Bryan Adams cancels Mississippi show, citing state's new law

[pedro01]

There is nothing dignified about this whole stupid toilet/locker room issue.

Forcing women to accept men in the toilet if the man pretends to be trans or pretends to "identify as female" is asinine.

Everyone knows women go there together for their secret women pow-wows or whatever. The Ladies Room is their safe space. I thought the Left was in full support of safe spaces?

People can pretend that it is some kind of civil right, human right, and anyone who opposes is a bigot, but that is all BS. There was a lesbian on the BBC speaking out against this so don't pretend that the LGBT community is united on the issue. The vast majority of women still don't want men in their toilets.

They can solve this issue by changing the signs on the doors. Instead of the image of a man or woman, just have a penis or vagina.

You and others continue with your minds in the toilet. By doing so, you purposefully trivialise the issue and contribute to the demonisation of LGBT people. The religious hate laws deny LGBT people access to public services, jeopardises their employment prospects and in some case their actual employment as they can be dismissed for their biological make up. Beating up the toilet diversion plays into the agenda of hate and discrimination that is expressed by the laws and the people behind the laws. Why bring in left and right into this issue? What do I now about lesbians on the BBC. All these distractions and diversions. Plays right into the hands of the bigots.

I will say one thing on the toilet issue Continued reference to men in women's toilets is either a sign of ignorance or a deliberate inflammation of the issue. Who is talking about men in women's bathrooms? We are discussing Trans people who identify as women using women's bathrooms. To suggest otherwise is just a blatant sop to promoting discrimination. You don't like LGBT people, fine but don't perpetuate discrimination that denies them equality under the law.

In the case of men in womens bathrooms, we are talking about the trans men that would want access to womens bathrooms.

Now - this is not a question of equality. This is a question of letting people with a mental illness into bathrooms of the opposite sex.

And make no mistake, transgenders are suffering from a mental condition.

If you don't believe me - go look in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or even better, watch this video from 3:20 onwards were an M2F Transgender that is quite open about the fact that it IS a mental disorder.

40% of Transgenders that go through gender re-assignment go on to attempt suicide. The re-assignment is not the cure - because they still have an underlying mental disorder.

This isn't skin color, this isn't sexual preference. This is changing bathroom access to accommodate mental illness.

And then there's the pervs. People that want to give males access to female bathrooms because it will facilitate their activities.

In face, in North Carolina, the proposed "nondiscrimination ordinance" was being championed by a convicted child molester. You can read about this unsavory character here: http://www.dailywire.com/news/3995/convicted-sexual-predator-and-lgbt-activist-behind-robert-kraychik

According to your unreferenced and unsourced figure, 40% of Trans people having done re-assignment commit suicide. And so because of that we can't let them use the toilet. I think that the last person I would want to consult on Trans issues is you. Did you go away and get some post grad award in genetics since your last post on this thread? More likely you spent a few days playing google bingo and desperately trying to find data that fits your twisted agenda. How you must have delighted on discovering the mental health issues related to Trans people. And of course being the oh so sensitive soul that you are, you couldn't wait to pass around your latest piece of bigotry. That Trans people are 'nuts' so they shouldn't be allowed to use the toilets. Who knows what they will do in the depths of the depression and anguish in the toilet cubicle.

You have no business lecturing anyone on Trans issues. Your need to discriminate against them and comment on their behaviour is perverse. As is your retreat into the already established off topic issue of male sex offenders.

Keep up the feverish google bingo. Who knows, you might actually find a clue.

Actually 40% ATTEMPT suicide. I did not say they were successful.

Here is a report from UCLA - http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

You are being silly to say that this is the REASON they should not be allowed to use the toilet. Nobody said that.

Ultimately - this is an issue that will impact grown, teen and adolescent females as well as transgenders.

One side of the coin is transgender rights and the other is womens' rights/safety.

There is no discrimination, here, that is merely a strawman that you use in every post.

I see now you not only accuse me of bigotry but also of perversion. A real charmer aren't you?

[pedro01]

I stated that just over 40% of people that undergo sex change surgery end up attempting suicide. You then blamed that (with no evidence) on them being persecuted as opposed to the disappointment that the surgery does not do what they think.

As for a website has an "anti LGBT" agenda? "sexchangeregret" - it's a website by people that regret having a sex change. The guy in the video at the top of the home page had a sex change himself. Are you really claiming he is "anti LGBT"?

