Springsteen cancels show because of North Carolina law

[Pinot]

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.

Oh the States Rights bullshit again. Yeah, why can't we have slaves? We need those darkies to pick our cotten!

Kiss my states rights! A favorite argument for discrimination for all the crackers.

[Scotwight]

Oh the States Rights bullshit again. Yeah, why can't we have slaves? We need those darkies to pick our cotten!

Kiss my states rights! A favorite argument for discrimination for all the crackers.

Easy on the pejorative rhetoric many States right issues not of interest to crackers. Tell the truth. Look below

Let States Decide on Marijuana

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/27/opinion/sunday/high-time-let-states-decide-on-marijuana.html?_r=0

Half the states look at right-to-die legislation

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2015/04/15/death-with-dignity-laws-25-states/25735597/

I don't need abusive language to make my point because I have facts.

[Neurath]

During the Q&A in the UK a student told Obama that she was "non-biinary" and said that non-binary people have no rights. I do realize that the conflict over the North Carolina laws is not really about who gets to piss in what shit can, but I do wonder what sort of toilet access rights self identified non-binary people would be happy with. As for me, provided someone isn't pissing on my leg, I don't care where they piss.

[canuckamuck]

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.

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

[Credo]

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.

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

If someone is a predator, then they should be charged. It doesn't matter if they are gay, straight or transgender.

[up-country_sinclair]

who decides who is a TG?

In my opinion this is one of the most important questions related to this issue, and it has yet to be satisfactorily answered by the proponents of this experiment.

They will undoubtedly argue that it is the 'transgender" who makes this decision.

Well, I'd like to point out that there is a tendency for the advocates of these people to engage in a bit of chicanery when facts presented do not fit their political agenda. Several cases have been posted of men dressed as women who were arrested for committing crimes in female restrooms. Those who support this radical idea immediately say that the person arrested was not a "transgender' but just a "cross dresser". That's very convenient, isn't it? How do they know this person didn't 'identify' as a 'transgender' on the day he committed the crime?

[Neurath]

The best way for Transgender folks to get access to female toilets would be to frame it as an issues of Men's Rights - the hard done right winger blokes who moan constantly about feminazis would lap it up.

[Chicog]

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.

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

It only became an "issue" to conservatives when TG rights were about to be framed in law.

Up to that point they were perfectly happy with the status quo.

There are laws against sexual crimes in case you haven't noticed.

This does not increase any chances of it happening, because transgenders have been using the toilets that reflect their gender identity without any problem up to that point.

If it was based on evidence, then as I said there is more evidence to support a law banning Catholic priests from toilets.

[Credo]

who decides who is a TG?

In my opinion this is one of the most important questions related to this issue, and it has yet to be satisfactorily answered by the proponents of this experiment.

They will undoubtedly argue that it is the 'transgender" who makes this decision.

Well, I'd like to point out that there is a tendency for the advocates of these people to engage in a bit of chicanery when facts presented do not fit their political agenda. Several cases have been posted of men dressed as women who were arrested for committing crimes in female restrooms. Those who support this radical idea immediately say that the person arrested was not a "transgender' but just a "cross dresser". That's very convenient, isn't it? How do they know this person didn't 'identify' as a 'transgender' on the day he committed the crime?

It doesn't really matter. If someone commits a crime in a female restroom they have committed a crime.

[Scotwight]

It only became an "issue" to conservatives when TG rights were about to be framed in law.

Up to that point they were perfectly happy with the status quo.

There are laws against sexual crimes in case you haven't noticed.

This does not increase any chances of it happening, because transgenders have been using the toilets that reflect their gender identity without any problem up to that point.

If it was based on evidence, then as I said there is more evidence to support a law banning Catholic priests from toilets.

If you mean banning them from the, "little boys room" then I think many would consider that a good idea.

[Chicog]

It only became an "issue" to conservatives when TG rights were about to be framed in law.

Up to that point they were perfectly happy with the status quo.

There are laws against sexual crimes in case you haven't noticed.

This does not increase any chances of it happening, because transgenders have been using the toilets that reflect their gender identity without any problem up to that point.

If it was based on evidence, then as I said there is more evidence to support a law banning Catholic priests from toilets.

If you mean banning them from the, "little boys room" then I think many would consider that a good idea.

Yeah, and watch these North Carolina/Tennessee, etc . conservative god botherers get their tits in a wringer if you tried.

[Scotwight]

It only became an "issue" to conservatives when TG rights were about to be framed in law.

Up to that point they were perfectly happy with the status quo.

There are laws against sexual crimes in case you haven't noticed.

This does not increase any chances of it happening, because transgenders have been using the toilets that reflect their gender identity without any problem up to that point.

If it was based on evidence, then as I said there is more evidence to support a law banning Catholic priests from toilets.

