Finally someone said it:Why should Group demand minority status based on what they do in the bedroom

[Timmy]

"This is the first group that demands minority status based on what they do in their bedrooms. And that’s what makes it so dangerous."

"What about the privacy, the modesty of women and girls?" he said. "But in our legal system that’s irrelevant because the rights of so-called transgenders are far more important.”

To be honest those two statements are full of ignorance. No one is demanding minority status based on what they do in the bedroom. Its based on their sexual preference which is obvious in alot of cases due to social norms.

You mean that gay couple that wanted the wedding cake weren't banging each other in the bakery?

 

[emilynghiem]

WHAT special rights ? An example please.

Dear Timmy:
Example A:
Houston passed a bathroom policy where Transgender people could not even be questioned in the restroom or that could count as harassment and incur a fine up to $5,000.

No other group would have this special rights protection against harassment where someone couldn't question them in the restroom.

So other people lose their free speech to ask questions to make sure it is safe for someone of male appearance to be in the women's restroom.

So the LGBT have protected status that other people don't have, at the expense of the equal civil rights of other members of the public.

Example B:
When states passed laws banning same sex marriage and only recognizing traditional marriage, that violated constitutional laws and was struck down.

But when laws were passed imposing same sex marriage through the state govt, against the beliefs of people this violates, that is enforced as law.

Thus the beliefs of LGBT are enforced through govt against the beliefs of those who are in conflict; but when the beliefs in traditional marriage were imposed in conflict with LGBT, that was struck down.

Again, along with PENALTIES against business owners who can be forced to attend gay weddings against their beliefs if this is a recognized status.

So that is discriminating against people for their beliefs.

A. the people OF LGBT beliefs are favored by govt
B. the people of other beliefs are penalized by govt

that is taking sides, and not neutral.

If govt was fair, it would be disallowed for groups to be forced
to do business together who have conflicting beliefs,
so that both are equally protected from the other.

Again, like Hindus and Muslims. Govt would never be used to defend one belief from persecution by the other, where one side is penalized and the other side is defended as a special class. Common sense would tell us to separate these groups if they disagree so much, mind their own business, and don't impose on each other if they can't work it out civilly. But not force one belief on the other THROUGH GOVT.

Actually . Having. "Men" and "women" bathrooms is special status . You lose .

No, Timmy because the LGBT still recognize
the same Male/Female segregation or else they would
ask for all neutral restrooms. But they aren't.

They are asking for LGBT men to use the women's
restroom instead of the men's. They are asking for that distinction.

Many schools and many cases have settled this issue
by gender neutral and unisex facilities.

If that were accepted by the LGBT, we wouldn't have this issue!!!

 

[Pumpkin Row]

You know, if you want to get really specific, while I wasn't referring to them, I don't think they should count either~

So, no, no handicapped parking spots. We're all just people, so they should all be treated the same, with no special treatment anywhere. So, yes, since you're mentally handicapped, if I had my way, you'd lose your parking spot, too. Problem?

Yeah. You'd be like "fuck you disable vet, grow some legs and use the stairs". I think that sucks .

Actually, someone who's missing legs would be more likely to go to a store with ramps, which means that stores would build said ramps to attract customers.

Besides, I highly doubt a disabled vet would live alone. They'd need someone to drive them around since... you know... they have no legs to hit the gas with.

Yet none of them ever did it until they were required to do so

Why don't you cry about it? I hear that's a common reaction among lefties.

Actually we put up quite a cry about handicapped access

Of course....Republucans were on the wrong side of history on that one

I'm not Republican, so you can't use me as an excuse to complain about them even more. Then again, facts haven't seemed to stop you before~

 

[Asclepias]

"This is the first group that demands minority status based on what they do in their bedrooms. And that’s what makes it so dangerous."

"What about the privacy, the modesty of women and girls?" he said. "But in our legal system that’s irrelevant because the rights of so-called transgenders are far more important.”

To be honest those two statements are full of ignorance. No one is demanding minority status based on what they do in the bedroom. Its based on their sexual preference which is obvious in alot of cases due to social norms.

You mean that gay couple that wanted the wedding cake weren't banging each other in the bakery?

Well they were in the owners mind. Thats why he had sweat on his lip as he imagined the sex.

 

[defcon4]

Actually we put up quite a cry about handicapped access

Of course....Republucans were on the wrong side of history on that one

You did? I did not know you were Republican...Cool

 

[Vandalshandle]

I love these threads. Kind of surreal, like watching a historical documentary in reverse!

 

[Asclepias]

WHAT special rights ? An example please.

Dear Timmy:
Example A:
Houston passed a bathroom policy where Transgender people could not even be questioned in the restroom or that could count as harassment and incur a fine up to $5,000.

No other group would have this special rights protection against harassment where someone couldn't question them in the restroom.

