Springsteen cancels show because of North Carolina law

[mopar71]

Hasbeen musicians and singers cannot resurrect their faded careers by latching on to current political controversies. A number of years ago an apt observer coined SHUT UP AND SING .... which sums up the then clumsy political intervention by decades old singers and groups.. NOT ONE FAN paid for a ticket to any concert held by these do-gooders went to pay for their compulsion to tell citizens of one U.S. State or another how to conduct their creation of laws... Celebrities have ZERO Political Acumen... no more than the average concert fan. Some of these bright stars never even completed high school ... So SHUT UP AND SING Springsteen... as you have no more insight into any political issue or event that an average 8 grader in America. You just have a platform because you were ONCE popular on the music scene. The only thing you do is piss off many thousands of Americas who just wish you would SHUT UP AND SING ...

Clearly these musicians are willing to forgo the revenue lost from outraged christians not attending their concerts.

But like I said, there are lots of good christian acts out there that they can go and watch to wash away their sins.

Don't look know but someone is sounding like an anti-Christian bigot.

I'm not Christian, I'm agnostic, but I seriously doubt that Christians are the only ones causing the LGBT community problems.

It's not the Christians who throw gays off the roof or stone them to death. (that would be the "religion of peace")

It wasn't Christians who helped defeat the gay marriage referendum in California in 2008 (minorities who turned out in record numbers for Obama did).

Maybe she is Christian, but Bronwyn Winter, Associate Professor, University of Sydney (and lesbian) recently argued against "Society Must Recognise Trans People's Gender Identities" on BBC [http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/n3ct0q91]

So can people please stop attacking Christians as if they are the problem here? I know they are an easy targets because they say a lot of silly sounding things, but mainly it is because no one is afraid of them. That second part is actually a good thing.

[up-country_sinclair]

Presidential candidate, Senator Ted Cruz weighed in on the North Carolina law yesterday:

"Grown adult men — strangers— should not be alone in a bathroom with little girls. And that's not conservative. That's not Republican or Democrat. That's basic common sense."

I agree with Senator Cruz. Some might disagree, and that's fine. But what those that disagree can't do is ban us from the public square and prohibit us from expressing our opinion on this topic.

What we're witnessing in North Carolina is minoritarianism at its insidious worst. 1/2 of 1% forcing the majority to bend to its beliefs by means of extortion. It's unconscionable and it is my hope that it will be met with equal push back.

So let me get this straight then, no pun intended.

The person below should not be alone in a bathroom with little girls, but in a bathroom full of males.

And more to the point, the beefy looking male I keep posting is OK in a bathroom with little girls because he was born with a vagina.

Yep, makes about as much sense as one of Rafael's election speeches.

But hey, if that's your opinion, that's fine.

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

[lostboy]

In any case, I may well be a B. That's the thing. Not everything is known. The role of Genetics. The role of Environment. Serious study into sex and sexuality didn't really start until the 50's. Even Freud's view was mainly supposition.

So you admit that not everything is known and that serious study is in its infancy, yet you are forcefully advocating for this experiment to continue.

In my opinion, this is a perilously cavalier attitude to have. But it's certainly within your rights to have that attitude, and I would never support anyone denying your right to express it. But those of us who have wives, girlfriends and daughters can't afford to be so cavalier. We have legitimate concerns about this and prefer to proceed cautiously.

Not only are you wrong about me but you are wrong about others with your parochial 'fathers of daughters, husbands of wives' line of attack.

"Here's what I do not worry about: I don't worry about her being attacked in a restroom by a trans woman because (a) it has never happened; and ( trans women are the most victimized group of people I've ever met, and the least likely to commit a crime of indecency in a restroom, because they are afraid of getting beat up when all they want to do is pee. And here is something else I don't worry about: I don't worry about my daughter being cruel and inhumane to trans men, women or kids, because my wife and I have raised her to have values and because she is a kind person."

https://www.facebook.com/steve.rudner/posts/10154115477302929

Father of a 21 year old daughter. A Texas attorney. A member of the Board of Director of Equality Texas.

Someone who actually 'gets it'.

[lostboy]

Headlines last month in Charlotte, North Carolina

NBA must move All-Star Game from Charlotte http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nba/charlotte-hornets/article68471677.html So what is the line of attack? Can't use 'retread rock start'. Can't use 'well they play in Saudi Arabia'. Can't use 'nobody cares about this person'.

“The NBA is dedicated to creating an inclusive environment for all who attend our games and events,” the league said in the statement. “We are deeply concerned that this discriminatory law runs counter to our guiding principles of equality and mutual respect, and do not yet know what impact it will have on our ability to successfully host the 2017 All-Star Game in Charlotte.”

The backlash, the Movement that the bigots predict? Well it is seems like it is going the wrong way. For them.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/sports/nba/charlotte-hornets/article68471677.html#storylink=cpy

[Chicog]

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

If they aren't available, it is most certainly not.

[lostboy]

http://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender

Thanks for that, though I still can't say for certain I know what transgender means. Would I be correct in saying this is a gay person?

I cannot believe that you are seriously asking this question. Access to information has never been so easy. There is no excuse for any question such as this unless it is being deliberately incendiary.

Taking the comment at face value, here is a reference prepared by psychiatrists who are also LGBT people http://www.aglp.org/pages/LGBTFactSheets.php

This battle in the culture war ended last year with SCOTUS. The trans potty paranoia is just a feeble attempt at pushback by the religious bigots. It will soon pass. Their opinion is a minority, marginal viewpoint that is not accepted by the majority of people.

Yes, it is a sincere question. I don't understand what is a transgender person if it is not a gay or transexual person. Is it a transvestite? I can't think of too many other options.

I would imagine that very few, in fact almost no posters on TVF would have a definitive answer on this issue. I am not Trans so neither do I. However, I have read somewhat about LGBT issues.

Transsexual seems to be an older reference, possibly used at a time when the understanding of Trans issues was slim. What has become clear is that sexual orientation i.e. the LGB is not the same as gender identity i.e. the T.

Also, in my opinion, there was some confusion at the time of the word transexual having currency about the difference between cross dressers, which seems to be a psycho-sexual characteristics and transgenders. It is now understood that Transgender is the more acceptable term.

In my view the key difference is that Transgenderism is probably genetic while Cross Dressing and similar activities are an expression of sexuality, not necessarily homosexuality but in any case not related to gender identity.

"This paper represents the first comprehensive review of the scientific evidence that gender identity is a biological phenomenon," explains corresponding author Joshua D. Safer, MD, FACP. "As such it provides one of the most convincing arguments to date for all medical providers to gain the transgender medicine skills necessary to provide good care for these individuals," he added. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150213112317.htm

While not everything is known and LGBT studies is still in its infancy, it seems that what scientific research has been done supports my view.

LGBT people are connected because we are genetically destined to be the way we are. There is absolutely no reason why people should say we are abnormal and absolutely no reason why we should not be treated equally under the law and maintain our human right to dignity as people.

The 1st Article of the Declaration of Universal Human Rights is:

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/

[Chicog]

Don't look know but someone is sounding like an anti-Christian bigot.

I'm not Christian, I'm agnostic, but I seriously doubt that Christians are the only ones causing the LGBT community problems.

It's not the Christians who throw gays off the roof or stone them to death. (that would be the "religion of peace")

It wasn't Christians who helped defeat the gay marriage referendum in California in 2008 (minorities who turned out in record numbers for Obama did).

Maybe she is Christian, but Bronwyn Winter, Associate Professor, University of Sydney (and lesbian) recently argued against "Society Must Recognise Trans People's Gender Identities" on BBC [http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/n3ct0q91]

So can people please stop attacking Christians as if they are the problem here? I know they are an easy targets because they say a lot of silly sounding things, but mainly it is because no one is afraid of them. That second part is actually a good thing.

If you think this isn't an attempt by right wing conservative christians to impose their religious beliefs on others, you need to look again.

They are legislating over a problem that does not exist out of vindictive religious spite.

And quite what that has to do with dopey muslim clerics I don't know, the last I checked they don't run North Carolina.

[up-country_sinclair]

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

If they aren't available, it is most certainly not.

There are single stall, handicapped bathrooms everywhere in the US. These people can use the handicapped single stall toilets when no other single stall bathrooms are available. If the good people of North Carolina need to change an existing law to allow this, I think that they would.

And guess what. If there is no handicapped bathroom available in that particular building, they're just going to have to hold like normal people always do when there isn't a bathroom available.

Again, let's remember that we're talking about less than 1% of the entire population. Most credible data puts it at 1/3 of 1%.

This is minoritarianism run amok.

[SgtRock]

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

If they aren't available, it is most certainly not.

Then that would have provided the perfect opportunity for these so called superstars to stop their grandstanding and put the money from these cancelled concerts to good use.

Building more single stall bathrooms for transgenders.

[lostboy]

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

If they aren't available, it is most certainly not.