If you mean banning them from the, "little boys room" then I think many would consider that a good idea.

Yeah, and watch these North Carolina/Tennessee, etc . conservative god botherers get their tits in a wringer if you tried.

I think you may be surprised as once upon a time Georgia and North Carolina constitutions barred Catholics from state offices.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Scotwight

[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.

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

What nonsense...

"Bathrooms are often the place for predators"...ridiculous. Stop writing this nonsense.

Your argument is simply about hate. Hate of anyone different from you.

This bathroom predator bullshit has never happened. It's only in the weak minds of fearful wingnuts.

[canuckamuck]

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.

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

What nonsense...

"Bathrooms are often the place for predators"...ridiculous. Stop writing this nonsense.

Your argument is simply about hate. Hate of anyone different from you.

This bathroom predator bullshit has never happened. It's only in the weak minds of fearful wingnuts.

Yes I hate sexual predators even the heterosexual ones I was talking about. And yes they are different than me.

So I would give you full marks, except for that you believe sexual predators do not use bathrooms as a hunting ground.

You should Google "raped in a men's room news" You need to add the word 'news' or you will just get porn.

Perhaps you don't believe in stories of prison rape either.

[Chicog]

It only became an "issue" to conservatives when TG rights were about to be framed in law.

Up to that point they were perfectly happy with the status quo.

There are laws against sexual crimes in case you haven't noticed.

This does not increase any chances of it happening, because transgenders have been using the toilets that reflect their gender identity without any problem up to that point.

If it was based on evidence, then as I said there is more evidence to support a law banning Catholic priests from toilets.

If you mean banning them from the, "little boys room" then I think many would consider that a good idea.

Yeah, and watch these North Carolina/Tennessee, etc . conservative god botherers get their tits in a wringer if you tried.

I think you may be surprised as once upon a time Georgia and North Carolina constitutions barred Catholics from state offices.

Well that protected a few children at least.

[Scotwight]

If you mean banning them from the, "little boys room" then I think many would consider that a good idea.

Yeah, and watch these North Carolina/Tennessee, etc . conservative god botherers get their tits in a wringer if you tried.

I think you may be surprised as once upon a time Georgia and North Carolina constitutions barred Catholics from state offices.

Well that protected a few children at least.

So we agree. If a group has a small minority of members who are dangerous to children they should be kept out of public toilets.

Nice to know consensus rules in the end.

[Chicog]

So we agree. If a group has a small minority of members who are dangerous to children they should be kept out of public toilets.

Nice to know consensus rules in the end.

Who said anything about a "small" minority?

This is the Catholic Church we are talking about.

It's almost obligatory.

[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.

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

What nonsense...

"Bathrooms are often the place for predators"...ridiculous. Stop writing this nonsense.

Your argument is simply about hate. Hate of anyone different from you.

This bathroom predator bullshit has never happened. It's only in the weak minds of fearful wingnuts.

Yes I hate sexual predators even the heterosexual ones I was talking about. And yes they are different than me.

So I would give you full marks, except for that you believe sexual predators do not use bathrooms as a hunting ground.

You should Google "raped in a men's room news" You need to add the word 'news' or you will just get porn.

Perhaps you don't believe in stories of prison rape either.

On to prison rape now...ye gods. How do you find the courage to even leave the house?

Sexual predators and an LGBT bathroom law should not be in the same...oh never mind.

These people...wow

[Chicog]

I know, if it was an epidemic of transgender people raping kids I'd understand it, but it's simply an epidemic of dinosaurs spitting the dummy because no-one cares about their stupid book of fiction.

[Jingthing]

Yep, it's as if there aren't real serious problems in the USA such as education, health care, unemployment, economic inequality, crumbling infrastructure, racism, etc. The right wing needs to invent problems that don't exist ... transgender boogeymen in the toilets. It's quite sad.

[canuckamuck]

The bathroom issue stems from the fact that, even as things are today, bathrooms are often a place for predators. Now give men the right to put on a dress and use the toilet at the local swimming pool, why not even the change room?

I get the point that TG's may not do this, but who decides who is a TG? The teenager in charge at the front desk at the pool.

What nonsense...

"Bathrooms are often the place for predators"...ridiculous. Stop writing this nonsense.

Your argument is simply about hate. Hate of anyone different from you.

This bathroom predator bullshit has never happened. It's only in the weak minds of fearful wingnuts.

Yes I hate sexual predators even the heterosexual ones I was talking about. And yes they are different than me.

So I would give you full marks, except for that you believe sexual predators do not use bathrooms as a hunting ground.

You should Google "raped in a men's room news" You need to add the word 'news' or you will just get porn.

Perhaps you don't believe in stories of prison rape either.

On to prison rape now...ye gods. How do you find the courage to even leave the house?

Sexual predators and an LGBT bathroom law should not be in the same...oh never mind.

