NC bathroom law

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, she is not a bird. Even if she dresses in feathers and puts on a beak, and says she is a bird, she is not a bird.

But she is just as close to being a bird, as I am to being a woman, if I put on a dress and a wig, and declare that I am a woman.

Ok this is freakishly detailed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Agreed! But you are missing the point. These laws that allow any man to use the ladies room, make it easier for the demented heterosexual man to claim he's a tranny, to get access to the ladies room. If a man goes into the ladies room, there is no way to tell if it's a tranny, or just a perveted hetero. The solution which causes the fewest number of people to be inconvenienced, is to leave it the way it's been for 230 years. Please tell me where I am wrong.

Can you cite one example of this ever happening?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Can you cite one example of this ever happening?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

http://www.dailywire.com/news/5190/5...-prestigiacomo

[Sea Dangles]

Hell, it actually sounds like another fetish is a possibility. I would listen to hot babes make a doody.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Ok this is freakishly detailed.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Detailed yes. Wrong, no.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Can you cite one example of this ever happening?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're being really, really dense. You know how you like to tell others o google something for 30 seconds? Take your own advice. Look it up. Are you seriously going to suggest that you don't concede that perverts and voyeurs have ever plied their craft in a public restroom?

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You're being really, really dense. You know how you like to tell others o google something for 30 seconds? Take your own advice. Look it up. Are you seriously going to suggest that you don't concede that perverts and voyeurs have ever plied their craft in a public restroom?

Voyeurs and perverts are a different argument than a man or woman who has had their gender changed.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Voyeurs and perverts are a different argument than a man or woman who has had their gender changed.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That's not the meaning of transgender but don't let that stop you .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

http://www.dailywire.com/news/5190/5...-prestigiacomo

Dailywire? Im sure you can come with a less biased source. Shapiro is a pundit...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

Dailywire? Im sure you can come with a less biased source. Shapiro is a pundit...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Shapiro is brilliant. All sources are biased. You are biased. You asked if there was one example. The article pointed out five. What has bias to do with pointing out examples. Either they are examples or they are not. Bias and lying are not the same thing. Are you saying the examples are lies? Are you saying that Shapiro made it up?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Voyeurs and perverts are a different argument than a man or woman who has had their gender changed.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I explained this to you already. Yes, voyeurs and perverts are a different risk than true transgenders. But PLEASE TELL US, if you open the restrooms to trannys, how do you prevent perverts from going in there as well? How can you fail to see, that these permissive laws make it significantly easier for the perverts to claim to be trannys, to gain access to the ladies rom? Does everyone have to pass a polygraph exam before entering?

"a man or woman who has had their gender changed. "

No such thing. You can change your appearance. Your sex is determined by your DNA. That doesn't change, ever. There is no such thing as changing your sex.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Dailywire? Im sure you can come with a less biased source. Shapiro is a pundit...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I just googled "woman attacked in public restroom". Try it. And get back to me.

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Jim your analogies are ridiculous"

Lob an insult without trying to support it. Yawn.

Insult? sounds like you are a little thin skinned.
It wasn't an insult, just not a worthy comparison


OK, so lawmakers are not doing a good job of trying to pass a law to keep a small group of citizens from being discriminated against and you and others are upset about that. That is my observation. They have a right to be treated fairly and not be discriminated just as many in history who are different from you whether it be skin color, religion or what country they are from. The world is changing, you can either accept things or resist. It sounds like you only have a problem with 2 things, the president pulling his executive order/action tough guy thing which he should be called out on I agree, and the fact that unscrupulous people other than true transgenders will take advantage of these laws and pretend to be male to female just to get into woman's rooms to do possible harmful things. Well if they can write the law to keep those creeps out of it, then is it acceptable? Or are you closed minded on the subject?

