Alaskan boy participates in the girls state championship

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-18-2016, 07:53 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: A person doesn't have a right to feel comfortable in the bathroom that matches their gender?

Some may feel threatened, they don't have a right to be free from that?

A grown man, hairy and fat, might go into a bathroom that has a bunch of little girls, and you're saying they don't have a right to be traumatized with something that could scar them forever?

I'm traumatized and scarred for life after reading your many posts about penises, meat gazing, and prison rape. 

[BFritz21]

(08-18-2016, 08:37 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, you do not have the right to be sheltered while in public from things you find uncomfortable or threatening (if they are not threatening), especially not at the expense of another person's rights. 
 

You don't?!  

So it's legal to walk or roll around in public completely naked?

See, I always thought that was against the law.  

I'll address the rest later or tomorrow but I'm going out right now.

[BFritz21]

(08-18-2016, 10:42 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no right to be "comfortable"

What if someone feels uncomfortable around a person in a wheelchair that has a creepy voice coming out of a machine?  Does that mean you should not be allowed to be in the same room with that person.

No one is harmed by using the same bathroom with a person of the other sex.

So it's legal to walk or roll around in public completely naked?


See, I always thought that was against the law.  

[BmorePat87]

(08-19-2016, 12:59 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: You don't?!  

So it's legal to walk or roll around in public completely naked?

See, I always thought that was against the law.  

I'll address the rest later or tomorrow but I'm going out right now.

Being naked, like being drunk or drinking, is something that can only be done in a few select locations outside. Same with going to the bathroom. 

These are regulated because they're considered indecent or immoral. Some people may find them uncomfortable, but that isn't necessarily why they're illegal. The fact that some behaviors are regulated also doesn't support the belief that you have a right to shield yourself from anything you find uncomfortable in public.

[BFritz21]

(08-19-2016, 01:56 AM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Being naked, like being drunk or drinking, is something that can only be done in a few select locations outside. Same with going to the bathroom. 

These are regulated because they're considered indecent or immoral. Some people may find them uncomfortable, but that isn't necessarily why they're illegal. The fact that some behaviors are regulated also doesn't support the belief that you have a right to shield yourself from anything you find uncomfortable in public.

You're saying in public, which PUBLIC bathrooms are in PUBLIC.  Being in a place that has always been protected and private when you're the opposite sex is indecent and immoral.

[Harmening]

Do you think that he's suggesting that it's okay to walk around in a public bathroom naked?

[*bfine32*]

(08-18-2016, 10:42 PM)fredtoast Wrote: There is no right to be "comfortable"

Does that knife cut both ways?

[GMDino]

(08-19-2016, 08:15 AM)Harmening Wrote: Do you think that he's suggesting that it's okay to walk around in a public bathroom naked?

Only if they are taking a  ***** bath.

Or so I've been told.

[BmorePat87]

(08-19-2016, 03:58 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: You're saying in public, which PUBLIC bathrooms are in PUBLIC.  Being in a place that has always been protected and private when you're the opposite sex is indecent and immoral.

No it's not. 

[Rotobeast]

(08-19-2016, 10:45 AM)GMDino Wrote: Only if they are taking a  ***** bath.

Or so I've been told.

I miss Vas.


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[fredtoast]

(08-19-2016, 10:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Does that knife cut both ways?

Absolutely.

No ones freedom should be limited just to make other people feel "comfortable".

Don't you agree with treating everyone equally?


There is a difference between a "right to feel comfortable" and a "right to privacy".  That is why i distinguish between a public restroom and a lockeroom/shower.

[fredtoast]

(08-19-2016, 01:01 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: So it's legal to walk or roll around in public completely naked?


See, I always thought that was against the law.  

Do you think it is legal for you to expose yourself to young boys in a public bathroom?

[*bfine32*]

(08-19-2016, 02:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Absolutely.

No ones freedom should be limited just to make other people feel "comfortable".

Don't you agree with treating everyone equally?


There is a difference between a "right to feel comfortable" and a "right to privacy".  That is why i distinguish between a public restroom and a lockeroom/shower.

Sure I do, everybody should be able to use public facilities and no one is saying a trans cannot use the bathroom. Some just want to pass legislation that allows them to use the facility where they are more comfortable. That is why I found the comfort comment amusing.

I remember your failed attempt to show it was because of safety and stopping crimes before they are committed.

[*bfine32*]

I have a question for all my homies on the bathroom debate:

Is using the bathroom a biological or social event?

[fredtoast]

(08-19-2016, 02:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure I do, everybody should be able to use public facilities and no one is saying a trans cannot use the bathroom. Some just want to pass legislation that allows them to use the facility where they are more comfortable. That is why I found the comfort comment amusing.

I remember your failed attempt to show it was because of safety and stopping crimes before they are committed.

I don't understand.  You have no problem with transgender people using the restroom of the sex they identify with, but you oppose a law that says they can?  WTF?

And you still don't understand what I said.  Allowing a transgender person to use the bathroom of the gender they identify does not violate anyone's rights.  It doesn't stop anyone from doing anything.  But a law saying that they can not use the bathroom of the the gender you identify does stop people from being able to do something.  One position does not stop anyone from doing anything.  No one has their freedoms limited.  The other position DOES stop someone from doing something.  People do have their freedoms limited.
 
And I did not fail to show that safety was a concern. 

[fredtoast]

(08-19-2016, 02:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have a question for all my homies on the bathroom debate:

Is using the  bathroom a biological or social event?

Biological.

[*bfine32*]

(08-19-2016, 02:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I don't understand.  You have no problem with transgender people using the restroom of the sex they identify with, but you oppose a law that says they can?  WTF?


 

Hell, I don't always come to a complete stop at a stop sign, doesn't mean I think the law is wrong.

(08-19-2016, 02:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And you still don't understand what I said. Allowing a transgender person to use the bathroom of the gender they identify does not violate anyone's rights. It doesn't stop anyone from doing anything. But a law saying that they can not use the bathroom of the the gender you identify does stop people from being able to do something. One position does not stop anyone from doing anything. No one has their freedoms limited. The other position DOES stop someone from doing something. People do have their freedoms limited.

And telling someone they must use the facility that matches their biological makeup does not stop anyone from doing anything other that allowing them to use a facility of everyone of the same gender. As your proposal doesn't allow folks to use the facility with everyone of the same sex.

(08-19-2016, 02:33 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And I did not fail to show that safety was a concern.

Sure you did. You linked a bunch of articles showing exactly the opposite of what you claimed, but tried to Fred your way out of it, with a 'just becaise I was mistaken, doesn't mean I was wrong".

[*bfine32*]

(08-19-2016, 02:36 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Biological.

The why not assign it based on biology?

[fredtoast]

(08-19-2016, 02:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The why not assign it based on biology?

Because that would infringe on the rights of people to use the restroom of the gender they identify with.

The color of a persons skin is biological, does that mean it is okay to have separate restrooms based on skin color?

[fredtoast]

(08-19-2016, 02:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Sure you did. You linked a bunch of articles showing exactly the opposite of what you claimed, but tried to Fred your way out of it, with a 'just becaise I was mistaken, doesn't mean I was wrong".

No I did not.  I posted proof that transgender people were often the target of violence based just on being transgender.

Pull up the thread and sho it to everyone so they can judge for themselves.  i am not going to argue against your faulty memory.