These people...wow

No, just illuminating the level of denial you are in. In your world predators no longer exist because that would be in the way of another liberal beach head.

You can't imagine that a pedophile or a toilet voyeur wouldn't consider putting on a frock to get full access to a women's bathroom. Please pay attention I am not saying TG's would do this. I am saying there are people out there that would and probably already do.

[Chicog]

No, just illuminating the level of denial you are in. In your world predators no longer exist because that would be in the way of another liberal beach head.

Of COURSE predators exist.

You're just look in the wrong place.

...In Congress, Hastert supported the Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act of 2000, which among other measures, sought to prevent and punish the sexual abuse of minors.

...

"It is important to have a national notification system to help safely recover children kidnapped by child predators," he said. "But it is equally important to stop those predators before they strike, to put repeat child molesters into jail for the rest of their lives and to help law enforcement with the tools they need to get the job done."

Now, prosecutors say Hastert sexually abused five students decades ago when he was a high school teacher and wrestling coach at Yorkville High School.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-dennis-hastert-lawmaker-record-met-20160413-story.html

Who do kids *really* need protecting from?

And of course that loathsome piece of scum is getting all sorts of letters of support from his fellow *cough*..er.. Republicans.

[Scotwight]

No, just illuminating the level of denial you are in. In your world predators no longer exist because that would be in the way of another liberal beach head.

Of COURSE predators exist.

You're just look in the wrong place.

...In Congress, Hastert supported the Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act of 2000, which among other measures, sought to prevent and punish the sexual abuse of minors.

...

"It is important to have a national notification system to help safely recover children kidnapped by child predators," he said. "But it is equally important to stop those predators before they strike, to put repeat child molesters into jail for the rest of their lives and to help law enforcement with the tools they need to get the job done."

Now, prosecutors say Hastert sexually abused five students decades ago when he was a high school teacher and wrestling coach at Yorkville High School.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-dennis-hastert-lawmaker-record-met-20160413-story.html

Who do kids *really* need protecting from?

And of course that loathsome piece of scum is getting all sorts of letters of support from his fellow *cough*..er.. Republicans.

This thread is a good object lesson. Some here have no trouble denying rights to transgender people and you have no problem denying rights to Catholic priests and/or Republicans. It all depends on who we see as the bogyman but denying rights was never really the issue.

[canuckamuck]

No, just illuminating the level of denial you are in. In your world predators no longer exist because that would be in the way of another liberal beach head.

Of COURSE predators exist.

You're just look in the wrong place.

...In Congress, Hastert supported the Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act of 2000, which among other measures, sought to prevent and punish the sexual abuse of minors.

...

"It is important to have a national notification system to help safely recover children kidnapped by child predators," he said. "But it is equally important to stop those predators before they strike, to put repeat child molesters into jail for the rest of their lives and to help law enforcement with the tools they need to get the job done."

Now, prosecutors say Hastert sexually abused five students decades ago when he was a high school teacher and wrestling coach at Yorkville High School.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-dennis-hastert-lawmaker-record-met-20160413-story.html

Who do kids *really* need protecting from?

And of course that loathsome piece of scum is getting all sorts of letters of support from his fellow *cough*..er.. Republicans.

So in a world with predators hiding in plain site (as in your article) you feel comfortable letting men in to the little girl's room because they say they are TG.

and of course we know a TG is an oppressed minority and incapable of any wrong action. So much so that even fake TG's are made morally superior by association.

[Diplomatico]

This thread is a good object lesson. Some here have no trouble denying rights to transgender people and you have no problem denying rights to Catholic priests and/or Republicans. It all depends on who we see as the bogyman but denying rights was never really the issue.

Exactly. This ridiculous "debate" (if you want to even call it that) has nothing to do with rights. It's about a special interest group demanding special treatment.....the US Constitution makes no mention of toilet rights. Whether one agrees or disagrees with that demand for special treatment is a matter of one's personal perspective.

[Chicog]

No, just illuminating the level of denial you are in. In your world predators no longer exist because that would be in the way of another liberal beach head.

Of COURSE predators exist.

You're just look in the wrong place.

...In Congress, Hastert supported the Child Abuse Prevention and Enforcement Act of 2000, which among other measures, sought to prevent and punish the sexual abuse of minors.

...

"It is important to have a national notification system to help safely recover children kidnapped by child predators," he said. "But it is equally important to stop those predators before they strike, to put repeat child molesters into jail for the rest of their lives and to help law enforcement with the tools they need to get the job done."

Now, prosecutors say Hastert sexually abused five students decades ago when he was a high school teacher and wrestling coach at Yorkville High School.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-dennis-hastert-lawmaker-record-met-20160413-story.html

Who do kids *really* need protecting from?

And of course that loathsome piece of scum is getting all sorts of letters of support from his fellow *cough*..er.. Republicans.

This thread is a good object lesson. Some here have no trouble denying rights to transgender people and you have no problem denying rights to Catholic priests and/or Republicans. It all depends on who we see as the bogyman but denying rights was never really the issue.

Denying rights is the *only* issue.

This law was brought in because of an anti-discrimination law that merely framed the status quo.

I'll ask again: Why was this not an issue before that?

[Chicog]

So in a world with predators hiding in plain site (as in your article) you feel comfortable letting men in to the little girl's room because they say they are TG.

and of course we know a TG is an oppressed minority and incapable of any wrong action. So much so that even fake TG's are made morally superior by association.

I feel comfortable with transgender women, who were born men, being allowed into the little girls room.

As for your second absurd claim:

"We know a TG is an oppressed minority and incapable of any wrong action".

Substitute TG for Christian or Republican and you have hit the jackpot.

When in fact things could not be further from the truth.

There are already laws in place to protect children from adult molesters.

Although in the case of the church there seems to be an attempt to circumvent them.

[canuckamuck]

So in a world with predators hiding in plain site (as in your article) you feel comfortable letting men in to the little girl's room because they say they are TG.

and of course we know a TG is an oppressed minority and incapable of any wrong action. So much so that even fake TG's are made morally superior by association.

I feel comfortable with transgender women, who were born men, being allowed into the little girls room.

As for your second absurd claim:

"We know a TG is an oppressed minority and incapable of any wrong action".

Substitute TG for Christian or Republican and you have hit the jackpot.

When in fact things could not be further from the truth.

There are already laws in place to protect children from adult molesters.

Although in the case of the church there seems to be an attempt to circumvent them.

You should add up how many anti Christian statements you have made in this thread. If any one here has a hate agenda it's you.

As for transgenders using the bathrooms with little girls. Sure your fine with it, but that wasn't ever my point. I am speaking of the baby you have thrown out with the bathwater. The security of kids from straight predators masquerading as TG. When you come up with a plan for that then you can move forward. The needs of the many are currently outweighing the needs of the few.

[Chicog]

You should add up how many anti Christian statements you have made in this thread. If any one here has a hate agenda it's you.

As for transgenders using the bathrooms with little girls. Sure your fine with it, but that wasn't ever my point. I am speaking of the baby you have thrown out with the bathwater. The security of kids from straight predators masquerading as TG. When you come up with a plan for that then you can move forward. The needs of the many are currently outweighing the needs of the few.

You don't need to add them up.

My position on overreaching god botherers is well known.

I respect any individuals right to practice his religion.

I despise any individuals desire to impose his religious beliefs on others.

So that isn't even up for debate, and it is not the topic of this thread.

Maybe you can answer my question which does not appear to be getting any semblance of an answer.

If transgender people using toilets is a risk enough to enact legislation now, why was it not considered a risk until the North Carolina god botherers noticed that equal rights for the LGBT community was about to be framed in law?

Note: Prior to this point, I'm fairly certain the two individuals, photos of whom I have posted in this thread, were quite happily using the toilets of their identified gender without any god botherers even knowing they were there.

All this garbage about "predatorial men dressed as women" is exactly that.

The only men that wear dresses that children need to be afraid of are priests.

[canuckamuck]

You should add up how many anti Christian statements you have made in this thread. If any one here has a hate agenda it's you.

As for transgenders using the bathrooms with little girls. Sure your fine with it, but that wasn't ever my point. I am speaking of the baby you have thrown out with the bathwater. The security of kids from straight predators masquerading as TG. When you come up with a plan for that then you can move forward. The needs of the many are currently outweighing the needs of the few.

You don't need to add them up.

My position on overreaching god botherers is well known.

I respect any individuals right to practice his religion.

I despise any individuals desire to impose his religious beliefs on others.

So that isn't even up for debate, and it is not the topic of this thread.

Maybe you can answer my question which does not appear to be getting any semblance of an answer.

If transgender people using toilets is a risk enough to enact legislation now, why was it not considered a risk until the North Carolina god botherers noticed that equal rights for the LGBT community was about to be framed in law?

Note: Prior to this point, I'm fairly certain the two individuals, photos of whom I have posted in this thread, were quite happily using the toilets of their identified gender without any god botherers even knowing they were there.

All this garbage about "predatorial men dressed as women" is exactly that.

The only men that wear dresses that children need to be afraid of are priests.

Absolutely things were better left as they were. But I certainly oppose any law that gives men the right to enter the ladies room. It's one thing to let life's inconveniences work themselves out under the radar, it is another to give legal assent to perv's. Again, I am not calling any of these speciality groups pervs, I am talking about regular pervs)

Perhaps if you liberals weren't so hell bent on tearing up the fabric of society you would see that some things are better left alone.