You will have to do better than continually accuse people of bigotry, especially when it's your only answer to facts.

The website sexchangeregret is by one person who decided to revert to male and now advocates against sex change. it could not *be* more personal.

Furthermore, what you've done is said that LGBT are by definition "mentally ill" which presumably you've based on your own or others interpretation of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (I'm assuming the latest version).

Well that same document actually called homosexuality a mental illness until 1973.

So if you stand by the science, you'll find that it eliminated the word "disorder" in 2012 in reference to Gender identity.

Further, in reference to the high suicide rate, the link I gave you has plenty of references at the bottom that show that many of the suicides were not in fact down to mental illness, and that there is plenty of statistical evidence that acceptance, especially among family, is a key factor in preventing not only transgender, but LGBT suicides.

The truth is that you have a downer on the LGBT community, but fortunately there are plenty of people out there who have better things to do in life than spend their time making life miserable for those of whom they disapprove.

I'll leave you to your views now, there are some people that simply aren't worth the waste of time.

Nope - I did not once say that LGBT are mentally ill.

I said that transgenders were suffering from a mental disorder, this is scientific fact.

Go to 3:30 to hear a transgenders view on it - which matches my own.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmgqeKqMcxg

Perhaps you see yourself as more knowledgeable than this transgender. She sounds pretty switched on to me.

You seem to want to put words into my mouth, to paint me as a bad person.

It's not working - because people see through that approach nowadays.

[bentfarang]

I find your post ridiculous. You want to get anal and literal about 100 percent false. Hint: CONTEXT. I never said anything CLOSE to 100 percent of all GLBT Americans have been significantly oppressed. DUH! Please don't bother replying because I have no interest in such absurd conflicts over misunderstood semantics.

Both sides of this argument claim to be 100% right and the opposing view 100% wrong. If only it was that simple.

[Jingthing]

I find your post ridiculous. You want to get anal and literal about 100 percent false. Hint: CONTEXT. I never said anything CLOSE to 100 percent of all GLBT Americans have been significantly oppressed. DUH! Please don't bother replying because I have no interest in such absurd conflicts over misunderstood semantics.

Both sides of this argument claim to be 100% right and the opposing view 100% wrong. If only it was that simple.

Ignore list time. The stuff you insist on focusing on is too ridiculous for my time. Maybe someone else will want to play anal games about language with you.

Edited April 18, 2016 by Jingthing

[lostboy]

In the case of men in womens bathrooms, we are talking about the trans men that would want access to womens bathrooms.

Now - this is not a question of equality. This is a question of letting people with a mental illness into bathrooms of the opposite sex.

And make no mistake, transgenders are suffering from a mental condition.

If you don't believe me - go look in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders or even better, watch this video from 3:20 onwards were an M2F Transgender that is quite open about the fact that it IS a mental disorder.

40% of Transgenders that go through gender re-assignment go on to attempt suicide. The re-assignment is not the cure - because they still have an underlying mental disorder.

This isn't skin color, this isn't sexual preference. This is changing bathroom access to accommodate mental illness.

And then there's the pervs. People that want to give males access to female bathrooms because it will facilitate their activities.

In face, in North Carolina, the proposed "nondiscrimination ordinance" was being championed by a convicted child molester. You can read about this unsavory character here: http://www.dailywire.com/news/3995/convicted-sexual-predator-and-lgbt-activist-behind-robert-kraychik

According to your unreferenced and unsourced figure, 40% of Trans people having done re-assignment commit suicide. And so because of that we can't let them use the toilet. I think that the last person I would want to consult on Trans issues is you. Did you go away and get some post grad award in genetics since your last post on this thread? More likely you spent a few days playing google bingo and desperately trying to find data that fits your twisted agenda. How you must have delighted on discovering the mental health issues related to Trans people. And of course being the oh so sensitive soul that you are, you couldn't wait to pass around your latest piece of bigotry. That Trans people are 'nuts' so they shouldn't be allowed to use the toilets. Who knows what they will do in the depths of the depression and anguish in the toilet cubicle.

You have no business lecturing anyone on Trans issues. Your need to discriminate against them and comment on their behaviour is perverse. As is your retreat into the already established off topic issue of male sex offenders.

