North Carolina House Passes Bill Voiding All Local LGBT Nondiscrimination Ordinances

[GMDino]

(04-17-2016, 08:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is a shame you are so uncaring about folks that might have "issues". I would suggest that someone born as a male, but identifies as a woman might have "issues", but we got to make laws to make them more comfortable; right? I am unaware of any rampant abuse of transgenders in public facilities currently and if so I'm sure there are laws currently in place to protect them against physical abuse. Do you think perhaps they are ignorant of these laws? 

(04-17-2016, 08:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So callus toward folks with issues. It is a shame

All seriousness aside:

I love how manly men who aren't afraid to stare around the gym locker room and watch other scrub their wieners in a bathroom mirror  are so convcerned about a guy dressed as a woman using a stall int he ladies room for "safety" reasons.  Yet they never seem to complain about women dressed as men using the stalls in the men's room who might see them measuring their hogs in the "common mirror".  It is a hoot.  

[*bfine32*]

(04-17-2016, 08:32 PM)GMDino Wrote:

All seriousness aside:

I love how manly men who aren't afraid to stare around the gym locker room and watch other scrub their wieners in a bathroom mirror  are so convcerned about a guy dressed as a woman using a stall int he ladies room for "safety" reasons.  Yet they never seem to complain about women dressed as men using the stalls in the men's room who might see them measuring their hogs int he "common mirror".  It is a hoot.  

Your desperate exaggeration of everything I've said aside, Fred.; I haven't  said anything about safety; we are talking about the right to be comfortable when using a public facility. Are you against this? 

[Belsnickel]

(04-17-2016, 08:40 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Your desperate exaggeration of everything I've said aside, Fred.; I haven't  said anything about safety; we are talking about the right to be comfortable when using a public facility. Are you against this? 

Who is actually comfortable using any public facility?

[GMDino]

(04-17-2016, 08:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Who is actually comfortable using any public facility?

1) You answered a question with a question.  Larry will chide you for this.

2) You answered for me...Larry will now think you are ALSO an alt for Fred.  Or me.

3) To answer your question:  "real men".  

[Belsnickel]

(04-17-2016, 08:46 PM)GMDino Wrote: 1) You answered a question with a question.  Larry will chide you for this.

2) You answered for me...Larry will now think you are ALSO an alt for Fred.  Or me.

3) To answer your question:  "real men".  

Well, I wasn't trying to respond to any question. It just dawned on me than I am never comfortable using public facilities and so thought it was interesting that there was a discussion over the right to be comfortable in using them.

[GMDino]

(04-17-2016, 08:50 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Well, I wasn't trying to respond to any question. It just dawned on me than I am never comfortable using public facilities and so thought it was interesting that there was a discussion over the right to be comfortable in using them.

Well that's your own fault.

You should be more worldly and be able to stare around the room.

At least that is what I've been told.

[*bfine32*]

(04-17-2016, 08:44 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Who is actually comfortable using any public facility?

I am; but we should look to make laws for those that are not. What is the cause of your discomfort? 

[Belsnickel]

(04-17-2016, 09:35 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I am; but we should look to make laws for those that are not. What is the cause of your discomfort? 

Usually it's the disgusting state of things. Sometimes it is the people trying to be chatty. Depending on the bathroom on campus it could be the way that the stall is so short you can almost see over it while seated even.

But yeah, public restrooms aren't comfortable.

[fredtoast]

(04-17-2016, 08:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is a shame you are so uncaring about folks that might have "issues". I would suggest that someone born as a male, but identifies as a woman might have "issues", but we got to make laws to make them more comfortable; right? I am unaware of any rampant abuse of transgenders in public facilities currently and if so I'm sure there are laws currently in place to protect them against physical abuse. Do you think perhaps they are ignorant of these laws? 

(04-17-2016, 08:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So callus toward folks with issues. It is a shame

There bis a big difference between people having issued with something that poses no threat of any harm or embarrassment (being in the same room with w transgender person) and transgender people having concerns about their own safety based on a history of violence against them just because they are transgender.

There are all sorts of people who have "issues" in our society.  We do not shape public policy to placate those people with irrational fears (fear of the color green, fear of being in the same room with a transgender person) because their is no real threat to their safety.  But we do shape public policy to protect those who have a history of being victimized based of their beliefs or appearances.

[*bfine32*]

(04-18-2016, 12:16 AM)fredtoast Wrote: There bis a big difference between people having issued with something that poses no threat of any harm or embarrassment (being in the same room with w transgender person) and transgender people having concerns about their own safety based on a history of violence against them just because they are transgender.

There are all sorts of people who have "issues" in our society.  We do not shape public policy to placate those people with irrational fears (fear of the color green, fear of being in the same room with a transgender person) because their is no real threat to their safety.  But we do shape public policy to protect those who have a history of being victimized based of their beliefs or appearances.