So other people lose their free speech to ask questions to make sure it is safe for someone of male appearance to be in the women's restroom.

So the LGBT have protected status that other people don't have, at the expense of the equal civil rights of other members of the public.

Example B:
When states passed laws banning same sex marriage and only recognizing traditional marriage, that violated constitutional laws and was struck down.

But when laws were passed imposing same sex marriage through the state govt, against the beliefs of people this violates, that is enforced as law.

Thus the beliefs of LGBT are enforced through govt against the beliefs of those who are in conflict; but when the beliefs in traditional marriage were imposed in conflict with LGBT, that was struck down.

Again, along with PENALTIES against business owners who can be forced to attend gay weddings against their beliefs if this is a recognized status.

So that is discriminating against people for their beliefs.

A. the people OF LGBT beliefs are favored by govt
B. the people of other beliefs are penalized by govt

that is taking sides, and not neutral.

If govt was fair, it would be disallowed for groups to be forced
to do business together who have conflicting beliefs,
so that both are equally protected from the other.

Again, like Hindus and Muslims. Govt would never be used to defend one belief from persecution by the other, where one side is penalized and the other side is defended as a special class. Common sense would tell us to separate these groups if they disagree so much, mind their own business, and don't impose on each other if they can't work it out civilly. But not force one belief on the other THROUGH GOVT.

Actually . Having. "Men" and "women" bathrooms is special status . You lose .

No, Timmy because the LGBT still recognize
the same Male/Female segregation or else they would
ask for all neutral restrooms. But they aren't.

They are asking for LGBT men to use the women's
restroom instead of the men's. They are asking for that distinction.

Many schools and many cases have settled this issue
by gender neutral and unisex facilities.

If that were accepted by the LGBT, we wouldn't have this issue!!!

What does LGBT stand for exactly?

 

[defcon4]

Well they were in the owners mind. Thats why he had sweat on his lip as he imagined the sex.

..and here is the infinite wisdom of Asslips...

 

[rightwinger]

Yeah. You'd be like "fuck you disable vet, grow some legs and use the stairs". I think that sucks .

Actually, someone who's missing legs would be more likely to go to a store with ramps, which means that stores would build said ramps to attract customers.

Besides, I highly doubt a disabled vet would live alone. They'd need someone to drive them around since... you know... they have no legs to hit the gas with.

Yet none of them ever did it until they were required to do so

Why don't you cry about it? I hear that's a common reaction among lefties.

Actually we put up quite a cry about handicapped access

Of course....Republucans were on the wrong side of history on that one

I'm not Republican, so you can't use me as an excuse to complain about them even more. Then again, facts haven't seemed to stop you before~

Sure you aren't

Who did you vote for in the last election?

 

[frigidweirdo]

But they are a minority? And you said , and I quote "minority status shouldn't exist "!

That's what you said . Now you make exceptions ? So which is it????

You know, if you want to get really specific, while I wasn't referring to them, I don't think they should count either~

So, no, no handicapped parking spots. We're all just people, so they should all be treated the same, with no special treatment anywhere. So, yes, since you're mentally handicapped, if I had my way, you'd lose your parking spot, too. Problem?

Yeah, disabled people, pregnant women etc, they can just stand on buses and trains while able bodied people sit down because they too might get a little tired. We don't discriminate.

I'm glad you understand. Of course, people who aren't selfish can feel free to give up their seat.

So pregnant women gets on a train and there's a seat for people who need seats and all the people sitting down are selfish, so the pregnant woman should just stand then?

Pretty much. Sounds a bit like life, doesn't it?

What, encouraging assholes to be assholes?

 

[emilynghiem]

"This is the first group that demands minority status based on what they do in their bedrooms. And that’s what makes it so dangerous."

"What about the privacy, the modesty of women and girls?" he said. "But in our legal system that’s irrelevant because the rights of so-called transgenders are far more important.”

To be honest those two statements are full of ignorance. No one is demanding minority status based on what they do in the bedroom. Its based on their sexual preference which is obvious in alot of cases due to social norms.

You mean that gay couple that wanted the wedding cake weren't banging each other in the bakery?

Dear Timmy

The discrimination lawsuits went too far
with cake delivery services that required people to attend
a same sex wedding OUTSIDE THEIR PLACE OF BUSINESS
which was AGAINST THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

If the point is NOT to judge or impose on people for their beliefs,
then why is this happening by penalizing anyone for their beliefs?

 

[Timmy]

WHAT special rights ? An example please.

Dear Timmy:
Example A:
Houston passed a bathroom policy where Transgender people could not even be questioned in the restroom or that could count as harassment and incur a fine up to $5,000.

No other group would have this special rights protection against harassment where someone couldn't question them in the restroom.

So other people lose their free speech to ask questions to make sure it is safe for someone of male appearance to be in the women's restroom.