Keep up the feverish google bingo. Who knows, you might actually find a clue.

Actually 40% ATTEMPT suicide. I did not say they were successful.

Here is a report from UCLA - http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/AFSP-Williams-Suicide-Report-Final.pdf

You are being silly to say that this is the REASON they should not be allowed to use the toilet. Nobody said that.

Ultimately - this is an issue that will impact grown, teen and adolescent females as well as transgenders.

One side of the coin is transgender rights and the other is womens' rights/safety.

There is no discrimination, here, that is merely a strawman that you use in every post.

I see now you not only accuse me of bigotry but also of perversion. A real charmer aren't you?

Make up your mind whether you want to have a discussion or a slagging match. You are not really effective at either.

Provide evidence that Trans people pose a risk to the safety of women and children in toilets. You claim to be the Defender of Woment's Toilets, then prove it. You will not be able to because there is no evidence that Trans people pose any risk of sexual assault. You will find that Trans people are more likely to be victims of assault than perpetrators.

So we are left again with asking why you are perpetuating untrue and inflammatory claims. It can only be to promote discrimination against a minority. Like I consistently say, if you don't want to be called a bigot then don't say bigoted things. Quite simple really. Even you should be able to grasp the concept.

[lostboy]

The classification of Gender Dysphoria, which is defined as intense persistent gender incongruence in the International Classification of Diseases is under review. It is argued that:

"The diagnosis inappropriately pathologizes gender noncongruence and should be eliminated" http://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender.aspx

If you are going t try and sound smart, you should really do your homework first. Just throwing out a few bits of jargon does not hide your intent. Only wackos like Donald Trump make fund of mentally challenged for intellectually disabled people any more. And, of course, now you. You wish to perpetuate the stigma of mental health issues to promote discrimination against trans people. If you are not Trans, why not just leave them alone. If their existence threatens your perception of your manhood, or lack of it, then go consult someone in a professional capacity and just leave the minorities alone to deal with their issues.

You have zero business discussing any issue relating to the mental health of Trans people. And using this as an excuse to deny them the ability to take a piss is revolting.

This is a discussion forum, I know you are a regressive liberal - so how about we just take the following as read, so we can actually discuss the issues.

1 - You want to tell people what they can and cannot talk about, although you believe yourself to be a bastion of free speech.

2 - You believe anyone with a different opinion from your own is bigoted

3 - You will liberally use the report button to try to stifle opposing views.

In short - WE ALL GET IT. There is no need to repeat accusations of bigotry or tell people what they can and cannot say in every post. We gotcha there 100%.

So you claim that the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders is wrong and you are right.

As for "anti LGBT" websites - the site I posted "sex change regret" was created by a male to female transgender who went through reassignment. How is he anti LGBT? Contributors to that site are also disappointed gender re-assignees. I think their stories are well worth listening to. Your claim that the site is "anti LGBT" just because it doesn't fit your narrative is quite ludicrous.

The pioneers of gender reassignment surgery Johns Hopkins no longer carry out the procedure because they know it doesn't fix the problem, which is a mental issue.

And this isn't about where .01% of the population, suffering from a mental disorder "take a piss". It is about both the existing users and the aspiring users of those toilets and locker rooms. The safety and well being of both groups is important. Not one over the other.

We get it? Who, precisely is we? Or are you using the Royal Wee? Are you a Movement? You speak on behalf of who? Being a Wee of course is apropos to your mind being persistently in the toilet. So break it down for us and not your whiny little Victim thing of not being able to express your views - break down for the rest of us, just how is any of what you have said in your multiple posts linked to HB1523 in the Mississippi Legislature 2016.

How is an internal debate among the psychiatric community about the classification of gender dysphoria as a 'disorder' or not in any way related to HB1523 that allows the dismissal of LGBT people because of their biology? How is the attempted suicide rate of post operative Trans people connected to HB1523 that allows government employees and recipients of government funding and contracts to discriminate against LGBT people? How is the dissatisfaction of ONE post operative Trans person in any way connected to HB1523?

