- This topic has 105 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
My guess is you wouldn’t want your wives or daughter to give their opinion. And I’d also venture to say that if they do agree the bill is bad they are in a very meager minority. A significant majority of women HATE the idea that they may have to share a public bathroom with ANY man. Ask ’em, I DARE you. Pay for a public opinion poll on the subject. And as you’re doing that tell me why NC is not the only state that has just such a law and more so why other places that have passed such a law allowing for “I identify” to either repeal it or are considering repealing it. AND also why the Obama administration and school districts who have adopted the Obama edict to file suit in Federal court to block it. No matter what you say women and parents in general see it as an assault on their safety and sense of decency.
It’s your claim, you pay for the public opinion poll to support it.
Make sure you word it, “Do you want to to share a bathroom with men?” and not, “Do you support the rights of LGBT persons to use the restroom that matches their gender identity?” to make sure you get the result you’re looking for.
Wulfpack, the point is this, and the crux of the argument is THIS. SELF IDENTIFICATION. Protective laws are based entirely on this. Constitutional laws are based on this. To be included in a protected class your have to PROVE you are a member of that class, and self identification does not hack it. Without a hard and fast rule about whether or not someone belongs to that class anyone can claim it and membership cannot be established. I cannot claim to be an American Indian without genetic proof. I also do not have the skin of a Black so I’m not in that group either. So by that token I cannot claim protections of laws passed for those classes. Self Identification is not sufficient for proof of inclusion in the LGBT community, AND that is the legal side of the bill that was passed. Like it or not the legislature can claim their law is constitutional on those grounds. Go ask a REALLY, REALLY good lawyer (like my cousin who I helped put through law school).
Smarter than the average bear
Pak, I already know the answer to both of those questions and the results would still be overwhelmingly NO especially if the second question was worded “Do you support the rights of LGBT persons to use the restroom that matches the gender they ‘self identify’ with?” That has been from the start the sticking point with the whole mess.
Smarter than the average bear
My wife does not support the bill. None of her friends do, either. My very own conservative mother does not support the bill. So I guess it depends on who you poll. But again, the polling does not matter. That’s never been the test for constitutionality, and thank the man upstairs for that.
A libertarian, a vegan, and a crossfitter walk into a bar….
Rule number 1 of Crossfit is “always talk about Crossfit”
How do you know if someone if vegan? Oh, they’ll tell you…
The ordinance was passed to protect the rights of a very very small minority. What about the rights of 99.7% of the population to use the rest room or locker room of their sex? What about their RIGHTS to privacy?
And once again I will state it is the T’s that the law is designed to protect. It is designed to protect the woman from a man blatantly walking into a ladies locker room and watching, or walking around naked and exposing. The ordinance as written in CLT would allow a man to do so with no legal ramifications.
The ordinance was passed to protect the rights of a very very small minority. What about the rights of 99.7% of the population to use the rest room or locker room of their sex? What about their RIGHTS to privacy?
And once again I will state it is the T’s that the law is designed to protect. It is designed to protect the woman from a man blatantly walking into a ladies locker room and watching, or walking around naked and exposing. The ordinance as written in CLT would allow a man to do so with no legal ramifications.
What if a person tries to use the law to disguise inappropriate or unlawful activity?
The ordinance does not permit or excuse inappropriate or unlawful activity. The ordinance protects the legitimate use of facilities for transgender persons; it is not an excuse to misuse the law for criminal purposes or even for reasons of convenience.
A business may object to a non-transgender person seeking to use a restroom or changing facility for a false reason. A business may require persons who do not have the protected characteristics of gender identity or gender expression to use the appropriate restroom. A business may also report or remove persons who are engaging in criminal activity.
A business concerned that a non-transgender person is using an inappropriate restroom or changing facility may ask that person to use the appropriate facility. If the person does not comply, the business may contact CMPD to file a trespassing complaint. Such enforcement is not deemed to be discrimination under the ordinance.
Additionally, the North Carolina indecent exposure laws remain valid in restrooms and locker rooms within the City of Charlotte. If a violation of the indecent exposure laws occurs, please contact CMPD. http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_14/GS_14-190.9.html .
I think McCrory wins again in spite of HB2 over Cooper in a recount. I think Ross pulls off the upset on a last minute shot.
How about an exercise in practical application to the right to self identify to gain access to whatever facilities someone desires since that is what those opposed to the HB2 law want.
An 18 year old transgender wins the right to use whatever facilities they want in their school. The case is widely covered in the news. The person uses said restroom despite objections from students and parents. More publicity. the 18 yo graduates and sometime later commits a crime which requires incarceration. OK, where do you put them? By self identify the authorities should be required to send him to a female jail, but the problem is notoriety makes that impossible. Male jail, nope sitting duck there too. What’s the answer? it’s obvious this thing has long term ramifications no one has looked at. But the answer to many is simple, that 1 in 10,000 or more has more rights to do what they wish than those who do not want it’s side effects.
Smarter than the average bear
I identify as a canine. There are no ordinances restricting where I crap. I’m coming to your hood to drop a poop on your lawn
I got dogs, big dogs, 3 of them, and they will eat you up. Bring on the poop.