So the LGBT have protected status that other people don't have, at the expense of the equal civil rights of other members of the public.

Example B:
When states passed laws banning same sex marriage and only recognizing traditional marriage, that violated constitutional laws and was struck down.

But when laws were passed imposing same sex marriage through the state govt, against the beliefs of people this violates, that is enforced as law.

Thus the beliefs of LGBT are enforced through govt against the beliefs of those who are in conflict; but when the beliefs in traditional marriage were imposed in conflict with LGBT, that was struck down.

Again, along with PENALTIES against business owners who can be forced to attend gay weddings against their beliefs if this is a recognized status.

So that is discriminating against people for their beliefs.

A. the people OF LGBT beliefs are favored by govt
B. the people of other beliefs are penalized by govt

that is taking sides, and not neutral.

If govt was fair, it would be disallowed for groups to be forced
to do business together who have conflicting beliefs,
so that both are equally protected from the other.

Again, like Hindus and Muslims. Govt would never be used to defend one belief from persecution by the other, where one side is penalized and the other side is defended as a special class. Common sense would tell us to separate these groups if they disagree so much, mind their own business, and don't impose on each other if they can't work it out civilly. But not force one belief on the other THROUGH GOVT.

Actually . Having. "Men" and "women" bathrooms is special status . You lose .

No, Timmy because the LGBT still recognize
the same Male/Female segregation or else they would
ask for all neutral restrooms. But they aren't.

They are asking for LGBT men to use the women's
restroom instead of the men's. They are asking for that distinction.

Many schools and many cases have settled this issue
by gender neutral and unisex facilities.

If that were accepted by the LGBT, we wouldn't have this issue!!!

DOnt you think they should use the room they pass for ?

And if you are soooo against special rights, you should demand unisex bathrooms . Right?

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Actually, someone who's missing legs would be more likely to go to a store with ramps, which means that stores would build said ramps to attract customers.

Besides, I highly doubt a disabled vet would live alone. They'd need someone to drive them around since... you know... they have no legs to hit the gas with.

Yet none of them ever did it until they were required to do so

Why don't you cry about it? I hear that's a common reaction among lefties.

Actually we put up quite a cry about handicapped access

Of course....Republucans were on the wrong side of history on that one

I'm not Republican, so you can't use me as an excuse to complain about them even more. Then again, facts haven't seemed to stop you before~

Sure you aren't

Who did you vote for in the last election?

Uh. Nobody. I wasn't and still am not old enough to vote. You're not going to find anything to fit your false narrative here.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Minority status shouldn't exist, regardless.

More ignorance from the right.

Again, there is no such thing as ‘minority status.’

The Constitution prohibits government from seeking to disadvantage a given class of persons for no other reason than who they are, absent a rational basis, objective evidence in support, and a legitimate legislative end.

This might concern race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, as well as choices all Americans make about their personal, private lives, such as whom to marry or whether to have a child or not.

In the case of transgender Americans, it’s the protected liberty to decide who you are, how you might live your life, and how you express yourself as an individual to society in general – decisions which are all entitled to Constitutional protections.

Government, therefore, may not seek to disadvantage transgender Americans based on lies, fear, bigotry, and hate.

 

[rightwinger]

WHAT special rights ? An example please.

Dear Timmy:
Example A:
Houston passed a bathroom policy where Transgender people could not even be questioned in the restroom or that could count as harassment and incur a fine up to $5,000.

No other group would have this special rights protection against harassment where someone couldn't question them in the restroom.

So other people lose their free speech to ask questions to make sure it is safe for someone of male appearance to be in the women's restroom.

So the LGBT have protected status that other people don't have, at the expense of the equal civil rights of other members of the public.

Example B:
When states passed laws banning same sex marriage and only recognizing traditional marriage, that violated constitutional laws and was struck down.

But when laws were passed imposing same sex marriage through the state govt, against the beliefs of people this violates, that is enforced as law.

Thus the beliefs of LGBT are enforced through govt against the beliefs of those who are in conflict; but when the beliefs in traditional marriage were imposed in conflict with LGBT, that was struck down.

Again, along with PENALTIES against business owners who can be forced to attend gay weddings against their beliefs if this is a recognized status.

So that is discriminating against people for their beliefs.

A. the people OF LGBT beliefs are favored by govt
B. the people of other beliefs are penalized by govt

that is taking sides, and not neutral.

If govt was fair, it would be disallowed for groups to be forced
to do business together who have conflicting beliefs,
so that both are equally protected from the other.

Again, like Hindus and Muslims. Govt would never be used to defend one belief from persecution by the other, where one side is penalized and the other side is defended as a special class. Common sense would tell us to separate these groups if they disagree so much, mind their own business, and don't impose on each other if they can't work it out civilly. But not force one belief on the other THROUGH GOVT.

Actually . Having. "Men" and "women" bathrooms is special status . You lose .

