|
Mississippi & NC religious freedom laws
|
|
Topic Started: Apr 6 2016, 01:24 PM (2,729 Views)
|
|
rkl15
|
Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM
Post #136
|
All-Star
- Posts:
- 1,970
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #460
- Joined:
- December 24, 2013
|
- brumdog44
- Apr 25 2016, 03:40 PM
- rkl15
- Apr 25 2016, 12:07 PM
Just a quick "Google" search states that .02 to .03 percent of the population are transgender.
I thought your number sounded incorrect, so I did a quick google search like you said. It's not .02 to .03 percent, it's .2 to .3 percent. That is quite a difference....it turn's 70,000 people to 700,000 people. While I'm against the Charlotte law, I think the numbers need to be accurate. Yep, sorry. miss-type.
estimated that there are 700,000 in the US.
Estimated population in the US of 322,762,018.
Let's say that 25% (random number) are opposed, or would feel uncomfortable with this law.
That would mean we are making a law for 700,000 people and making 80,690,505 uncomfortable.
This law is a waste of time, money and other resources.
|
|
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Apr 26 2016, 07:40 AM
Post #137
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- rkl15
- Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM
This law is a waste of time, money and other resources. So is the response bill.
|
|
| |
|
boilergrad01
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:09 AM
Post #138
|
Working on the last 5
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #135
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Apr 26 2016, 05:49 AM
- boilergrad01
- Apr 25 2016, 08:50 PM
This article is total joke. Care to expand on that
|
|
Nothing beats an Astronaut
|
| |
|
dreachon
|
Apr 26 2016, 09:32 AM
Post #139
|
Creative Title Here
- Posts:
- 24,068
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #148
- Joined:
- February 10, 2008
|
- boilergrad01
- Apr 26 2016, 08:09 AM
- dreachon
- Apr 26 2016, 05:49 AM
- boilergrad01
- Apr 25 2016, 08:50 PM
This article is total joke.
Care to expand on that Well, let's start at the top with the title.
- Quote:
-
Cutting through the liberal propaganda on HB 2
Oh good. I can see we're set up for a nice, unbiased, factual discussion on the topic.
- Quote:
-
The truth is that HB2 made very few substantive changes to North Carolina law.
Ok. Cool. That sounds like it could be true. Let's hear it.
- Quote:
-
HB2 was passed to rein in a rogue city council in Charlotte that acted beyond its legal authority, to establish a statewide bathroom privacy and safety law clarifying existing state policy and to enumerate existing state policy as it relates to discrimination in employment and public accommodations.
Ummmm. That sounds like the total opposite of "very few substantive changes". You mean, all they did reign (typo in the article) in a city, establish a statewide law, and remove LGBT from the groups protected against discrimination? That's like, everything the people who are against HB2 are arguing about. What do you mean "few substantive changes"????
- Quote:
-
Charlotte City Council voted to repeal this separate-sex bathroom ordinance, which would have allowed men to enter women’s restrooms, shower rooms, bathhouses and changing rooms throughout the city, placing women, children, the elderly and other citizens at great risk of personal privacy violations, unwarranted exposure to individuals of the opposite sex and sexual assault.
Here we have a claim of "great risk" with no data or facts to back it up. Guess we should just take him at his word!
- Quote:
-
HB2 established a statewide bathroom privacy and safety standard that authorizes individuals to use multiple occupancy bathrooms and changing facilities that correspond to their biological sex as designated on their birth certificates.
Ummm. Yeah. That's exactly the problem. Wasn't this article about uninformed propaganda? So far the propaganda seems right on target.
- Quote:
-
existing state law allows individuals who have undergone sex reassignment surgery to change the sex designation on their birth certificates.
Oh well that just makes everything all better, eh. "I have breasts, dress as a woman, and no dick, but I'll just keep using the men's room until that birth certificate change comes through for me."
- Quote:
-
With respect to employment discrimination, HB2 clarifies the state’s existing policy. The classifications recognized for these protections include race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex and handicap....North Carolina is one of 28 states that do not recognize “sexual orientation” and/or “gender identity” as legally protected classifications in state employment non-discrimination laws.
Again. That is exactly the problem! Jesus. I've never seen such amazingly well-researched and accurate propaganda before.
- Quote:
-
And they are mad that HB2 curtailed their efforts to impose a radical social policy of unbridled sexual license on our state.
Lol @ "radical unbridaled sexual license on our state." Get off my lawn, much? "These dang kids are all sexin each other before marriage! Blasphemy!"
