OK so my bullring thread to NYcarbineer didn't get anywhere on the issue of LGBT definition of gender as cultural. Can we explore the question of whether govt can impose on Culture on another against their beliefs? Here is the last post on the original thread where I got stuck with NYcarbineer California: There are three genders. Can we take a similar example of differences in standards or culture, and debate how do we decide when govt can or cannot impose when individuals BELIEVE otherwise? ================================================== EXAMPLE: Here's a case out of Texas. A woman and her husband displayed a LARGE bumper sticker on their truck, like the size of an advertisement, that contained the F word considered obscene. A Sheriff got complaints from people, that this was causing a breach or disturbance of the peace. The Sheriff publicized the truck sticker to ask help to contact the owner to resolve the grievances and complaints to PREVENT disturbance or "disorderly conduct" (similar to warning people NOT to cuss out people in a public restaurant but to resolve the conflict civilly to STOP the disturbance). Texas penal code describes disorderly conduct as “intentionally or knowingly [using] abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of peace.” Making “an offensive gesture or display in a public place” is also prohibited if “the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of peace.” But the ACLU cited a 1971 Supreme Court decision, Cohen v. California, in which the high court overturned a man’s disturbing-the-peace conviction after he’d gone to a courthouse in Los Angeles wearing a jacket that said “F‑‑k the Draft.” In this case, don't the people in THAT district exposed to the obscene bumper sticker have the right to complain of disruption of the peace, and distraction to drivers that could trigger road rage, accidents or other unsafe confrontations. Just because in a CALIFORNIA CASE IN A COURTROOM the person's obscene statement was ruled lawful and not disruptive, does that mean ALL such cases must be treated the same??? ========================================= In the case of transgender recognition and accommodation: Can't it be left to individual cases if people AGREE with those LGBT beliefs about culture? If clubs in the Montrose area of Houston AGREE to accept cross dressing and all kinds of wild costumes and adult wear in public, does that mean this "must be accepted" in all facilities? Why can't culture be relative especially if NYcarbineer argues it should be recognized and tolerated for LGBT definitions of gender? Why can't it be locally decided if people know someone personally when they yell "FU I'm going to strangle you if you don't STFU" and don't mean a REAL death threat that is otherwise a felony. If someone is TRULY transitioned from one gender to another in opposition to what their birth certificate says, why can't the community around that person make the decision to be okay with that and NOT impose it "in every other case" where someone is CLAIMING to be transgender by cultural identity and not genetics. Can we discuss or debate where to draw the line? I would prefer to finish the conversation with NYcarbineer, but if anyone else can help us, then thank you!