The plain and simple fact is that none of your facts mean anything. They are completely and entirely out of context and not related to this topic which is about religious hate legislation, specifically HB1523 in Mississippi. So again, why are you pursuing this line? It can only be to tarnish and demonise LGBT people, specifically in your recent posts Transgender people. And when there are legitimate voices raised in protest at your bigotry, you play the victim. You start making lists of your biased perceptions of other people's characters and motivations. You retreat into the simple minded polemic of the ideological sand pit - and you even plagiarise your insults. I think another poster should be claiming the 'regressive' thing because clearly he would have stolen it from his favourite website gatesofvienna.

What is it about your need to prevent minorities from relieving themselves? It is completely and utterly insane, this entire line of argument perpetuated by people who cannot get their minds out of the toilet. I really believe that there are some significant psycho-sexual malformations playing on certain people's obsession with genitalia, cakes and toilets. Irrespective of all that, just provide one link, one connection, one rational argument that links any of this, including your Johns Hopkins Professor (retired) and his views on gender reassignment to HR 1523. Just one will do. And when you can't, just admit your agenda is to use language and terminology that is out of context in a deliberate attempt to promote discrimination against LGBT people. Many people suffer from mental health issues. Knowing that there are people like you around who will harass and harangue them over this must be so comforting for them.

[Jingthing]

Humor break.

[Chicog]

I said that transgenders were suffering from a mental disorder, this is scientific fact.

Claiming as a "scientific fact" that it is a disorder, when I've pointed out to you that the very document you used to back up your argument no longer describes it as a disorder is, well, just plain stupid.

'Nuff said.

[stillbornagain]

Don't forget the flowers Charles. What's a good gay wedding without flowers.

Thanks for finally admitting the truth.

And thank you for further confirming that conservatives are typically much less capable of perceiving satire: http://hij.sagepub.com/content/14/2/212.abstract

[chuckd]

Don't forget the flowers Charles. What's a good gay wedding without flowers.

Thanks for finally admitting the truth.

And thank you for further confirming that conservatives are typically much less capable of perceiving satire: http://hij.sagepub.com/content/14/2/212.abstract

Satire?

[Chicog]

And now Pearl Jam are joining in.

it seems all they'll have left soon are the Jonas brothers.

[lostboy]

Don't forget the flowers Charles. What's a good gay wedding without flowers.

Thanks for finally admitting the truth.

And thank you for further confirming that conservatives are typically much less capable of perceiving satire: http://hij.sagepub.com/content/14/2/212.abstract

Satire?

We're talking with a Texan here. Everything is bigger in the bighorn state or the lone star state or whatever they call themselves now. They don't do satire. They can't do irony. So we are left with sarcasm and moving practically to the burlesque. Texans are in your face kind of people.

Must feel sorry for the republicans now. They just can't seem to fit into modern society.

[chuckd]

OIC.

When a liberal posts something it is satire. When a conservative posts something it is sarcasm.

You just keep believing that. It will serve you well in your world of lostboys,.

[Chicog]

Do you reckon this bloke is a Texan?

[Roadman]

One singer canceling a tour won’t stop a hate bill, but these actions add up. Make no mistake, these are hate bills.

These bills are written to give carte blanche to a wide variety of professionals to discriminate against LGBT people in the course of their jobs.

Why would these crackers do something like this? Hate, ignorance and fear. These are your local Republican governments in action.

Pathetic.

This is much needed push back...brought on by LGBT people purposely targeting business of people of Christian faith...demanding service...such a being forced to make a penis cake for a gay wedding...crying foul when they are politely asked to take their business down the street...where they will be accommodated...

What is hateful...is the lack of respect for all people...not just gay people...

Your people just do not know when to give it a rest...bringing lawsuits against people of faith causes the LGBT more harm than good...

Hate...is in the eye of the beholder...if you could be honest...you would acknowledge that the hate and unreasonable witch-hunt comes from the LGBT community...IMHO

Do I really need to ask what's up with old men and their penis cake fetish? I have been to many weddings for straight couples. Not one of them had a wedding cake in the shape of any genitalia. Not one. Where do you old men get this idea that same sex couples are fixated on genitalia shaped baked goods? Can gay people not eat hot dogs now without looking like Rick Perry 'going down to downtown'? Are gay people not allowed to eat donuts because they are not anatomically appropriate to gay men. So they can only be eaten by straight men and lesbians?

Your push back is as limp as Little GGT appears to be. It is a last gasp of the religious bigots. There are not enough of them to sustain this advance. The numbers of old white reactionaries are diminishing daily. The religious bigots, if not inventing hate, certainly employ it for the benefit of the propagation of their lunacy.

Many countries now have anti hate legislation. Even in America. Kathryn Knott, the daughter of a local police chief jailed fro 5 - 10 months for gay bashing http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Kathryn-Knott-Convicted-in-Center-City-Gay-Bash-Attack-to-Learn-Fate-368025551.html

This is your push back? We LGBT people should give it a rest? And let ourselves be victimised by gangs of people on the street? Just allow any bigot to come up and bash us if they please? If you think hate is in the eye of the beholder, then you have zero moral compass. Don't bother looking to religion to provide one since that is the font and well spring of LGBT hatred. May you continue to enjoy your fantasies about genitalia shaped baked goods.

I agree with the general direction of what ggt is saying but not the example. Likewise your use of the Knott example is not valid as Knott should have been rightfully imprisoned for assault which is not what is being discussed which is the right to refuse service. You are somewhat astray with the hate legislation as well as again that is not what ggt was inferring and there are other levels of legislation that also intertwine.

My home country of New Zealand has it about right with full legal rights for all. However we still allow personnel rights of all to be recognised and that is what in my opinion ggt was inferring. Case in point here in NZ was a hetro couple who ran a bed and breakfast (B&B that a gay couple wished to stay at. The gay couple were refused accommodation to which they took offence and made a big issue out of it. Outcome was the B&B couple were judged to be within their rights on the basis that while their B&B was a business, it was very much more a personnel in your face business relationship with their customer than for example a large hotel where the right to refuse is deemed as unlawful in that there is no real personnel relationship between hotel staff and the customer.

There is a fine point where society's rights and individuals rights meet. Fair enough in that is how we get to rightfully discuss and set society standards and laws. But it gets a bit tedious with the constant outcry that seems to be constantly coming from the one side, and for that matter when that one group is hell bent on trampling over private personel rights.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Roadman

[lostboy]

One singer canceling a tour won’t stop a hate bill, but these actions add up. Make no mistake, these are hate bills.

These bills are written to give carte blanche to a wide variety of professionals to discriminate against LGBT people in the course of their jobs.

Why would these crackers do something like this? Hate, ignorance and fear. These are your local Republican governments in action.

Pathetic.

This is much needed push back...brought on by LGBT people purposely targeting business of people of Christian faith...demanding service...such a being forced to make a penis cake for a gay wedding...crying foul when they are politely asked to take their business down the street...where they will be accommodated...

What is hateful...is the lack of respect for all people...not just gay people...

Your people just do not know when to give it a rest...bringing lawsuits against people of faith causes the LGBT more harm than good...

Hate...is in the eye of the beholder...if you could be honest...you would acknowledge that the hate and unreasonable witch-hunt comes from the LGBT community...IMHO

Do I really need to ask what's up with old men and their penis cake fetish? I have been to many weddings for straight couples. Not one of them had a wedding cake in the shape of any genitalia. Not one. Where do you old men get this idea that same sex couples are fixated on genitalia shaped baked goods? Can gay people not eat hot dogs now without looking like Rick Perry 'going down to downtown'? Are gay people not allowed to eat donuts because they are not anatomically appropriate to gay men. So they can only be eaten by straight men and lesbians?

Your push back is as limp as Little GGT appears to be. It is a last gasp of the religious bigots. There are not enough of them to sustain this advance. The numbers of old white reactionaries are diminishing daily. The religious bigots, if not inventing hate, certainly employ it for the benefit of the propagation of their lunacy.

Many countries now have anti hate legislation. Even in America. Kathryn Knott, the daughter of a local police chief jailed fro 5 - 10 months for gay bashing http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Kathryn-Knott-Convicted-in-Center-City-Gay-Bash-Attack-to-Learn-Fate-368025551.html

This is your push back? We LGBT people should give it a rest? And let ourselves be victimised by gangs of people on the street? Just allow any bigot to come up and bash us if they please? If you think hate is in the eye of the beholder, then you have zero moral compass. Don't bother looking to religion to provide one since that is the font and well spring of LGBT hatred. May you continue to enjoy your fantasies about genitalia shaped baked goods.

I agree with the general direction of what ggt is saying but not the example. Likewise your use of the Knott example is not valid as Knott should have been rightfully imprisoned for assault which is not what is being discussed which is the right to refuse service. You are somewhat astray with the hate legislation as well as again that is not what ggt was inferring and there are other levels of legislation that also intertwine.

My home country of New Zealand has it about right with full legal rights for all. However we still allow personnel rights of all to be recognised and that is what in my opinion ggt was inferring. Case in point here in NZ was a hetro couple who ran a bed and breakfast (B&B that a gay couple wished to stay at. The gay couple were refused accommodation to which they took offence and made a big issue out of it. Outcome was the B&B couple were judged to be within their rights on the basis that while their B&B was a business, it was very much more a personnel in your face business relationship with their customer than for example a large hotel where the right to refuse is deemed as unlawful in that there is no real personnel relationship between hotel staff and the customer.

There is a fine point where society's rights and individuals rights meet. Fair enough in that is how we get to rightfully discuss and set society standards and laws. But it gets a bit tedious with the constant outcry that seems to be constantly coming from the one side, and for that matter when that one group is hell bent on trampling over private personel rights.

Simple test. Substitute Black for Gay. Would you be presenting the same argument then? The NZ decision was wrong. The UK and Europe have it correct on this.

[up-country_sinclair]

And now Pearl Jam are joining in.

it seems all they'll have left soon are the Jonas brothers.

Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, and Pearl Jam.

Not an actual woman among them.

[Chicog]

And now Pearl Jam are joining in.

it seems all they'll have left soon are the Jonas brothers.

Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, and Pearl Jam.

Not an actual woman among them.

After reviewing post #134, what is your point?

[lostboy]

Just another example for the hypocrisy of these so-called entertainment "stars" and SJWs: What Beverly Hills Hotel Boycott? A-List Stars Set for Weekend Fundraiser at Venue

"No major Hollywood red carpet event has unspooled inside the Beverly Hills Hotel since 2014 when the owner, the Sultan of Brunei, passed Sharia law in his country, calling for the stoning of gays and adulterers."

...

"Another source quipped, "I think people have turned their attention toward anti-LGBT legislation being passed everywhere from North Carolina to Tennessee to care any more about a boycott of the Beverly Hills Hotel.""

Ain't it great to have the right to selectively boycott (or not anymore) for whatever reason you please? To have the freedom to select your flavour of the month?

What a bunch of hypocrites! Or does anybody understand, that after two years it is okay again to support people or business owners who advocate the stoning of gays? What could be the reason for this switch of principle? If there was ever one.

The ownership over the Beverly Hills Hotel has exactly what to do with toilets in North Carolina and Mississippi?

[lostboy]

And now Pearl Jam are joining in.

it seems all they'll have left soon are the Jonas brothers.

Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, and Pearl Jam.

Not an actual woman among them.

Gretchen Peters, the country music songwriter who wrote ‘Independence Day', stated, "The people who are at risk are people like my son who would really be called out publicly, and anyone who is a trans person knows that can escalate into a really dangerous situation. I live in fear of that as a mother." http://video.journalnow.com/Country-Singers-And-Songwriters-Protest-AntiLBGT-Laws-Of-MS-And-NC-30618083

Your persistent anti-LGBT agenda is so easily debunked with the minimum of effort. You have what credibility to harangue us on women's rights?

[seedy]

Nonsense post Removed

Reply to the post. Do not attack the Poster

[Chicog]

I agree with the general direction of what ggt is saying but not the example. Likewise your use of the Knott example is not valid as Knott should have been rightfully imprisoned for assault which is not what is being discussed which is the right to refuse service. You are somewhat astray with the hate legislation as well as again that is not what ggt was inferring and there are other levels of legislation that also intertwine.

My home country of New Zealand has it about right with full legal rights for all. However we still allow personnel rights of all to be recognised and that is what in my opinion ggt was inferring. Case in point here in NZ was a hetro couple who ran a bed and breakfast (B&B that a gay couple wished to stay at. The gay couple were refused accommodation to which they took offence and made a big issue out of it. Outcome was the B&B couple were judged to be within their rights on the basis that while their B&B was a business, it was very much more a personnel in your face business relationship with their customer than for example a large hotel where the right to refuse is deemed as unlawful in that there is no real personnel relationship between hotel staff and the customer.

There is a fine point where society's rights and individuals rights meet. Fair enough in that is how we get to rightfully discuss and set society standards and laws. But it gets a bit tedious with the constant outcry that seems to be constantly coming from the one side, and for that matter when that one group is hell bent on trampling over private personel rights.

