Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • Mississippi & NC religious freedom laws
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • …
  • 30
Mississippi & NC religious freedom laws
Tweet Topic Started: Apr 6 2016, 01:24 PM (2,729 Views)
rkl15 Apr 26 2016, 07:15 AM Post #136
Member Avatar
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.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Apr 26 2016, 07:40 AM Post #137
Member Avatar
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.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
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
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article73394937.html
This article is total joke.
Care to expand on that
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Apr 26 2016, 09:32 AM Post #139
Member Avatar
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
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article73394937.html
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.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sirbrianwilson Apr 26 2016, 10:07 AM Post #140
Member Avatar
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
Posted Image
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sirbrianwilson Apr 26 2016, 10:10 AM Post #141
Member Avatar
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
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article73394937.html
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
Posted Image
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 Apr 26 2016, 04:01 PM Post #142
Member Avatar
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
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Apr 26 2016, 08:17 PM Post #143
Member Avatar
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
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article73394937.html
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.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Apr 26 2016, 08:22 PM Post #144
Member Avatar
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
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sirbrianwilson Apr 26 2016, 08:25 PM Post #145
Member Avatar
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...
Posted Image
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Apr 26 2016, 08:26 PM Post #146
Member Avatar
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.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Apr 26 2016, 08:29 PM Post #147
Member Avatar
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.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
rkl15 Apr 26 2016, 08:34 PM Post #148
Member Avatar
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.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 Apr 26 2016, 08:56 PM Post #149
Member Avatar
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.



Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Apr 26 2016, 08:56 PM Post #150
Member Avatar
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.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • …
  • 30

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 7:54 PM Jul 10
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy