North Carolina House Passes Bill Voiding All Local LGBT Nondiscrimination Ordinances

[*bfine32*]

(04-19-2016, 12:59 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Where is the irony in this.

Liberals have always opposed government action that support discrimination.

That's because you guys are just so awesome. But it seems I often see them advocating for the Government telling private business owners what to do. of course only in an awesome manner.

[*PhilHos*]

(04-19-2016, 12:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You are trying to compare apples to oranges.

People with gender identification disorder do have issues, but they don't try to punish or discriminate other people because of it.

I can sympathize with people with gender identification disorder because they are not hurting anyone else.

I can not sympathize with people who want to punish transgenders for no reason.  In my opinion those type of people have issues much worse than Gender Identification Disorder.

Only a very small percentage of the population have issues that make them unable to use stairs, yet all public buildings have wheel chair access.  What kind of asshole would say "I don't like looking at cripples.  They make me feel uncomfortable.  Why do we need special laws for such a small minority of the population?"

You know what kind of asshole would say something like that?  The same type of person who would go out of his way to use insulting animal terms to describe transgenders.  The same type of person who would smugly joke that Gender Identification Disorder was something made up or imaginary that could be turned on and off just to use the public restroom of the opposite sex. 

Yes, because requesting wheelchair access is because the wheelchair bound people are "uncomfortable" using the stairs. 

And who wants to punish transgenders? No one. Just because people are in favor of having a law that says if you've got a penis use the bathroom for penises, doesn't mean they want to punish transgenders. You claim that's discrimination, fine, you have the right to that opinion, but don't make up strawman arguments (or strawwomen or strawtrans arguments) about how people want to "punish" transgenders. Just because you think that's what the outcome of the law does, does not mean that that's the intent of those in favor of the law.

[fredtoast]

(04-19-2016, 01:04 PM)bfine32 Wrote: That's because you guys are just so awesome. But it seems I often see them advocating for the Government telling private business owners what to do. of course only in an awesome manner.

1.  I still don't see any irony.

2.  It is awesome when the government tells businesses they can not discriminate based on things like religious beliefs.

[fredtoast]

(04-19-2016, 01:53 PM)PhilHos Wrote: And who wants to punish transgenders? No one. Just because people are in favor of having a law that says if you've got a penis use the bathroom for penises, doesn't mean they want to punish transgenders. You claim that's discrimination, fine, you have the right to that opinion, but don't make up strawman arguments (or strawwomen or strawtrans arguments) about how people want to "punish" transgenders. Just because you think that's what the outcome of the law does, does not mean that that's the intent of those in favor of the law.

To say the consequences are irrelevant is comical.  It is like saying "I don't want to discriminate against black people.  I just want to deny them equality because I don't like being around them."

It is not a coincidence that these laws are called "Religious Freedom" laws, and that the exact same people who supported discrimination against homosexuals in the same sex marriage debate now back all of these "religious freedom" laws that discriminate against transgender people.  And I heard that exact same lame argument during the same sex debate.  "I don't want to discriminate against gay people.  i just want to deny them equal protection under the law because of my religious beliefs."

You have already admitted that this issue was about religious beliefs when you were crying about Springsteen cancelling his concert.  And I have to remind you again that in the United States we don't make laws just to placate the Christians religious beliefs.  Especially when they amount to discrimination.

[Belsnickel]

NC's law may be short lived... https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/federal-appeals-court-sides-with-trangender-teen-says-bathroom-case-can-go-forward/2016/04/19/6a873b88-f76b-11e5-9804-537defcc3cf6_story.html

Quote:In backing high school junior Gavin Grimm, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit deferred to the U.S. Education Department’s position that transgender students should have access to the bathrooms that match their gender identities rather than being forced to use bathrooms that match their biological sex. The department has said that requiring transgender students to use a bathroom that corresponds with their biological sex amounts to a violation of Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination at schools that receive federal funding.

NC is in the 4th Circuit, so it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

[*bfine32*]

(04-19-2016, 11:21 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: NC's law may be short lived... https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/federal-appeals-court-sides-with-trangender-teen-says-bathroom-case-can-go-forward/2016/04/19/6a873b88-f76b-11e5-9804-537defcc3cf6_story.html


NC is in the 4th Circuit, so it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Just asking>>>How can stating someone should use the facility that is compatible with their sex be discrimination based on sex? 

[fredtoast]

(04-19-2016, 11:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just asking>>>How can stating someone should use the facility that is compatible with their sex be discrimination based on sex? 

They are not allowed to use the bathroom of the sex they identify as.


The law has been defined based on sexual identity instead of biological sex.

[*bfine32*]

(04-19-2016, 11:31 PM)fredtoast Wrote: They are not allowed to use the bathroom of the sex they identify as.


The law has been defined based on sexual identity instead of biological sex.

Thought they identified with a gender, not a sex. 

[Belsnickel]

(04-19-2016, 11:26 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Just asking>>>How can stating someone should use the facility that is compatible with their sex be discrimination based on sex? 

Honestly, I don't know all the ins and outs of it. From my very limited understanding of the DoE position, if a trans woman is told she cannot use female facilities because her sex is male. Therefore, it is consider discrimination based on sex because it is basing the action on her biological sex and not gender.

This is what I remember from the most recent Title IX training I sat through.

[*bfine32*]

(04-19-2016, 11:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Honestly, I don't know all the ins and outs of it. From my very limited understanding of the DoE position, if a trans woman is told she cannot use female facilities because her sex is male. Therefore, it is consider discrimination based on sex because it is basing the action on her biological sex and not gender.