There are single stall, handicapped bathrooms everywhere in the US. These people can use the handicapped single stall toilets when no other single stall bathrooms are available. If the good people of North Carolina need to change an existing law to allow this, I think that they would.

And guess what. If there is no handicapped bathroom available in that particular building, they're just going to have to hold like normal people always do when there isn't a bathroom available.

Again, let's remember that we're talking about less than 1% of the entire population. Most credible data puts it at 1/3 of 1%.

This is minoritarianism run amok.

Transgender people are not handicapped. Calling them so is discriminatory. The good people of North Carolina are getting their butts kicked over this issue.

Still with the mind in the toilet. Still making up pseudo-intellectual terms to try and justify your bigotry. The moderator of this thread was right, you can't fix stupid.

[up-country_sinclair]

North Carolina has made provisions in the law for these people to use single stall bathrooms. This is entirely fair to all concerned.

If they aren't available, it is most certainly not.

Then that would have provided the perfect opportunity for these so called superstars to stop their grandstanding and put the money from these cancelled concerts to good use.

Building more single stall bathrooms for transgenders.

That is a great proposal.

[Chicog]

Remember Republican Jeremy Durham, the co-sponsor of the Tennessee anti-LGBT law?

Yes, the one who was kicked out of the Capitol building because of his continued sexual harrassment of women (34 at last count)?

But that's OK right, because he's really a good guy who's helping to stop little children being sexually abused.

Oh, hold on.....

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - A top Republican in the state House wrote to a federal judge to call for a lenient sentence for a former youth pastor convicted of child porn possession.

House Majority Whip Jeremy Durham of Franklin wrote the letter in March, about three months after a grand jury declined to indict him on prescription fraud charges sought by prosecutors.

Joseph Todd Neill was ultimately sentenced to more than three years in prison by U.S. District Judge Harry S. “Sandy” Mattice in Chattanooga. Police found the child porn images while investigating Neill’s sexual relationship with a 16-year-old congregant at North Fork Baptist Church in Shelbyville.

Yeah, this is really about protecting children isn't it?

[JDGRUEN]

It seems that Sprigsteen will have a tough time overcoming this level of opposition ...

No - They are not bigots - they just want to protect their families... AND DID ... TARGET BELLIES UP...

Target Changes Restroom Policy After Receiving Boycott Threats

http://associatedmed...oycott-threats/

[up-country_sinclair]

I hope information above is accurate about Target reversing its decision, but so far I haven't been able to find other sources with can verify the link above.

Let's hope the news above is true and that common sense has prevailed.

Edited April 24, 2016 by up-country_sinclair

[lostboy]

It seems that Sprigsteen will have a tough time overcoming this level of opposition ...

No - They are not bigots - they just want to protect their families... AND DID ... TARGET BELLIES UP...

Target Changes Restroom Policy After Receiving Boycott Threats

http://associatedmed...oycott-threats/

Target temporarily delays the implementation of its earlier decision. Until a solution can be found. Please get your facts correct. This is merely a slight hiccup and is not the tidal wave of homophobes supporting religious hate legislation that you predict.

[up-country_sinclair]

If the information above is accurate it is most certainly more than just a "delay of implementation of its earlier decision". The statement indicates that they are likely going to have a separate bathroom for these people.

Which, of course, if just common sense.

[lostboy]

If the information above is accurate it is most certainly more than just a "delay of implementation of its earlier decision". The statement indicates that they are likely going to have a separate bathroom for these people.

Which, of course, if just common sense.

Target's announcement i that they are temporarily holding the implementation of their earlier announcement. Go find it for yourself instead of making stuff up and imposition your suppositions on their actions.

[up-country_sinclair]

If the information above is accurate it is most certainly more than just a "delay of implementation of its earlier decision". The statement indicates that they are likely going to have a separate bathroom for these people.

Which, of course, if just common sense.

Target's announcement i that they are temporarily holding the implementation of their earlier announcement. Go find it for yourself instead of making stuff up and imposition your suppositions on their actions.

Taken from the statement in the link above:

We will be working diligently to implement a new policy that is amicable for all guests. We have discussed creating a third restroom option for our unisex or LGBT guests.”

[thaihome]

Does anyone else find having this discussion (in at least 3 running threads ) on a Thai centric forum somewhat ironic?

Maybe somewhat related to the earlier thread on TV members fascination with ladyboys. ?

TH

[Chicog]

It seems that Sprigsteen will have a tough time overcoming this level of opposition ...

No - They are not bigots - they just want to protect their families... AND DID ... TARGET BELLIES UP...

