If you say "taxes are theft" I may disagree with your viewpoint, but I'm not personally attacked by it. If your viewpoint is a challenge to their personal identity, you should probably keep that to yourself.
Edit: just as a final thought, I've been on both sides of this, I've been silenced and I've silenced other people and honestly they both suck. I hold this view with the believe that some middle ground of things not being okay is the only one that works. If someone thinks that a free for all of ideas works well they are welcome to try it on their social media and at their company and I could be convinced if I could see it work at scale. It's really a practical view more than a philosophical one
Others believe this is hatred.
Google provides onsite gyms at many locations, which have change rooms. In this case, that discussion will likely have to take place at work.
“Don’t ask don’t tell” is a tempting policy, but that’s how you end up surrounded by TERFs when something inadvertently outs you.
That’s clearly a straw man. Nobody is having that discussion at work.
And death threats are not politics, they are matters which should be reported to the police.
However, even if the work has a strict "no politics" policy, if Bob does have significant prejudice against transgender people, then having Bob in the workplace with Alice at all potentially puts her at risk. There doesn't need to be a conversation about trans rights for him to know that she is trans, and for that to translate into harassment and even violence.
I don't have a solution for that problem. But that doesn't mean it's not a problem. And it's not a problem that's solved by prohibiting employees from talking about controversial topics in the workplace -- which is the argument that was made by the poster I was actually responding to.
*Dammit, I did it again! Sorry.
You were trying to use an outlier, an extremist situation (badly representing the opposing part) to frame a discussion about general principles for politics.
Of course you will get downvoted. It’s not a constructive contribution.
That sounds like a rather discriminating and polarising policy.
And are we allowed to discuss that (clearly leftist) policy?