No, Timmy because the LGBT still recognize
the same Male/Female segregation or else they would
ask for all neutral restrooms. But they aren't.

They are asking for LGBT men to use the women's
restroom instead of the men's. They are asking for that distinction.

Many schools and many cases have settled this issue
by gender neutral and unisex facilities.

If that were accepted by the LGBT, we wouldn't have this issue!!!

Still don't understand the conservative hysteria over where you pee

 

[Timmy]

"This is the first group that demands minority status based on what they do in their bedrooms. And that’s what makes it so dangerous."

"What about the privacy, the modesty of women and girls?" he said. "But in our legal system that’s irrelevant because the rights of so-called transgenders are far more important.”

To be honest those two statements are full of ignorance. No one is demanding minority status based on what they do in the bedroom. Its based on their sexual preference which is obvious in alot of cases due to social norms.

You mean that gay couple that wanted the wedding cake weren't banging each other in the bakery?

Dear Timmy

The discrimination lawsuits went too far
with cake delivery services that required people to attend
a same sex wedding OUTSIDE THEIR PLACE OF BUSINESS
which was AGAINST THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

If the point is NOT to judge or impose on people for their beliefs,
then why is this happening by penalizing anyone for their beliefs?

What religious beliefs ?

If you go into business you have to follow the rules . Apparently you want religious people to have SPECIAL RIGHTS the rest of us don't have .

 

[Pumpkin Row]

You know, if you want to get really specific, while I wasn't referring to them, I don't think they should count either~

So, no, no handicapped parking spots. We're all just people, so they should all be treated the same, with no special treatment anywhere. So, yes, since you're mentally handicapped, if I had my way, you'd lose your parking spot, too. Problem?

Yeah, disabled people, pregnant women etc, they can just stand on buses and trains while able bodied people sit down because they too might get a little tired. We don't discriminate.

I'm glad you understand. Of course, people who aren't selfish can feel free to give up their seat.

So pregnant women gets on a train and there's a seat for people who need seats and all the people sitting down are selfish, so the pregnant woman should just stand then?

Pretty much. Sounds a bit like life, doesn't it?

What, encouraging assholes to be assholes?

More like allowing people to have the freedom to choose to be. Or do you think that restricting rights is super neat? Sounds like you're okay with our government deciding how we should act even when not infringing on the rights of others.

 

[frigidweirdo]

"This is the first group that demands minority status based on what they do in their bedrooms. And that’s what makes it so dangerous."

"What about the privacy, the modesty of women and girls?" he said. "But in our legal system that’s irrelevant because the rights of so-called transgenders are far more important.”

To be honest those two statements are full of ignorance. No one is demanding minority status based on what they do in the bedroom. Its based on their sexual preference which is obvious in alot of cases due to social norms.

You mean that gay couple that wanted the wedding cake weren't banging each other in the bakery?

Dear Timmy

The discrimination lawsuits went too far
with cake delivery services that required people to attend
a same sex wedding OUTSIDE THEIR PLACE OF BUSINESS
which was AGAINST THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS.

If the point is NOT to judge or impose on people for their beliefs,
then why is this happening by penalizing anyone for their beliefs?

If people with beliefs sign up to do business, then they sign up to accept the laws of doing business. If they don't want to go against their religious beliefs, they're perfectly free to no sign up to do business.

 

[rightwinger]

Yet none of them ever did it until they were required to do so

Why don't you cry about it? I hear that's a common reaction among lefties.

Actually we put up quite a cry about handicapped access

Of course....Republucans were on the wrong side of history on that one

I'm not Republican, so you can't use me as an excuse to complain about them even more. Then again, facts haven't seemed to stop you before~

Sure you aren't

Who did you vote for in the last election?

Uh. Nobody. I wasn't and still am not old enough to vote. You're not going to find anything to fit your false narrative here.

Sorry.....didn't realize I was dealing with a child

 

[Pumpkin Row]

Minority status shouldn't exist, regardless.

More ignorance from the right.

Again, there is no such thing as ‘minority status.’

The Constitution prohibits government from seeking to disadvantage a given class of persons for no other reason than who they are, absent a rational basis, objective evidence in support, and a legitimate legislative end.

This might concern race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, as well as choices all Americans make about their personal, private lives, such as whom to marry or whether to have a child or not.

In the case of transgender Americans, it’s the protected liberty to decide who you are, how you might live your life, and how you express yourself as an individual to society in general – decisions which are all entitled to Constitutional protections.

Government, therefore, may not seek to disadvantage transgender Americans based on lies, fear, bigotry, and hate.

On the other hand, the government is completely okay with giving advantage to a certain race, as Democrats love affirmative action laws.

Not that Democrats have a problem with violating the constitution, given the current president has violated it 64 times, and nobody has stopped him.

Of course, the most ironic thing is you calling anyone ignorant.