Target Changes Restroom Policy After Receiving Boycott Threats

http://associatedmed...oycott-threats/

If they want to protect their families they simply need to stay away from churches.

[Chicog]

Does anyone else find having this discussion (in at least 3 running threads ) on a Thai centric forum somewhat ironic?

Maybe somewhat related to the earlier thread on TV members fascination with ladyboys. ?

TH

Maybe it's because the forum is called "World News" and not "Thai News".

Just a guess, like.

[Pinot]

This bathroom issue, that's never actually happened, drives the wingnuts crazy.

Imagine living in a world where the possibility of something happening, that's never happened, keeps you up at night?

"I want to protect my daughter." OFFS

No, not nuclear war...who is shitting beside me in the next stall.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Pinot

[i claudius]

Honestly I do not care if someone wants to dress in a dress ,make love to another man same for women,but I do wish everyone would stop going on about it and telling us how "normal" it is, just bloomin well get on with your lives .

[Chicog]

Honestly I do not care if someone wants to dress in a dress ,make love to another man same for women,but I do wish everyone would stop going on about it and telling us how "normal" it is, just bloomin well get on with your lives .

Correct.

This issue was created from nothing by excitable god botherers.

They really hate the concept of equal rights.

Edited April 24, 2016 by Chicog

[Scotwight]

Honestly I do not care if someone wants to dress in a dress ,make love to another man same for women,but I do wish everyone would stop going on about it and telling us how "normal" it is, just bloomin well get on with your lives .

Correct.

This issue was created from nothing by excitable god botherers.

They really hate the concept of equal rights.

Don't you mean the concept of who you think should have equal rights? How about, Zoophiliasts, Frotteurists, Galactophiliaists, Furriests? I could go on but the spelling is getting me down. My point is do all of the people into these things deserve equal rights because what they may be doing is legal or you think it should be legal? Hill tribe people get married quite young. Isis people cut others heads off. Don't you think equal rights should be determined by the standards of the people effected? One thing is OK for a Caliphate or mountain province in Burma and another for San Francisco. Unless you are the person who decides for everyone?

[thaihome]

Does anyone else find having this discussion (in at least 3 running threads ) on a Thai centric forum somewhat ironic?

Maybe somewhat related to the earlier thread on TV members fascination with ladyboys. ?

TH

Maybe it's because the forum is called "World News" and not "Thai News".

Just a guess, like.

Ah, then you missed it.

It a world news section on a forum where all posters either live in Thailand or visit it often. That would be Thailand, where this bathroom issue is a non issue and people use whatever toilet they are comfortable with and nobody says a word either way.

TH

[Chicog]

Honestly I do not care if someone wants to dress in a dress ,make love to another man same for women,but I do wish everyone would stop going on about it and telling us how "normal" it is, just bloomin well get on with your lives .

Correct.

This issue was created from nothing by excitable god botherers.

They really hate the concept of equal rights.

Don't you mean the concept of who you think should have equal rights? How about, Zoophiliasts, Frotteurists, Galactophiliaists, Furriests? I could go on but the spelling is getting me down. My point is do all of the people into these things deserve equal rights because what they may be doing is legal or you think it should be legal? Hill tribe people get married quite young. Isis people cut others heads off. Don't you think equal rights should be determined by the standards of the people effected? One thing is OK for a Caliphate or mountain province in Burma and another for San Francisco. Unless you are the person who decides for everyone?

We are talking about people taking a piss or a dump, not the list of pecadillos conjured up by your very fertile imagination.

There has never been a problem with any of this until some god botherers recently decided that they were against it being framed in law.

Do you think transgender people were using the toilet of their birth sex before these idiots got involved?

Edited April 24, 2016 by Chicog

[Scotwight]

Correct.

This issue was created from nothing by excitable god botherers.

They really hate the concept of equal rights.

Don't you mean the concept of who you think should have equal rights? How about, Zoophiliasts, Frotteurists, Galactophiliaists, Furriests? I could go on but the spelling is getting me down. My point is do all of the people into these things deserve equal rights because what they may be doing is legal or you think it should be legal? Hill tribe people get married quite young. Isis people cut others heads off. Don't you think equal rights should be determined by the standards of the people effected? One thing is OK for a Caliphate or mountain province in Burma and another for San Francisco. Unless you are the person who decides for everyone?

We are talking about people taking a piss or a dump, not the list of pecadillos conjured up by your very fertile imagination.

There has never been a problem with any of this until some god botherers recently decided that they were against it being framed in law.

