The Biden administration is all in for preventing discrimination against the LGBTQ community. The president’s Inauguration Day executive order and related policy directives put the full force of government behind that objective.

In the main, it’s a good thing. Discrimination is always wrong. And while old biases die hard, we’re learning that “live and let live” works quite well in civilized society.

But watch out for the T, the transgender component of LGBTQ. It’s one thing to shield a mistreated group from discrimination; it’s entirely another to mandate universal support of a pretext that is objectively false.

First a caveat: The meaning of sex and gender, terms that once seemed interchangeable, has evolved into a complex, hotly contested, and still-shifting topic. I don’t pretend to understand it all. I respect the diversity of views and I’ve no doubt that they are sincere — but I believe that for purposes of practical application in society it all boils down to this: In nearly all cases, human sex is binary, male and female. And while gender may now be defined as how one feels about himself or herself and wishes to be seen by the world, self-identity has little bearing on that person’s biological makeup.

Protecting the rights of 330 million Americans is, at its core, a balancing act — the challenge of finding ways to give a boost to those who need it without placing corresponding undue burden on others. In this case, it doesn’t balance at all.

The fundamental problem is the notion, now firmly embedded in public policy, that one’s gender is dictated solely by personal preference and that it is necessary for society at large to treat that personal preference as fact, even when it contradicts obvious reality.

But biology doesn’t work that way. Hormone treatment and surgical modifications can change appearances and, to some degree, behavior and physical attributes — but billions of chromosomes in every human body can’t be fooled.

Nevertheless, our leadership is plowing ahead with little apparent concern for the illogic of its policy. Last week, the U.S. State Department announced that citizens may modify the gender (sex) indicated on their passports to align with their preferred identity, even if contradicted by other legal documents.

So, if I’m feeling particularly youthful today, can I revise the birthdate shown on my passport accordingly? Probably not.

There are some relatively silly implications of the new transgender orthodoxy — celebrating male pregnancies is one — and some deadly serious ones. The latter include:

• Compliance overkill. For example, people have lost their jobs for failure to utilize prescribed pronouns. Pronouns!

• Unwarranted, frightening, and dangerous intrusions on privacy, such as biological male presence in women’s and girls’ restrooms and showers.

• The incalculable and wholly unnecessary risks attendant to asking youngsters to select their preferred gender, leading potentially to increased sexual ambiguity and anguish and even life-changing medical modification of perfectly healthy human bodies.

And consider the long-term impact on women’s sports programs at all levels.

For example, collegiate athletics is a booming business. The fame and fortune of an athletic director or coach is linked directly to his or her won-loss record. Their financial incentive to find bigger and stronger athletes for the women’s teams (with transgender females as an obvious source) is already substantial — what women’s basketball coach does not secretly wish for a dominant 6'10", 240-pound center?

Moreover, the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision and related NCAA rules changes that permit financial compensation for collegiate athletes will make it more enticing for any male athletes who have some inclination toward gender change to consider that avenue. Meanwhile, the disincentives for males to do so is diminishing. What not long ago was viewed by many with disdain is now celebrated. Look at Caitlyn (née Bruce) Jenner’s selection by ESPN for the Arthur Ashe Courage Award.

It stands to reason that if the construct of separate men’s and women’s athletic teams has any meaning at all, those teams must be populated exclusively by men and women; if not, women-only sports programs will ultimately disappear.

However well intended, our current transgender policy is headed for trouble. The fix is obvious: We can and should commit to protecting transgender Americans from discrimination, just as with their LGBQ counterparts, without going off the deep end of validating the view that biological differences are irrelevant.

If we stay on the current course, I’m pretty sure that we’ll wake up one day and recognize that a public policy that ignores physical reality will never work.