- Quote:
-
Unfortunately, the media are propagating the smear campaign, and many levelheaded citizens have been confused and misled by it.
If this article has cleared up anything, it's that nobody is actually confused by HB2. So, thanks for that, guy.
Hopefully that was enough expansion.
|
|
| |
|
sirbrianwilson
|
Apr 26 2016, 10:07 AM
Post #140
|
Stemlerite
- Posts:
- 22,404
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- February 4, 2008
|
- rkl15
- Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM
- brumdog44
- Apr 25 2016, 03:40 PM
- rkl15
- Apr 25 2016, 12:07 PM
Just a quick "Google" search states that .02 to .03 percent of the population are transgender.
I thought your number sounded incorrect, so I did a quick google search like you said. It's not .02 to .03 percent, it's .2 to .3 percent. That is quite a difference....it turn's 70,000 people to 700,000 people. While I'm against the Charlotte law, I think the numbers need to be accurate.
Yep, sorry. miss-type. estimated that there are 700,000 in the US. Estimated population in the US of 322,762,018. Let's say that 25% (random number) are opposed, or would feel uncomfortable with this law. That would mean we are making a law for 700,000 people and making 80,690,505 uncomfortable. This law is a waste of time, money and other resources. yeah, but does your 25% account for the significant amount of those people that are mentally ill?
br
|

|
| |
|
sirbrianwilson
|
Apr 26 2016, 10:10 AM
Post #141
|
Stemlerite
- Posts:
- 22,404
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- February 4, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Apr 26 2016, 09:32 AM
- boilergrad01
- Apr 26 2016, 08:09 AM
- dreachon
- Apr 26 2016, 05:49 AM
- boilergrad01
- Apr 25 2016, 08:50 PM
This article is total joke.
Care to expand on that
Well, let's start at the top with the title. - Quote:
-
Cutting through the liberal propaganda on HB 2
Oh good. I can see we're set up for a nice, unbiased, factual discussion on the topic. - Quote:
-
The truth is that HB2 made very few substantive changes to North Carolina law.
Ok. Cool. That sounds like it could be true. Let's hear it. - Quote:
-
HB2 was passed to rein in a rogue city council in Charlotte that acted beyond its legal authority, to establish a statewide bathroom privacy and safety law clarifying existing state policy and to enumerate existing state policy as it relates to discrimination in employment and public accommodations.
Ummmm. That sounds like the total opposite of "very few substantive changes". You mean, all they did reign (typo in the article) in a city, establish a statewide law, and remove LGBT from the groups protected against discrimination? That's like, everything the people who are against HB2 are arguing about. What do you mean "few substantive changes"???? - Quote:
-
Charlotte City Council voted to repeal this separate-sex bathroom ordinance, which would have allowed men to enter women’s restrooms, shower rooms, bathhouses and changing rooms throughout the city, placing women, children, the elderly and other citizens at great risk of personal privacy violations, unwarranted exposure to individuals of the opposite sex and sexual assault.
Here we have a claim of "great risk" with no data or facts to back it up. Guess we should just take him at his word! - Quote:
-
HB2 established a statewide bathroom privacy and safety standard that authorizes individuals to use multiple occupancy bathrooms and changing facilities that correspond to their biological sex as designated on their birth certificates.
Ummm. Yeah. That's exactly the problem. Wasn't this article about uninformed propaganda? So far the propaganda seems right on target. - Quote:
-
existing state law allows individuals who have undergone sex reassignment surgery to change the sex designation on their birth certificates.
Oh well that just makes everything all better, eh. "I have breasts, dress as a woman, and no dick, but I'll just keep using the men's room until that birth certificate change comes through for me." - Quote:
-
With respect to employment discrimination, HB2 clarifies the state’s existing policy. The classifications recognized for these protections include race, religion, color, national origin, age, biological sex and handicap....North Carolina is one of 28 states that do not recognize “sexual orientation” and/or “gender identity” as legally protected classifications in state employment non-discrimination laws.
Again. That is exactly the problem! Jesus. I've never seen such amazingly well-researched and accurate propaganda before. - Quote:
-
And they are mad that HB2 curtailed their efforts to impose a radical social policy of unbridled sexual license on our state.
Lol @ "radical unbridaled sexual license on our state." Get off my lawn, much? "These dang kids are all sexin each other before marriage! Blasphemy!" - Quote:
-
Unfortunately, the media are propagating the smear campaign, and many levelheaded citizens have been confused and misled by it.
If this article has cleared up anything, it's that nobody is actually confused by HB2. So, thanks for that, guy. Hopefully that was enough expansion. Don't be too hard here...it's hard for NC folks to understand this issue because they've never been exposed to LGBT discrimination and violence because it doesn't exist in the state.
br
|

|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Apr 26 2016, 04:01 PM
Post #142
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
- rkl15
- Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM
Yep, sorry. miss-type.
estimated that there are 700,000 in the US.
Estimated population in the US of 322,762,018.
Let's say that 25% (random number) are opposed, or would feel uncomfortable with this law.
That would mean we are making a law for 700,000 people and making 80,690,505 uncomfortable.
This law is a waste of time, money and other resources. I am against the Charlotte law, but making it a numbers issue is the wrong way to go about it. It shouldn't be about popularity, it should be about whether the law is right and just or not.
BTW, I've already cited the Reuters polls which showed the even split between people in favor of allowing transgenders to use the bathroom they are comfortable with and those opposed. Again, it's not about the numbers.
"The rights of the minority should never be voted on by the majority". -- Thomas Jefferson
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:17 PM
Post #143
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- dreachon
- Apr 26 2016, 05:49 AM
- boilergrad01
- Apr 25 2016, 08:50 PM
This article is total joke. "HB2 makes accommodation for the use of single-occupancy bathrooms and changing facilities “upon a person’s request due to special circumstances,” and existing state law allows individuals who have undergone sex reassignment surgery to change the sex designation on their birth certificates. Furthermore, the bill does not affect the ability of private businesses and nonprofit organizations to set their own policies"
This is similar to my suggestion that a man who chooses to identify as a woman needs to go through some process, or background check. Think of it as a similar precaution used to verify whether a person should possess a gun.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:22 PM
Post #144
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Apr 26 2016, 04:01 PM
"The rights of the minority should never be voted on by the majority". -- Thomas Jefferson
"Be suspicious of internet polls. " -- Abraham Lincoln
|
|
| |
|
sirbrianwilson
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:25 PM
Post #145
|
Stemlerite
- Posts:
- 22,404
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #1
- Joined:
- February 4, 2008
|
You are seriously suggesting that we should background check individuals based on their sexual orientation?
Between that, the comment on mental illness, the comment about hermaphrodites, and the statement by made about LGBT targeted crime being non-existent in NC, I really only have one comment I can make.
I rest my case...
|

|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:26 PM
Post #146
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Apr 25 2016, 09:34 PM
- HoosierLars
- Apr 25 2016, 08:30 PM
- brumdog44
- Apr 25 2016, 07:30 PM
- HoosierLars
- Apr 25 2016, 07:18 PM
- brumdog44
- Apr 25 2016, 03:40 PM
- rkl15
- Apr 25 2016, 12:07 PM
Just a quick "Google" search states that .02 to .03 percent of the population are transgender.
I thought your number sounded incorrect, so I did a quick google search like you said. It's not .02 to .03 percent, it's .2 to .3 percent. That is quite a difference....it turn's 70,000 people to 700,000 people. While I'm against the Charlotte law, I think the numbers need to be accurate.
When you guys were looking for stats, did you see anything classifying the types of trans people, e.g. ones with multiple sex organs, and ones with mental disorders, e.g. Daitlyn Jenner.
All you are doing is providing evidence for the opposing viewpoint. Congratulations.
How so? It's a medical fact that some people are biologically confused, which is very different from a man suddenly deciding to become a woman. The latter could be due to hormonal or emotional issues, and the latter can be classified as a type of mental disorder.
Because your statement assumes that if you are transgender that you either have 'multiple sex organs' or or mentally disordered.....or basically that anyone who isn't intersex must be mentally disordered if they are transgender. What you are referring to as 'multiple sex organs' is a rare condition, one that often involves either the parents making a choice while the child is a young age or one that people make in their teenage years to be operated on to physically resemble one or the other. That number is likely less than 50,000 in the U.S. Using your numbers about 8% of gender confused folks have biological issues. It's a gray area when we start talking about brain chemical imbalances, and we consider many mental illnesses to be the result of imbalances. I think most of the remaining folks could be managed with chemical/hormone therapy.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:29 PM
Post #147
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- sirbrianwilson
- Apr 26 2016, 08:25 PM
You are seriously suggesting that we should background check individuals based on their sexual orientation?
Between that, the comment on mental illness, the comment about hermaphrodites, and the statement by made about LGBT targeted crime being non-existent in NC, I really only have one comment I can make.