Do you think transgender people were using the toilet of their birth sex before these idiots got involved?

You wrote, "They really hate the concept of equal rights." You are assuming everyone agrees with your assignment of groups who deserve equal rights. Groups deserving of equal rights are determined by the morals and standards of the community involved not you. Nothing to do with god botherers.

The point is the same one a civil war was fought over the conflict between Federal and States rights. Does the State have the right to determine who uses toilets or the Federal government?

Did you ever wonder why America had States instead of being one big country? It's because people are different and have the right to govern themselves by State Law as opposed to Federal law.

The Tenth Amendment states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

You have made a big question into a little one and it's not. Does North Carolina have the right to determine toilet etiquette or is that right given to the Federal government?

The governors of Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania have issued executive orders banning discrimination against transgender state workers. Some cities and counties have also protected their transgender public employees through local ordinances, charter provisions, or other means.

Seems to me the States above have taken the responsibility to decide transgender/transvestite rules and if those are legal I'd guess the reverse would also be legal.

[thaihome]

Correct.

This issue was created from nothing by excitable god botherers.

They really hate the concept of equal rights.

Don't you mean the concept of who you think should have equal rights? How about, Zoophiliasts, Frotteurists, Galactophiliaists, Furriests? I could go on but the spelling is getting me down. My point is do all of the people into these things deserve equal rights because what they may be doing is legal or you think it should be legal? Hill tribe people get married quite young. Isis people cut others heads off. Don't you think equal rights should be determined by the standards of the people effected? One thing is OK for a Caliphate or mountain province in Burma and another for San Francisco. Unless you are the person who decides for everyone?

We are talking about people taking a piss or a dump, not the list of pecadillos conjured up by your very fertile imagination.

There has never been a problem with any of this until some god botherers recently decided that they were against it being framed in law.

Do you think transgender people were using the toilet of their birth sex before these idiots got involved?

You wrote, "They really hate the concept of equal rights." You are assuming everyone agrees with your assignment of groups who deserve equal rights. Groups deserving of equal rights are determined by the morals and standards of the community involved not you. Nothing to do with god botherers.

The point is the same one a civil war was fought over the conflict between Federal and States rights. Does the State have the right to determine who uses toilets or the Federal government?

Did you ever wonder why America had States instead of being one big country? It's because people are different and have the right to govern themselves by State Law as opposed to Federal law.

The Tenth Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

You have made a big question into a little one and it's not. Does North Carolina have the right to determine toilet etiquette or is that right given to the Federal government?

The governors of Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania have issued executive orders banning discrimination against transgender state workers. Some cities and counties have also protected their transgender public employees through local ordinances, charter provisions, or other means.

Seems to me the States above have taken the responsibility to decide transgender/transvestite rules and if those are legal I'd guess the reverse would also be legal.

States rights. Same argument Strom Thurmond in 48 and George Wallace in 68 used during third party presidential runs. Code words for if the bigots are the majority in a state they get to treat other people they don't like anyway they want.

TH

[Scotwight]

You wrote, "They really hate the concept of equal rights." You are assuming everyone agrees with your assignment of groups who deserve equal rights. Groups deserving of equal rights are determined by the morals and standards of the community involved not you. Nothing to do with god botherers.

The point is the same one a civil war was fought over the conflict between Federal and States rights. Does the State have the right to determine who uses toilets or the Federal government?

Did you ever wonder why America had States instead of being one big country? It's because people are different and have the right to govern themselves by State Law as opposed to Federal law.

The Tenth Amendment states: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

You have made a big question into a little one and it's not. Does North Carolina have the right to determine toilet etiquette or is that right given to the Federal government?

The governors of Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania have issued executive orders banning discrimination against transgender state workers. Some cities and counties have also protected their transgender public employees through local ordinances, charter provisions, or other means.

Seems to me the States above have taken the responsibility to decide transgender/transvestite rules and if those are legal I'd guess the reverse would also be legal.

States rights. Same argument Strom Thurmond in 48 and George Wallace in 68 used during third party presidential runs. Code words for if the bigots are the majority in a state they get to treat other people they don't like anyway they want.

TH

That is what I said. Civil War? People have been arguing about the 10th amendment and States rights since the country was formed. It's not code. It has been about Slavery and Tariffs and Segregation and Marijuana. Any time the Federal government disagrees with a State. Who gets to write the laws about certain things. Pot heads are not the same as slave owners but both fought for States rights over Federal rights. Current states' rights issues include the death penalty, assisted suicide, gay marriage and the medicinal use of marijuana, the last of which is in violation of federal law.