[Rockfish9]

I can't believe this has gotten this much press.... ... it's pretty simple..if you are sporting an outboard motor... your limited to the outboard dealer...if you sport an inboard motor you go to the inboard dealer... if you don't like your outboard motor.. remove it and go inboard ( and if you cant afford the surgery ..oh -well....use the outboard facilities until you are legit )...problem solved.. ...otherwise.. USE THE UNISEX restroom ( or porta potti).. and stop wasting hard earned tax payer money on this foolishness... our government and president have a lot more important things to worry about beside where people are going to releave themselves....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

Insult? sounds like you are a little thin skinned.
It wasn't an insult, just not a worthy comparison


OK, so lawmakers are not doing a good job of trying to pass a law to keep a small group of citizens from being discriminated against and you and others are upset about that. That is my observation. They have a right to be treated fairly and not be discriminated just as many in history who are different from you whether it be skin color, religion or what country they are from. The world is changing, you can either accept things or resist. It sounds like you only have a problem with 2 things, the president pulling his executive order/action tough guy thing which he should be called out on I agree, and the fact that unscrupulous people other than true transgenders will take advantage of these laws and pretend to be male to female just to get into woman's rooms to do possible harmful things. Well if they can write the law to keep those creeps out of it, then is it acceptable? Or are you closed minded on the subject?

"trying to pass a law to keep a small group of citizens from being discriminated against "

How is it discriminating, when previous laws (and 230 years of common sense) suggested that all men (based on how you were born) use the mens room, all women (based on how you were born) use the womens room?

Slipknot, there are times when I'd feel more comfortable, and less threatened, in the ladies room too. That doesn't mean I get to go in there.

How about the large numbers of women who don't want to share their restroom with people who don't have their anatomy? How come their desire for privacy is always expendable?

"They have a right to be treated fairly"

If you were born with a wee-wee, use th emens room...how, exavctly, is that unfair, if it applies equally to all men? No one is singling these trannys out. But the fact is, a man that identifies as a woman, is a man. You can never, ever make that wrong.

"whether it be skin color"

My god, do you people ever not play that card when you are wrong and hopeless? The fpurpose for which a restroom is built, has nothing to do with skin color. It has much to do with anatomy.

"The world is changing"

I'll say. You can keep the change. Change isn't nevcessarily improvement.

I am getting very, very close to supporting the notion of dividing the country. I see very little that unites us as Americans anymore.

"if they can write the law to keep those creeps out of it, then is it acceptable?"

It's more acceptable. But how in God's name do you write a law that says that men can go into a ladies room, but only if they are a tranny. If Willie Horton goes in there and says "I am a tranny", how the hell can you ever prove that he's lying.

Here's 2 questions for you (since I attempted to answer all of yours). First, do you understand that a man that identifies as a woman, is a man? Second, what's so wrong with the system we have been using for 200+ years? Have trannys been getting attacked in rest rooms, and no one told me?

In a perfect world, I guess, we'd have single stall bathrooms. But we can't afford that, so it's not worth talking about. Either a tiny number of trannys will be made uncomfortable, or a large number of non-trannys will be incomfortable (in NC, I promise you that the citizens overwhelmingly wanted the state law).

If I put on a wig and start singing show tunes, that doesn't change my gender. I don't see what good it does, to pretend otherwise. I want trannys to be happy, safe, and secure, I genuinely do. But often times, the minority has to assimmilate a bit. It can't always be th emajority that's forced to surrender their expectations of privacy and comfort.

Geez. I wish I died on the last day of the eisenhower adminidstration, that's when I should have been here.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

OK, so lawmakers are not doing a good job of trying to pass a law to keep a small group of citizens from being discriminated against and you and others are upset about that. That is my observation. They have a right to be treated fairly and not be discriminated just as many in history who are different from you whether it be skin color, religion or what country they are from.

It is, no doubt, difficult to do a good job of passing an unnecessary law. I don't understand what harmful or unfair discrimination there is in designating bathrooms as women or men. What is harmful or unfair in a man who feels like a woman using a bathroom designated men? All men, whether they are black, yellow, red, white, Russian, Ukrainian, British, American, Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Buddhists, homosexual, transgender, heterosexual, can use a bathroom designated men. Where is the harm or discrimination in that?

