Project 2025

[Dill]

(06-18-2024, 06:10 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Dill Wrote:[/url]??? So you agree a majority of Americans do favor gay marriage?  Are you saying that most people are just "indifferent" and not
really behind civil rights for gays?  Or should not be? You said you were more open-minded than I am. Should LGBTQ citizens have equal rights? 

Interesting how you were quick about Butker's Speech, but now you have no idea what Title IX is that Biden just tried to push thru that's all over the news. 
Pretty sure i made a post in here about it already Title IX. But I'll give you a link this time so you can't bring it up again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/17/us/politics/new-title-ix-rules-blocked.html
The LGBTQ are Protected, but there has to be some limits. Those limits come in the form of Protecting other Classes rights. 
I know exactly what i said, If it's not true, then why so much guilt about defending yourself? 
It's annoying as hell isn't when someone won't stay on topic by bringing up non-related issues in the current thread?  Almost as bad as people that can't answer a direct question.

??? I'm guilty about defending myself?? How? Where? From what??

No one asked you whether LGBTQ were "protected." The question was whether you support equal rights for LGBTQ citizens. 

I'm not getting a clear answer on whether you, having declared yourself "more open-minded" than I, support equal rights for LGBTQ citizens.

(06-18-2024, 06:10 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Dill Wrote:[url=http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-Project-2025?pid=1487531#pid1487531]So you agree that Butker is not for equal rights for women? 

We've already covered this, that's YOUR perception. Mine is different.

What we "covered" is that your "perception" differs from what Bukter actually said. Mine does not. 
In post #44 you wrote: If you chose the men over the women, then you are no better than Harrison Butker. 

That assumes Butker chooses men over women, doesn't it? Or is that only my "perception" again? 

(06-18-2024, 06:10 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Interesting how you were quick about Butker's Speech, but now you have no idea what Title IX is that Biden just tried to push thru that's all over the news. 
Pretty sure i made a post in here about it already Title IX. But I'll give you a link this time so you can't bring it up again.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/17/us/politics/new-title-ix-rules-blocked.html

The LGBTQ are Protected, but there has to be some limits. Those limits come in the form of Protecting other Classes rights. 
I know exactly what i said, If it's not true, then why so much guilt about defending yourself? 

But in regards to allowing Men to into the women's lockers rooms and competing against women in women only sports. 
Are you going to defend the biological women's rights or chose to defend the Men over the Women when it comes to Women Only ATHLETICS? 
I'm being very clear and specific so there isn't any need for you to ask questions. Give you stance and own it. 

I'll "own" that I don't think trans people with muscular-skeletal frames that developed as masculine should be allowed to compete in women's sports, though I think women should be allowed to compete in some men's sports--football, soccer, wrestling, basketball, baseball, hockey--if they can make the team. No one can claim they have a special advantage. 

As far as the legal challenge to Title IX, that's 96 pages and I'm still reading it. On the surface the "gender" addition is certainly parallel to other kinds of discrimination. The question is whether and the degree to which its imposition harms another group.