Smarter than the average bear
Odd. My longer post isnt showing up.
Probably hitting one of the keywords that traps your post in limbo. Happens to me most often when I quote a mod that cursed.
Yogi continues to cite an incorrect test. The issue is not to protect the “rights” of the majority – never has been. How many handicap folks are out there? And we have laws on the books to protect them, do we not? You are only inconvenienced in a very minor way. And I’m still not understanding how your “rights” are compromised. And if it is true that it is 1 in 10,000, is that 1 not a human being, with inalienable rights under the Constitution? Why do your “rights” carry more weight than theirs? I’m sorry dude, but the fact that the majority is inconvenienced in some way has never been the test. And from my vantage point, the majority absolutely does not support HB2. Liberals and conservatives alike (not that it matters).
Ugh.
Understand – these folks want us to Right one another. It appears to be working.
All sides had the opportunity to take the higher ground – most sides didn’t take it. The Charlotte legislature didn’t. The NC legislature didn’t. Big business certainly didn’t and local media certainly didn’t either.
I think the local media did a disgusting job of covering the story. The coverage was and remains decidedly one-sided. Of course, I am not surprised ; I subscribe to a paper that rivals Joseph Goebbels when it comes to propaganda.
The NBA’s, Springsteen’s and the boycotters action upset me most. These folks are intentionally inflicting pain on innocents. The mark of decency is how you act when you have the power to inflict pain. Their response is very telling about just how morally shallow they are.
The true heroes here are those in tbe LGBT community who are going to stay and visit. These are truly the most persuasive instruments of change and they deserve the support of all of us provided they aren’t destroying livelihoods and spreading hatred.
I believe this issue is very complicated. The heavy-handed response of government – no matter which side you are on – is likely to be clumsy and full of unintended consequences.
Both laws have their “high points”. Charlotte’s laws expand requirements for those who wish to do contracting for the city – which – imho is totally justified. The state’s laws allows businesses to expand whatever restroom policies they’d like.
Unfortunately, middle ground isn’t sought. And we have all taken the bait. Both sides got what they wanted
The link to Charlotte’s law if you want it. (That I could find.)
http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/nondiscrimination/Pages/default.aspx
Ugh.
Understand – these folks want us to hate one another. It appears to be working.
All sides had the opportunity to take the higher ground – most sides didn’t take it. The Charlotte legislature didn’t. The NC legislature didn’t. Big business certainly didn’t and local media certainly didn’t either.
I think the local media did a disgusting job of covering the story. The coverage was and remains decidedly one-sided. Of course, I am not surprised ; I subscribe to a paper that rivals Joseph Goebbels when it comes to propaganda.
The NBA’s, Springsteen’s and the boycotters action upset me most. These folks are intentionally inflicting pain on innocents. The mark of decency is how you act when you have the power to inflict pain. Their response is very telling about just how morally shallow they are.
The true heroes here are those in tbe LGBT community who are growing to stay and visit. These are truly the most persuasive instruments of change and they deserve the support of all of us provided they aren’t destroying livelihoods and spreading hatred.
I believe this issue is very complicated. The heavy-handed response of government – no matter which side you are on – is likely to be clumsy and full of unintended consequences.
Both laws have their “high points”. Charlotte’s laws expand requirements for those who wish to do contracting for the city – which – imho is totally justified. The state’s laws allows businesses to expand whatever restroom policies they’d like.
Unfortunately, middle ground isn’t sought. And we have all taken the bait. Both sides got what they wanted
The link to Charlotte’s law if you want it. (That I could find.)
http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/nondiscrimination/Pages/default.aspx
Ugh.
Understand – these folks want us to hate one another. It appears to be working.
All sides had the opportunity to take the higher ground – most sides didn’t take it. The Charlotte legislature didn’t. The NC legislature didn’t. Big business certainly didn’t and local media certainly didn’t either.
I think the local media did a disgusting job of covering the story. The coverage was and remains decidedly one-sided. Of course, I am not surprised ; I subscribe to a paper that rivals Joseph Goebbels when it comes to propaganda.
The NBA’s, Springsteen’s and the boycotters action upset me most. These folks are intentionally inflicting pain on innocents. The mark of decency is how you act when you have the power to inflict pain. Their response is very telling about just how morally shallow they are.
The true heroes here are those in tbe LGBT community who are growing to stay and visit. These are truly the most persuasive instruments of change and they deserve the support of all of us provided they aren’t destroying livelihoods and spreading hatred.
I believe this issue is very complicated. The heavy-handed response of government – no matter which side you are on – is likely to be clumsy and full of unintended consequences.
Both laws have their “high points”. Charlotte’s laws expand requirements for those who wish to do contracting for the city – which – imho is totally justified. The state’s laws allows businesses to expand whatever restroom policies they’d like.
Unfortunately, middle ground isn’t sought. And we have all taken the bait. Both sides got what they wanted
The link to Charlotte’s law if you want it. (That I could find.)
http://charmeck.org/city/charlotte/nondiscrimination/Pages/default.aspx
I’m frankly embarrassed by his comments. My support of HB2 is not because I wish for anyone to be discriminated against. To dismiss authors and supporters of this bill as hate mongers is either ignorant or disingenuous. Neither I, nor anyone else that I’ve spoken with, have any desire to cause pain for anyone suffering from gender dysphoria. As a husband and the father of a teenage girl, however, I a huge problem with anyone with male genitalia having access to public girls bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers. Opponents of HB2 have tried to make the case that transgender “women” are not there to harm other females. That may be 100% true. However, the law opens the door for sexual predators to use this provision to access these facilities and exposing our wives and daughters when they are at their most vulnerable. I can tell you that my daughter and her friends are very afraid. Before my wife and I ever talked with her about it she understood the threat this represented. Those who call BS on this potential threat should know that there have already been several documented cases of sexual predators dressing as women to access women’s locker rooms and department store changing facilities to spy on girls/women. The Charlotte statute provides legal cover for them. The media and opponents of HB2 have spent no time or effort to consider these very real consequences of not having the provisions of HB2 codified.
That said, I do think there are ways to make this law better. Anyone should have the right to legal recourse if they feel they are victims of wrongful termination. I would also be open to allowing people to legally change their gender once the physical process complete. Anyone with male genitalia does not belong in the women’s/girl’s bathrooom, locker room, showers, or changing room. I realize that this has a negative impact on a few people, but the risk to so many is just too great.
There were several posts stuck in purgatory. I published all of them. Just let me know if a post disappears and I will try to get it resurrected.
“Unfortunately, middle ground isn’t sought. And we have all taken the bait. Both sides got what they wanted”
This is exactly what I am most embarrassed about! Both sides making broad brush statements, neither wanting to work together, dig into the details (perceptions AND realities), then come up with something that is fair, comprehensive, and on solid legal footing.
Nope, let’s just piss all over each other and complain about the other, all while passersby giggle and take their $ elsewhere.
Wulfpack, you and others continue to either miss the point of ignore it. Citing the case of the handicap only confuses it. D Wolf said exactly what I’ve been saying. You have no proof that someone is who they claim to be without setting a standard. Unfortunately the only true method is a birth certificate, and North Caolina can and will issue a new birth certificate and drivers license to those who have sex change operations. I’ve talked to a great number of people about this law and overwhelmingly those who have actually READ the law support it since it does not discriminate in any way against those who can prove they belong to a specific class. The sticking point with those who do not want someone to self identify to belong to that class. It is obvious if you are willing to listen to their point of view, but then listening to the other side is something I’ve found liberals greatly lacking in over the last 20 years or so. And for the record I have not found one female YET who would support the self identify law. And like D wolf many parents hate the fact that Obama is trying to shove that down their throats by threatening to withhold federal money to schools if they don’t fall in line. The list of those joining the class action law suit to prevent that is quite large, and growing everyday.
Smarter than the average bear
I did an impromptu opinion poll and 100% of the women I surveyed said they would support the rights of LGBT individuals to use the restroom they self identify with. (I made sure to use ‘self identify’)
I asked a followup question about whether they were concerned about deviants using the law as cover to invade their privacy, and they responded no.
The only conclusion I can draw is an overwhelming majority of women do not support HB2.
Ok, I was curious, so I took the bait.
Asked my wife and daughter (20 years old) what they thought of the law. Asked the first 5 women I saw at work today. 100% of the women I asked said the law was an embarrassing, knee-jerk reaction that has done serious harm to NC’s reputation. After their initial response, I asked “but don’t you feel safer because of the law?”. Two rolled their eyes and walked away. The others answered, all pretty much in unanimous agreement, summed up as: “No, the law does NOTHING to protect women. If you truly want to protect women, make a commitment to PROSECUTE and CONVICT people who assault them, regardless of whether it’s in a bathroom or anywhere else.”
Not sure what I expected, but the 100% agreement was a bit of a surprise. Of the seven, four had actually read the text of HB2 (higher than I expected). Of those four, three of them said based on their reading, they thought the “bathroom” portion was basically a non-story and that the real purpose of the legislation was to make it harder for people to sue the state based on discrimination. I had heard this theory earlier, but I don’t concur: I believe it gives too much credit to our legislators…
BTW most of these are people I’ve heard discussing politics. Two are liberal, four are conservative, and one I’m not sure about.
Nope, you have to have a REAL poll, you can claim whatever you want on here to back up what you think is right. Scientific EVIDENCE. Tell you what, since the company I work for actually does these sorts of things, come up with the scratch to do the poll and I’ll split the cost on the front end, and then the loser pays total cost. Sort of like put your money where your mouth is. Now the premise is the majority of women will agree with you, or not. We’ll define women for this poll as any women over 18. And we’ll break down the 1000 respondents to match the demographics in accordance with the demographic breakdown in the state. Part of these demographics will include percentages of women with daughters under the age of 16. If you prefer some other polling company then there are several I know that can do the job.
Now in fairness I must conclude I already know the outcome to this poll, +/- 4%, since we piggybacked questions on this 4 months ago for one of our clients. But still, if any of you are so sure of what the answer will be then pony up.
Smarter than the average bear
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