Are there laws currently in place that protect transgenders from being physically assaulted in the use a facility compliant to their biological sex? You have yet to answer this question. If the answer is yes, then the only reason for a bill such as you suggest is for peace of mind. 

[fredtoast]

(04-18-2016, 12:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Are there laws currently in place that protect transgenders from being physically assaulted in the use a facility compliant to their biological sex? You have yet to answer this question. If the answer is yes, then the only reason for a bill such as you suggest is for peace of mind. 

You are still missing my point.

There are alread laws in place to protect everyone from lewd and lascivious behavior in public restrooms.  You don't need any more laws to give you "peace of mind" unless you just have an irrational fear of being in the same public restroom with a transgender.

The only point of these new "Bathroom Bills" is to punish transgenders, who are potentially victims of harassment and/or acts of violence from being forced to use the wrong public restroom, without doing ANYTHING to give people like you and more "peace of mind".  There is nothing irrational about the fear transgenders have of being forced to use the wrong public restroom.

When you balance an irrational fear of being in the same restroom with a transgender against the rational fear of possible harassment and/or acts of physical violence it is pretty easy to see which one is more important in shaping public policy.

[*bfine32*]

(04-18-2016, 12:50 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You are still missing my point.

There are alread laws in place to protect everyone from lewd and lascivious behavior in public restrooms.  You don't need any more laws to give you "peace of mind" unless you just have an irrational fear of being in the same public restroom with a transgender.

The only point of these new "Bathroom Bills" is to punish transgenders, who are potentially victims of harassment and/or acts of violence from being forced to use the wrong public restroom, without doing ANYTHING to give people like you and more "peace of mind".  There is nothing irrational about the fear transgenders have of being forced to use the wrong public restroom.

When you balance an irrational fear of being in the same restroom with a transgender against the rational fear of possible harassment and/or acts of physical violence it is pretty easy to see which one is more important in shaping public policy.

So yes there are laws in place to punish those that assault anyone in a bathroom. The "new law" was passes by Charlotte. The state simply reacted to this. It is really quite simple: Males go into the men's room,  female's go into the ladies' room. No one in either facility is allowed to act up for any reason. That's the way it has been. Making it legal for males to go into ladies' room is going to do absolutely nothing to stop those that would break the law. The new laws are for peace of mind only. Some thing the minority deserve peace of mind over the majority. 

[Vas Deferens]

(04-18-2016, 01:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So yes there are laws in place to punish those that assault anyone in a bathroom. The "new law" was passes by Charlotte. The state simply reacted to this. It is really quite simple: Males go into the men's room,  female's go into the ladies' room. No one in either facility is allowed to act up for any reason. That's the way it has been. Making it legal for males to go into ladies' room is going to do absolutely nothing to stop those that would break the law. The new laws are for peace of mind only. Some thing the minority deserve peace of mind over the majority. 

We need 'peace of mind' laws now?  

Soft.

[fredtoast]

(04-18-2016, 01:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The new laws are for peace of mind only. Some thing the minority deserve peace of mind over the majority. 

Again you fail to see the difference.

The issue effecting the majority's "peace of mind" is based on an IRRATIONAL fear of a transgender person being in the same public restroom.  Just being in the same public restroom with a transgender person DOES NOT put you in any risk.

The issue effecting the transgenders "peace of mind" is a very RATIONAL fear of harassment or possibly acts of physical violence against them.  Just being in the wrong public restroom DOES put a transgender person in risk.

Public policy has to be based on preventing actual harm instead of irrational fear.

[Griever]

i think republicans have had more sex in the bathrooms than trannys

[*bfine32*]

(04-18-2016, 01:55 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: We need 'peace of mind' laws now?  

Soft.

Pretty sure I'm one of the few saying we do not. You guys do realize the first measure passes in this debate was don't you?

[Vas Deferens]

(04-18-2016, 03:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Pretty sure I'm one of the few saying we do not. You guys do realize the first measure passes in this debate was don't you?

Not following you here.

[*bfine32*]

(04-18-2016, 03:44 PM)Vas Deferens Wrote: Not following you here.

The law that NC passed was in response to an ordinance that a city passed. So this law everyone is all upset about was only brought about because the city acted first. 

[GMDino]

(04-18-2016, 05:13 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The law that NC passed was in response to an ordinance that a city passed. So this law everyone is all upset about was only brought about because the city acted first. 

And?

The city passed a law to protect a minority.  The small government republicans running the state didn't like so they passed a law banning all cities from passing such laws.

Makes perfectly good sense if you wear a hat with "10/6"  on it and like tea.

[*bfine32*]

(04-18-2016, 05:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: And?

The city passed a law to protect a minority.  The small government republicans running the state didn't like so they passed a law banning all cities from passing such laws.

Makes perfectly good sense if you wear a hat with "10/6"  on it and like tea.

There is no and. It was simply explaining who passed a law first in this case. 

Please list the rash of attacks on transgenders in the city of Charlotte, so we can discuss the protection issue.