This is what I remember from the most recent Title IX training I sat through.

So she is discriminated due to her sex  because she doesn't accept her sex? Makes my head hurt.

If I identify as handicapped can I get the good parking spots or do I need the physical traits? I can see this identification issue opening up all kinds of issues. What if I identify as an older person, can i be discriminated based on age? 

[fredtoast]

(04-19-2016, 11:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote:  I can see this identification issue opening up all kinds of issues.

Just like you could see same sex marriage leading to people marrying dogs, right?

[*bfine32*]

(04-19-2016, 11:56 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Just like you could see same sex marriage leading to people marrying dogs, right?

But that aside. You don't see a slippery slope with the identity issue? I think there is already a high profile case of someone identifying with a different race. 

[Vas Deferens]

(04-19-2016, 11:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Makes my head hurt.

Sounds like a you problem. 

[SunsetBengal]

(04-19-2016, 12:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: You are trying to compare apples to oranges.

People with gender identification disorder do have issues, but they don't try to punish or discriminate other people because of it.

I can sympathize with people with gender identification disorder because they are not hurting anyone else.

I can not sympathize with people who want to punish transgenders for no reason.  In my opinion those type of people have issues much worse than Gender Identification Disorder.

Only a very small percentage of the population have issues that make them unable to use stairs, yet all public buildings have wheel chair access.  What kind of asshole would say "I don't like looking at cripples.  They make me feel uncomfortable.  Why do we need special laws for such a small minority of the population?"

You know what kind of asshole would say something like that?  The same type of person who would go out of his way to use insulting animal terms to describe transgenders.  The same type of person who would smugly joke that Gender Identification Disorder was something made up or imaginary that could be turned on and off just to use the public restroom of the opposite sex. 

Aha, ha ha.  It is you that may be using the bad analogy.  As people with disabilities represent nearly 20% of the general population, and transgenders representing only 0.03%...

I mean, you had a good angle, just chose the wrong sympathetic group,

[GMDino]

(04-19-2016, 11:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So she is discriminated due to her sex  because she doesn't accept her sex? Makes my head hurt.

If I identify as handicapped can I get the good parking spots or do I need the physical traits? I can see this identification issue opening up all kinds of issues. What if I identify as an older person, can i be discriminated based on age? 

I suppose in any of the situations above it would be up to the law to eventually decide.  True story though:  There is a student who goes to school with my daughter who acts like an old man.  She said he just likes acting like an old person.  He probably has some kind of issue but I don't know him.  He does not, however, get AARP benefits.  

Also I know people with handicapped placards for parking that you would never know anything was wrong with them.  I suppose we have to trust their doctors.

(04-20-2016, 12:02 AM)bfine32 Wrote:

But that aside. You don't see a slippery slope with the identity issue? I think there is already a high profile case of someone identifying with a different race. 

Yes, but what benefit did she get from that?

Heck, what benefit does a transwoman get from using the men's room?  Seems we are still focused on what *could* happen with a man in the woman's room though...as usual.  Gotta protect those poor, helpless women.  

[fredtoast]

(04-20-2016, 12:23 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Aha, ha ha.  It is you that may be using the bad analogy.  As people with disabilities represent nearly 20% of the general population, and transgenders representing only 0.03%...

I mean, you had a good angle, just chose the wrong sympathetic group,

To me discrimination against minorities is wrong no matter what the numbers are.

It is like saying it is okay sexually assault a child if you only do it once.

[*Nately120*]

(04-19-2016, 11:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: So she is discriminated due to her sex  because she doesn't accept her sex? Makes my head hurt.

If I identify as handicapped can I get the good parking spots or do I need the physical traits? I can see this identification issue opening up all kinds of issues. What if I identify as an older person, can i be discriminated based on age? 

Stuff like this just comes down to the laughable notion that able-bodied and able-minded straight white men seem to think that the disabled, mentally ill, gay, minority, and female populations of this country are simply treated like royalty.

My lord, if only I were a mentally ill handicapped black woman who had gender identity disorder and was confined to a wheelchair I probably would have been handed like a zillion bucks by now!!!  NO FAIR

[Griever]

(04-20-2016, 12:22 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Stuff like this just comes down to the laughable notion that able-bodied and able-minded straight white men seem to think that the disabled, mentally ill, gay, minority, and female populations of this country are simply treated like royalty.

My lord, if only I were a mentally ill handicapped black woman who had gender identity disorder and was confined to a wheelchair I probably would have been handed like a zillion bucks by now!!!  NO FAIR

michael jackson turned white, im sure you can turn black

[*Nately120*]

(04-20-2016, 02:02 PM)Griever Wrote: michael jackson turned white, im sure you can turn black

Well, I've been called a sand n-bomb more than 0 times, so I'm ok with the level of pigment-related hate I've been tossed thanks.

[*bfine32*]

I'm sure Trump will start to get a little more support around here:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-caitlyn-jenner-nc-transgender-bathroom-law-140215296.html

Quote:If Caitlyn Jenner walked into Trump Tower and asked to use the bathroom, Donald Trump says he would be fine with her using any one she chooses.

During a town hall hosted by NBC’s “Today” on Thursday, the Republican frontrunner weighed in on North Carolina’s new law requiring transgender people like Jenner to use restrooms that match their sex at birth rather than their gender identity — saying the legislation was unnecessary.

“There have been very few complaints the way it is. People go, they use the bathroom that they feel is appropriate — there has been so little trouble,” Trump said. “North Carolina, what they’re going through with all the business that is leaving and strife — and it’s on both sides — you leave it the way it is.”