The world is changing, you can either accept things or resist.

So far the physical differences between men and women have not, as far as I know, changed. We can either accept that or resist?

[Slipknot]

I don't know Jim

maybe they can use the family bathroom

In Europe don't they just have one unisex bathroom?

I have seen many times at a football game or something when women come in the men's room because their lines are too long to get in, there doesn't seem to be a problem with that.

Yes there are many things more important to concentrate on

you need to use a public restroom, use it. It does not bother me at all

I think we need to clear the slate and get rid of everyone in the government and start over

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

In Europe don't they just have one unisex bathroom?

that's a lotta people and just one bathroom...imagine the lines for that

in San Francisco don't they just use the sidewalk?

[Slipknot]

lol

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

lol

hey...i wouldn't put anything past Europe...

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I explained this to you already. Yes, voyeurs and perverts are a different risk than true transgenders. But PLEASE TELL US, if you open the restrooms to trannys, how do you prevent perverts from going in there as well? How can you fail to see, that these permissive laws make it significantly easier for the perverts to claim to be trannys, to gain access to the ladies rom? Does everyone have to pass a polygraph exam before entering?

No, they really don't make much of a difference at all. The proof is in the pudding...Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Mass, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont have all had anti-discrimination bathroom laws for years without any issues.

No such thing. You can change your appearance. Your sex is determined by your DNA. That doesn't change, ever. There is no such thing as changing your sex.

The primary thing your DNA does is trigger development of certain body parts in the womb. Your "sex" as far as your brain is concerned and other body development is primarily hormonal. This absolutely can be tinkered with.

I'd note as well that while rare some people are born with reversed sex chromosomes or irregular pairs.

This is why your bird fetish is so strange. You can't change your hormones and become a bird, nor was the ever a chance you were going to develop as a bird.

One sick puppy.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Shapiro is brilliant. All sources are biased. You are biased. You asked if there was one example. The article pointed out five. What has bias to do with pointing out examples. Either they are examples or they are not. Bias and lying are not the same thing. Are you saying the examples are lies? Are you saying that Shapiro made it up?

For such a "brilliant" guy the Shapiro piece is surprisingly weak. Most of the examples aren't people claiming to be transgender, the dude in Toronto is clearly crazy and the Seattle example was a publicity stunt.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

No, they really don't make much of a difference at all. The proof is in the pudding...Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Mass, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island and Vermont have all had anti-discrimination bathroom laws for years without any issues.


The primary thing your DNA does is trigger development of certain body parts in the womb. Your "sex" as far as your brain is concerned and other body development is primarily hormonal. This absolutely can be tinkered with.

I'd note as well that while rare some people are born with reversed sex chromosomes or irregular pairs.

This is why your bird fetish is so strange. You can't change your hormones and become a bird, nor was the ever a chance you were going to develop as a bird.

One sick puppy.

"The proof is in the pudding"

Says the guy who claims that there are zero reported incodents of anything bad ever happening to a woman in a restroom.

Spence, if I had a crystal ball, and could see that no woman would ever be assualted, I would still oppose this, because it's weird. It's just weird. Just because something turns tradiitonal family values on its head, doesn't necessarily mean it's a good thing.

Proof is in the pudding? Since when do libs subscribe to that theory? How long of a list would you like, of liberal ideas that have proven to be a disaster, yet liberals refuse to acknowledge the proof that's in the pudding? Pensions to public labor unions, assault weapons bans, fanatical gun control laws, affirmative action, sexual permissiveness...mountains of evidence to show how harmful these policies have been, yet your side could care less about that parictular brand of pudding.


"You can't change your hormones and become a bird"

Nor can you change your sex. It's not possible. I can't become a female any more than I can become a bird. I can look more like a female than I can look like a bird...but biologically, I cannot make myself either, I can just pretend. And if it makes me happy, and I don't bother anyone else, I should have that right.

Your sex, biologically, is not detremined by your hormones, but by your chromosomes, which don't get changed. Sorry.

"One sick puppy"

i come up with an anology that highlights the stupidity of your position here. To refute that, you (1) falsely claim that sex is based on hormones (instead of chromosomes) and can thus be changed, and then call me sick, and suggest I have a fetish.

Anything to avoid admitting you are wrong.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

For such a "brilliant" guy the Shapiro piece is surprisingly weak. Most of the examples aren't people claiming to be transgender, the dude in Toronto is clearly crazy and the Seattle example was a publicity stunt.

His brilliance wasn't necessary in order to merely provide examples. And your situational ethics cop-out doesn't cut it.

Jim said " These laws that allow any man to use the ladies room, make it easier for the demented heterosexual man to claim he's a tranny, to get access to the ladies room.

At first, you asked Jim for one example of what he said. But in response to the Shapiro article the one example morphs into " Most of the examples aren't people claiming to be transgender". The "most" is two (twice your requested one) is now insufficient.

Not only that, but Jim also said " If a man goes into the ladies room, there is no way to tell if it's a tranny, or just a perveted hetero." which the other three are examples of.

[Jim in CT]

Spence, maybe you'll tell us that the World Health Organization doesn't know as much about this stuff as some gay rights group, but here's some pudding that's just chock full of truth. You will find it to be inconvenient truthm, and thus not to be accepted, but try telling a scientist that it's not chromosomes that determine your sex...

"Humans are born with 46 chromosomes in 23 pairs. The X and Y chromosomes determine a person’s sex"

http://www.who.int/genomics/gender/en/index1.html

Also..."Gender, typically described in terms of masculinity and femininity, is a social construction that varies across different cultures and over time"

Gender is what you are referring to, which I guess can be said to be interchangeable. Not biological sex. And when one goes into a public restroom, it's (hopefully) not to engage in a social experiment, but rather to take care of a biological function. That used to be a simple, non-controversial topic. Not anymore. Unbelievable.

Enjoy that pudding.

[Jim in CT]

Also Spence, I see you didn't respond to a critical question of mine (shocker, I know)...what do you think of the fact that the Obama administration told the governor he could have a one week extension, only if he publicly acknowledged that the law is discriminatory and unconstitutional?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Rockfish9

I can't believe this has gotten this much press.... ... ....

When you are wrong as often as liberals are, you don't want to talk about things that actually matter. Instead, you steer the conversation to topics where you feel you can make conservatives look like hatemongers and bigots.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Ah, but there's the rub. When government mandates how it must be, it is no longer a matter of individual choice. Does that bother you a little bit?

nope ... I never lost the individual choice to use the Head and I am not fear full of the liberal Government stealing my rights... a conservative government stealing my rights now thats another story ..

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

When you are wrong as often as liberals are, you don't want to talk about things that actually matter. Instead, you steer the conversation to topics where you feel you can make conservatives look like hatemongers and bigots.

Jim : Conservatives dont need help from liberals to make conservatives look like hatemongers and bigots. they do fine all by themselves ..

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

nope ... I never lost the individual choice to use the Head and I am not fear full of the liberal Government stealing my rights... a conservative government stealing my rights now thats another story ..

So you're OK with someone else losing their rights just as long as you don't lose yours. I didn't picture you as being that selfish.

And your not afraid of "liberal" government taking away what you consider your rights, but have some trepidation that a "conservative" one might. You have asked why "conservatives" are afraid of "liberals" and their policies or ideas. Maybe, if they really are "afraid," you have answered your questions. Maybe they are afraid for the same reasons you are.

But why do you so often cast conservatives as being afraid. That is so discriminatory. Allowing yourself to be afraid of them, but calling them cowards when they oppose your points of view.