I rest my case... Assuming this is a relatively permanent life decision, why not? Does anyone here honestly think Bruce Jenner doesn't have some type of physical or mental disorder? Trying to pretend that this type of behavior is normal only makes things worse.
|
|
| |
|
rkl15
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:34 PM
Post #148
|
All-Star
- Posts:
- 1,970
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #460
- Joined:
- December 24, 2013
|
- brumdog44
- Apr 26 2016, 04:01 PM
- rkl15
- Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM
Yep, sorry. miss-type.
estimated that there are 700,000 in the US.
Estimated population in the US of 322,762,018.
Let's say that 25% (random number) are opposed, or would feel uncomfortable with this law.
That would mean we are making a law for 700,000 people and making 80,690,505 uncomfortable.
This law is a waste of time, money and other resources.
I am against the Charlotte law, but making it a numbers issue is the wrong way to go about it. It shouldn't be about popularity, it should be about whether the law is right and just or not. BTW, I've already cited the Reuters polls which showed the even split between people in favor of allowing transgenders to use the bathroom they are comfortable with and those opposed. Again, it's not about the numbers. "The rights of the minority should never be voted on by the majority". -- Thomas Jefferson We are a democracy. Majority rules?
"The measures of the fair majority... ought always to be respected." --Thomas Jefferson
"I subscribe to the principle, that the will of the majority honestly expressed should give law." --Thomas Jefferson
"All... being equally free, no one has a right to say what shall be law for the others. Our way is to put these questions to the vote, and to consider that as law for which the majority votes." --Thomas Jefferson
"This... [is] a country where the will of the majority is the law, and ought to be the law." --Thomas Jefferson
"The fundamental principle of [a common government of associated States] is that the will of the majority is to prevail." --Thomas Jefferson
In this type of decision you will never have everyone agree what is "right" or "wrong". Therefore, majority needs to rule.
Edited by rkl15, Apr 26 2016, 08:35 PM.
|
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:56 PM
Post #149
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
- rkl15
- Apr 26 2016, 08:34 PM
- brumdog44
- Apr 26 2016, 04:01 PM
- rkl15
- Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM
Yep, sorry. miss-type.
estimated that there are 700,000 in the US.
Estimated population in the US of 322,762,018.
Let's say that 25% (random number) are opposed, or would feel uncomfortable with this law.
That would mean we are making a law for 700,000 people and making 80,690,505 uncomfortable.
This law is a waste of time, money and other resources.
I am against the Charlotte law, but making it a numbers issue is the wrong way to go about it. It shouldn't be about popularity, it should be about whether the law is right and just or not. BTW, I've already cited the Reuters polls which showed the even split between people in favor of allowing transgenders to use the bathroom they are comfortable with and those opposed. Again, it's not about the numbers. "The rights of the minority should never be voted on by the majority". -- Thomas Jefferson
We are a democracy. Majority rules? "The measures of the fair majority... ought always to be respected." --Thomas Jefferson "I subscribe to the principle, that the will of the majority honestly expressed should give law." --Thomas Jefferson "All... being equally free, no one has a right to say what shall be law for the others. Our way is to put these questions to the vote, and to consider that as law for which the majority votes." --Thomas Jefferson "This... [is] a country where the will of the majority is the law, and ought to be the law." --Thomas Jefferson "The fundamental principle of [a common government of associated States] is that the will of the majority is to prevail." --Thomas Jefferson In this type of decision you will never have everyone agree what is "right" or "wrong". Therefore, majority needs to rule. I don't think you understand the meaning of 'democracy'.
Webster's definition: A form of government in which people choose their leaders by voting.
Democracy is a system of representation, not a system where all issues are voted on by the general population. It is a system intended to elect members who make educated decisions. And if they are simply voting by what is popular and not what is right, they truly are not serving justice. In which case, the checks and balance system will rule on it.
If you think it is anything different, then I would like to know what the general public vote on each constitutional amendment was.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Apr 26 2016, 08:56 PM
Post #150
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- sirbrianwilson
- Apr 25 2016, 08:36 PM
These are completely different issues. Just as guns and bathrooms are. You would have a more relevant argument if public facilities were still segregated. But we realized that was the wrong thing to do a long time ago. We're catching up in the LGBT world. No, they are very similar issues. Why is it ok for a man to identify as a woman, but it's not ok for a white woman to identify as a black woman? Somebody must have a way to rationalize this double-standard.
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|