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
  • …
  • 29
  • 30
Mississippi & NC religious freedom laws
Tweet Topic Started: Apr 6 2016, 01:24 PM (2,708 Views)
brumdog44 May 21 2016, 09:49 PM Post #436
Member Avatar
The guy picked last in gym class
Posts:
43,823
Group:
Members
Member
#181
Joined:
February 20, 2008
dreachon
May 21 2016, 07:21 PM
brumdog44
May 21 2016, 05:04 PM
dreachon
May 21 2016, 02:15 PM
Here's what I'm struggling with in your and aaron's solution.

1) With no law, someone who looks and lives as the opposite gender can use the opposite bathroom whether other patrons object or not.

IMO, you completed ignored why I wrote. Being transgender doesn't mean you can pass for a member of the opposite sex nor does it mean that someone can pass for a member of the opposite sex every day. Therefore, your logic that someone who is transgender using the opposite bathroom assumes that they can pass for a member of the opposite sex. That's a judgement call.
I didn't ignore it at all. You're right that it's a judgement call. It's THEIR judgement call. Not the judgement call of someone else in the bathroom. Now what about the rest of my post?
It's not just their judgement call.....because under your 'no law', they should still be allowed to use the bathroom and put the onus on the others in the bathroom to make that call.

By your 'no law', it also means that the ability of a transgender to use the bathroom should be directly proportional to their ability to look like a member of the opposite sex. Can't say I agree with that logic. If the reasoning is sound for transgenders to use the opposite bathroom, the solidity of whether that reasoning should be based on the fairness and justice it shows. If a person should be allowed to go into the bathroom of their gender identity, it would seem that the logic falls apart when you exclude those who lack the ability to 'look the part' even when dressing like a member of the opposite sex.

In terms of the rest that you wrote, it's really irrelevant to me because it's not something that I believe our disagreements are focused on. The cat is out of the bag and the issue is already at hand. I've seen the number of students in a small population who now claim that they wish to use a bathroom of the opposite sex go from zero to four within two weeks of the North Carolina ruling to now six.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon May 22 2016, 08:48 AM Post #437
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
brumdog44
May 21 2016, 09:49 PM
By your 'no law', it also means that the ability of a transgender to use the bathroom should be directly proportional to their ability to look like a member of the opposite sex. Can't say I agree with that logic. If the reasoning is sound for transgenders to use the opposite bathroom, the solidity of whether that reasoning should be based on the fairness and justice it shows. If a person should be allowed to go into the bathroom of their gender identity, it would seem that the logic falls apart when you exclude those who lack the ability to 'look the part' even when dressing like a member of the opposite sex.
You're going to have to pardon my confusion here.

You're saying not having a law excludes people who don't "look the part"? But having a law that says you have to look like that gender doesn't?

I thought the entire criticism of my "no law" argument is that anybody could just go in any bathroom regardless of what they look like?
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon May 22 2016, 08:50 AM Post #438
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
Quote:
 
Dreach, if the goal is to make it legal for trans to go to the bathroom opposite of their sex, and my proposal does exactly that, why are you so in favor of instead making it possible for anyone to go to the opposite bathroom?


You should really try reading, like, anything I've posted.

Quote:
 
You're more anti-trans than I am.


Mark it down. Aaron admits he's anti-trans.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray May 22 2016, 01:52 PM Post #439
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
dreachon
May 22 2016, 08:50 AM
Quote:
 
Dreach, if the goal is to make it legal for trans to go to the bathroom opposite of their sex, and my proposal does exactly that, why are you so in favor of instead making it possible for anyone to go to the opposite bathroom?


You should really try reading, like, anything I've posted.

Quote:
 
You're more anti-trans than I am.


Mark it down. Aaron admits he's anti-trans.
Lol. Where did I say I was anti-trans?
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 May 22 2016, 05:08 PM Post #440
Member Avatar
The guy picked last in gym class
Posts:
43,823
Group:
Members
Member
#181
Joined:
February 20, 2008
dreachon
May 22 2016, 08:48 AM
I thought the entire criticism of my "no law" argument is that anybody could just go in any bathroom regardless of what they look like?
That isn't a criticism I've offered. My criticism is that once the legal barrier was broken -- whether it was for or against -- you can't go backwards. And whether or not a law existed prior doesn't mean there weren't issues before. I think that it's a false assumption.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon May 22 2016, 07:25 PM Post #441
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
brumdog44
May 22 2016, 05:08 PM
dreachon
May 22 2016, 08:48 AM
I thought the entire criticism of my "no law" argument is that anybody could just go in any bathroom regardless of what they look like?
That isn't a criticism I've offered. My criticism is that once the legal barrier was broken -- whether it was for or against -- you can't go backwards. And whether or not a law existed prior doesn't mean there weren't issues before. I think that it's a false assumption.
Ah ok. I gotcha now. I spent so many damn posts arguing with aaron about the "no law" model that I just assumed you didn't like it for the same reason.

Your point is a fair criticism. Not sure I still agree with the law the way you've suggested it, but I'll admit that I don't know of many better options. So I'll keep my mind open about it.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon May 22 2016, 07:28 PM Post #442
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
Mr Gray
May 22 2016, 01:52 PM
dreachon
May 22 2016, 08:50 AM
Quote:
 
Dreach, if the goal is to make it legal for trans to go to the bathroom opposite of their sex, and my proposal does exactly that, why are you so in favor of instead making it possible for anyone to go to the opposite bathroom?