There was a similar case in the UK where a couple of God botherers took umbrage at a gay couple booking a room in their B&B and refused to let them stay on the grounds that they "weren't married", even though they were in a civil partnership.

One of the big Christian organisations bankrolled them and they took it all the way to the Supreme Court but lost at every step.

Which is nice.

They complained later that they don't do much business any more. Can't for the life of me think why.

[F430murci]

Lol, it seems we have a war of emotions between those viewed as bigoted freaks and those viewed as freaky dink male types that like to wear dresses and badly applied makeup. Oh my, we are really scrapping the bottom of the barrel here and losing a lot of time and energy over what should be viewed as a hysterical mess.

Edited April 20, 2016 by F430murci

[up-country_sinclair]

And now Pearl Jam are joining in.

it seems all they'll have left soon are the Jonas brothers.

Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, and Pearl Jam.

Not an actual woman among them.

After reviewing post #134, what is your point

The point is that it is men who are zealously forcing this ill-conceived experiment on American society (and women in particular).

I look forward to reading credible polling data on how actual women and girls feel about all this. Because, after all, they're the ones who are most impacted by this folly.

Edited April 20, 2016 by up-country_sinclair

[Jingthing]

Too much focus on minutia that is being overblown. The bigger important issues are about refusing service for basic services generally on offer to the general public and protection against discrimination in housing and employment. The toilet thing is important to transgender people as well.

[Chicog]

And now Pearl Jam are joining in.

it seems all they'll have left soon are the Jonas brothers.

Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, and Pearl Jam.

Not an actual woman among them.

After reviewing post #134, what is your point

The point is that it is men who are zealously forcing this ill-conceived experiment on American society (and women in particular).

I look forward to reading credible polling data on how actual women and girls feel about all this. Because, after all, they're the ones who are most impacted by this folly.

But at least you understand that it's a two way street, with women who have changed to men being forced to go into the ladies toilet.

This "predatorial men dressing up as women" nonsense is the very definition of a straw man, nothing else.

[mgjackson69]

Mississippi will care why?

Does this guy think he is so important?

When he needs his next paycheck he will be back...or not...who cares?

[up-country_sinclair]

Bryan Adams, Bruce Springsteen, and Pearl Jam.

Not an actual woman among them.

After reviewing post #134, what is your point

The point is that it is men who are zealously forcing this ill-conceived experiment on American society (and women in particular).

I look forward to reading credible polling data on how actual women and girls feel about all this. Because, after all, they're the ones who are most impacted by this folly.

But at least you understand that it's a two way street, with women who have changed to men being forced to go into the ladies toilet.

This "predatorial men dressing up as women" nonsense is the very definition of a straw man, nothing else.

I have no idea why you've made those assumptions, and any direct response would bring the thread further off topic.

[lostboy]

Seems like the most significant danger to women is posed by conservative male bigots.

"Conservative Trolls Have Been Suggesting Men Go into Women's Restrooms to Help Legislators Discriminate Against Trans People"

http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2016/02/17/23584290/conservative-trolls-have-been-suggesting-men-go-into-womens-restrooms-to-help-legislators-discriminate-against-trans-people

[lostboy]

Here is the agenda of the Family Research Council to eliminate Trans people

1. States and the federal government should not allow legal gender marker changes.

2. Transgender people should not have any legal protections against discrimination, nor should anyone be forced to respect their identity.

3. Transgender people should not be legally allowed to use facilities in accordance with their gender identity.

4. Medical coverage related to transition should not be provided by the government, or any other entity.

5. Transgender people should not be allowed to serve in the military.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/and-then-they-came-for-tr_b_9258678.html

How is this different from ethnic cleansing?

The article is written by a Trans female. Here is part of her biography

Brynn Tannehill ... graduated from the Naval Academy with a B.S. in computer science in 1997. She earned her Naval Aviator wings in 1999 and flew SH-60B helicopters and P-3C maritime patrol aircraft during three deployments between 2000 and 2004. She served as a campaign analyst while deployed overseas to 5th Fleet Headquarters in Bahrain from 2005 to 2006

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brynn-tannehill/

I imagine she would wipe the floor with some of the more obnoxious bigots who continue to troll this thread.