You should really try reading, like, anything I've posted.

Quote:
 
You're more anti-trans than I am.


Mark it down. Aaron admits he's anti-trans.
Lol. Where did I say I was anti-trans?
I was being facetious, but do you really not see it?

You're more handsome than I am

= me also saying I'm handsome
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray May 24 2016, 09:39 AM Post #443
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
dreachon
May 14 2016, 07:37 AM
Mr Gray
May 14 2016, 06:30 AM
dreachon
May 3 2016, 08:04 AM
rkl15
May 3 2016, 07:31 AM
My take on this issue:

USA Today Article on Bathroom Issue

I didn't write the article obviously, but I cannot disagree with it!
I mean, pretty much nail on the head right there.
man...this article really couldn't have missed the nail any further than it did. I can't believe you guys fall for these straw man arguments.
What, exactly, is the straw man here?
Well the heading says "Boycott, laws perpetuate the myth that transgender people are predators." This is a straw man or maybe more of a red herring. This has not been the primary issue in the opposition.....I have said it repeatedly as have many politicians and talking heads. I am not concerned about transgender "predators"....I'm concerned about predators taking advantage of the transgender law.

The article goes on to say "To hear the supporters of such laws tell it, the nation’s restrooms are under siege. They paint dark pictures of perverts and predators out to molest children by posing as the opposite sex to gain access" Again...this is a HUGE MISS. Under laws like the one on Charlotte that started all of this, a pervert wouldn't have to pose as the opposite sex to gain access......they can just walk right in and simply claim that they identify as that sex.

it then says this: "When South Carolina was considering an anti-transgender bathroom bill in April, Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott wrote to the legislature: “In the 41 years I have been in law enforcement in South Carolina, I have never heard of a transgender person attacking or otherwise bothering someone in a restroom. This is a non-issue.” In fact, there is plenty of evidence that transgender people are the ones most at risk to be mocked, assaulted and even murdered." - Again a HUGE MISS for the same reasons.

and finally: "Would potty police check birth certificates at the door? People have taken to social media at places such as Twitter’s #wejustneedtopee to show pictures of themselves looking very much like the gender they now identify with and wondering whether lawmakers would really want them to use their former restrooms." Again...as I have said repeatedly, if you look and act as a certain gender, there really will be no issue with using that bathroom...law or not. Opposing the Charlotte law (as NC did), isn't the same as opposing transgenders going into a different bathroom....and this article completely distorts that reality.

Dreach, as much as we've been discussing this, I'm really shocked that you see this article as hitting the nail on the head.
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon May 24 2016, 11:19 AM Post #444
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,068
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
Mr Gray
May 24 2016, 09:39 AM
dreachon
May 14 2016, 07:37 AM
Mr Gray
May 14 2016, 06:30 AM
dreachon
May 3 2016, 08:04 AM
rkl15
May 3 2016, 07:31 AM
My take on this issue:

USA Today Article on Bathroom Issue

I didn't write the article obviously, but I cannot disagree with it!
I mean, pretty much nail on the head right there.
man...this article really couldn't have missed the nail any further than it did. I can't believe you guys fall for these straw man arguments.
What, exactly, is the straw man here?
Well the heading says "Boycott, laws perpetuate the myth that transgender people are predators." This is a straw man or maybe more of a red herring. This has not been the primary issue in the opposition.....I have said it repeatedly as have many politicians and talking heads. I am not concerned about transgender "predators"....I'm concerned about predators taking advantage of the transgender law.

The article goes on to say "To hear the supporters of such laws tell it, the nation’s restrooms are under siege. They paint dark pictures of perverts and predators out to molest children by posing as the opposite sex to gain access" Again...this is a HUGE MISS. Under laws like the one on Charlotte that started all of this, a pervert wouldn't have to pose as the opposite sex to gain access......they can just walk right in and simply claim that they identify as that sex.

it then says this: "When South Carolina was considering an anti-transgender bathroom bill in April, Richland County Sheriff Leon Lott wrote to the legislature: “In the 41 years I have been in law enforcement in South Carolina, I have never heard of a transgender person attacking or otherwise bothering someone in a restroom. This is a non-issue.” In fact, there is plenty of evidence that transgender people are the ones most at risk to be mocked, assaulted and even murdered." - Again a HUGE MISS for the same reasons.

and finally: "Would potty police check birth certificates at the door? People have taken to social media at places such as Twitter’s #wejustneedtopee to show pictures of themselves looking very much like the gender they now identify with and wondering whether lawmakers would really want them to use their former restrooms." Again...as I have said repeatedly, if you look and act as a certain gender, there really will be no issue with using that bathroom...law or not. Opposing the Charlotte law (as NC did), isn't the same as opposing transgenders going into a different bathroom....and this article completely distorts that reality.

Dreach, as much as we've been discussing this, I'm really shocked that you see this article as hitting the nail on the head.
Well I saw it has hitting the nail on the head because it wasn't advocating for either law, but instead for no law, which I had been saying for a while.

As for the straw man, while you have not been arguing several of the points which you highlighted in the article (which i commend), that doesn't mean no one has brought up those issues.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Our users say it best:
"A great way to make a forums for free and it is very reliable as well. Thank you Zetaboards."
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 29
  • 30

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 7:53 PM Jul 10
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy