How North Carolina Will Respond To Fed's Request For Stay: Re Tranny Lawsuits

[BULLDOG]

OK, so how does that show the reality now?

The same way the discussion of how the model T lead up to the Toyota Tundra. It's much much worse now, more fine tuned and like a machine: the control the Church of LGBT exerts over the erstwhile-scientific entity.

So the Toyota Tundra is worse than the ModelT and that makes Psychiatry a bad science. Glad to see the right wing logic is still at the same level as always.

 

[Silhouette]

At this time we're going to dodge your strawman and get back to the topic. Bearing in mind that the best witness to what happened is someone who was there at the time.

Unfortunately for you, the experts in psychology and psychiatry disagree with you. I know you right wingers don't believe in things like education, or experts in any particular field, but you'll just have to get used to it.

Which ones? The "experts" at the American Psychological Association which was taken over by gay activists in the 1970s &80s; where they "disappeared" the ruling scientific principle?

Interview done in 2013. Cummings was president of the APA at the time in question when the Church of LGBT took over the APA:



Or the experts at Johns Hopkins? Article printed in 1999 From Johns Hopkins Medical News Journal JHMN: Sexual Healing
***********
Controversy over sex-change surgery at Hopkins raged, both in the media and inside the institution. “This was taking place at a very conservative place and in a highly charged atmosphere,” Schmidt recalls. “It’s pretty rough surgery; some people consider it mutilating. And, of course, the scientific side of it is pretty damn weak.”

Finally, in 1979, the unit’s then-director, Meyer, published a study questioning certain benefits of the surgery that helped convince the Hopkins hierarchy to eliminate its sex reassignment program entirely

 

[BULLDOG]

At this time we're going to dodge your strawman and get back to the topic. Bearing in mind that the best witness to what happened is someone who was there at the time.

Unfortunately for you, the experts in psychology and psychiatry disagree with you. I know you right wingers don't believe in things like education, or experts in any particular field, but you'll just have to get used to it.

Which ones? The "experts" at the American Psychological Association which was taken over by gay activists in the 1970s &80s; where they "disappeared" the ruling scientific principle?

Interview done in 2013. Cummings was president of the APA at the time in question when the Church of LGBT took over the APA:



Or the experts at Johns Hopkins? Article printed in 1999 From Johns Hopkins Medical News Journal JHMN: Sexual Healing
***********
Controversy over sex-change surgery at Hopkins raged, both in the media and inside the institution. “This was taking place at a very conservative place and in a highly charged atmosphere,” Schmidt recalls. “It’s pretty rough surgery; some people consider it mutilating. And, of course, the scientific side of it is pretty damn weak.”

Finally, in 1979, the unit’s then-director, Meyer, published a study questioning certain benefits of the surgery that helped convince the Hopkins hierarchy to eliminate its sex reassignment program entirely

So you go back 30 or 40 years to try to prove something you claim is happening today? I guess if that's all you got, you gotta go with it.

 

[Silhouette]

So you go back 30 or 40 years to try to prove something you claim is happening today?

Yes, when you want the accurate historical account of a progression of a thing up to the present day, you go back in time. And you select the best witnesses closest to the action with the most credentials who can tell you all about it. Don't become an attorney anytime soon. You don't want to lose money.

And BTW, I can see this topic makes you nervous. Hence your assignment to come and try to derail it.

Do you think the US Supreme Court with Ginsburg (having publicly declared that she adamantly doesn't believe equality means shared restrooms between sexes) on board will place the stay in the interim in these two cases on 1. Women and girls (1 in 6 who have been raped by a man invading their intimate privacy) having their expected segregation behind doors marked "women" or 2. Men pretending to be women having access to segregated chambers marked "women" on the door outside?

ie: whose civil rights and mental well being will be considered more immediately important?

 

[BULLDOG]

So you go back 30 or 40 years to try to prove something you claim is happening today?

Yes, when you want the accurate historical account of a progression of a thing up to the present day, you go back in time. And you select the best witnesses closest to the action with the most credentials who can tell you all about it. Don't become an attorney anytime soon. You don't want to lose money.

And BTW, I can see this topic makes you nervous. Hence your assignment to come and try to derail it.

Do you think the US Supreme Court with Ginsburg (having publicly declared that she adamantly doesn't believe equality means shared restrooms between sexes) on board will place the stay in the interim in these two cases on 1. Women and girls (1 in 6 who have been raped by a man invading their intimate privacy) having their expected segregation behind doors marked "women" or 2. Men pretending to be women having access to segregated chambers marked "women" on the door outside?

ie: whose civil rights and mental well being will be considered more immediately important?

OK. If you say you are showing groundwork for your claim, I expect you to show how that same situation from 30, 40 years ago gas continued to today. So far, your information is kinda like the right wing;s claims that the DNC today is racist because some democrats were racist 100 years ago. That might be true, but it means nothing today.

 

[Silhouette]

That's your position? We'll let the readers decide if the momentum of the Church of LGBT which completely took over the APA in the 1970s & 80s "suddenly vanished" instead of picked up steam in the interim until now. I think readers are smart enough to figure out that an outfit promoting men pretending to be women to the point of amputating health organs "as normal" has waned or increased since then in favor of the cult-Agenda of the Church of LGBT.

 

[Pop23]

The science is in favor of insanity.

So you site crap from more than 35 years ago to support your claim. Good for you.

The word is "cite". Anyway, the article from Johns Hopkins Journal was from Winter 1999 and the interview with the emeritus president of the APA in the youtube video was done April 2013. Nice try though.

Thank you for noting my typo. Yes the interview was 2013, but it was with a man who hasn't been part of the APA for more than 35 years. I get it. You don't like science, at least not current science.

Current science?

Like when the last study funding check arrived?

 

[Silhouette]

Current science?

Like when the last study funding check arrived?

Are you suggesting the APA cherry picks funding and only gives monies to those researchers who promise to shed good light only on LGBT Cult values?...and then only forwards those studies to the US Supreme Court "as unbiased scientific research" that they then use 'as scientific fact' to base key and pivotal social decisions off of which will impact America forever...?

M'gosh! Say it ain't so!

(It's so...)

 

[turzovka]

Setting the Record Straight: North Carolina Law Protects Everyone's Bodily Privacy

Public restrooms are places where women and girls may shower, change their clothes, handle personal grooming issues, and take care of many other private matters unique to females. Many people are uncomfortable merely discussing these topics, so imagine the discomfort when women have to do such activities with males present. Women and girls shouldn’t be forced to conduct these private activities in a confined space with male strangers present....

Consider especially that girls and women who have been sexually abused will suffer the additional trauma of being compelled to engage in their most intimate activities in the immediate company of male strangers. No one is saying that every man who struggles with sexual identity issues is a predator. No one. But the mere presence of men in what should be a private, safe space like a bathroom can trigger serious psychological and emotional trauma for women and girls who have been sexually abused. That is simply unacceptable.

Well the cards have been called on the table and the sleeves are rolled up. North Carolina is demanding the Fed clarify how a man who thinks he is a woman has dominant rights to women and girls' expectation of intimate privacy behind doors marked "women" above them. The Fed is demanding North Carolina accept their ad lib to the 1964 Civil Rights Act as "irrefutable interpretation". Yet nowhere in the 1964 Act does it discuss men who are experiencing delusions.

The Fed will ask the Court to put in place a stay that allows men to use the women's intimate hygiene retreats. North Carolina will counter that it's far more compelling to put in place a stay on the Fed's demand instead, since women's expectation of intimate segregated privacy behind a door marked "women" is far more compelling a safety and rights issue than a tiny group of men who are delusional. The power of historical prevalence and protection of women and girls will and should outweigh the extremely new notion that "men are women".

Anything less would be a perversion of justice and a suppression of the civil rights of women and girls.

Is this all this administration and congress have to worry about, social engineering? What a great accomplishment for our nation, Barack.

Meanwhile we are 20 trillion in debt, invaded by who knows what danger accompanying the border crossers, middle eastern refugees, et al., gang violence, a bad education system, a phony "healthy" economy, and a demoralized military.
Just make sure you get the right queer in the right bathroom and you will be a hero and our "cool" president.

 

[Silhouette]

Don't pretend it isn't an important issue.

 

[Silhouette]

It's an important issue. Forced rapid and escalating social re-engineering placing grotesque perversions for erstwhile moral and common sense constructs is a HUGE visceral issue for voters.

And, 1 in 6 women have been raped. As I said elsewhere, in a restroom with 6 stalls, there is a statistical probability that 1 woman in there at any given time will experience PTSD if a man is allowed in there with her where she bares her intimate parts for her hygiene ritual behind a door that gives her the expectation of segregation, denoted by the word "women" next to the door.

I believe that if the Court doesn't want impeachments in in 2017, they'll err on the side of clear rights and expectations of privacy/PTSD vs the nonexistent "rights" of men to practice the delusions of being women at the expense of these rape victims mental health. Expect viable and potent lawsuits: and not for denying men to use the women's restroom. Quite the other way around...

 

[Silhouette]

BTW bulldog, I notice you didn't weigh in on whether or not the USSC would place a stay favoring either 1. women and girls (1 in 6 who are rape victims) having to share their segregated private hygiene retreats denoted by the word "women" outside the door, with men or 2. Men pretending to be women wanting access to women's private hygiene retreats.

Well? Which side would be more likely to sue the entity owning the bathroom? 1. A woman who has been raped, suffering PTSD at the sight of a man when her backside is bared? or 2. A man who is miffed because he can't use the ladies room? ie: which is the status quo that would protect the most people? There are 17 million American women who have been raped. Are there 17 million self-diagnosed trannys?

 

[Silhouette]

If the Obama Regime wins this one.....it opens the door for all of us to identify as any general or race or ethnicity or age we want.

ALL labels of race, gender, age, ethnicity will be voided.

Statutory rape will no longer be a legal charge since a 35 year old man can just "identify" as a 16 year old.

I you're a little nuts there. Typical for a right winger.

There was "gay marraige" forced on all 50 states despite their rejection, just last Summer. It is a new arrangement which rips away either a mother or father for life from kids re: contract. And now there is "men will use women's restrooms and showers"...in spite of the fact that there is no way to sift one self-diagnosed man out from another and 17 million women who expect privacy behind doors marked "women" are rape survivors.

Tell us again how your cult using legal precedents to shove through all manner of insanity...the simple and real observation of that MO...is "nuts"?

 

[BULLDOG]

If the Obama Regime wins this one.....it opens the door for all of us to identify as any general or race or ethnicity or age we want.

ALL labels of race, gender, age, ethnicity will be voided.

Statutory rape will no longer be a legal charge since a 35 year old man can just "identify" as a 16 year old.

I you're a little nuts there. Typical for a right winger.

There was "gay marraige" forced on all 50 states despite their rejection, just last Summer. It is a new arrangement which rips away either a mother or father for life from kids re: contract. And now there is "men will use women's restrooms and showers"...in spite of the fact that there is no way to sift one self-diagnosed man out from another and 17 million women who expect privacy behind doors marked "women" are rape survivors.

Tell us again how your cult using legal precedents to shove through all manner of insanity...the simple and real observation of that MO...is "nuts"?

Just admit that all this butt hurt is over gay marriage, which the country wanted, and the entire LGBT bathroom thing is your childish last ditch effort to continue that battle after you already lost. Your entire argument is crap because there is not, and has not been a problem with transgender people molesting women in bathrooms. Rape, assault, molestation, and statutory rape are still illegal just like always, no matter who does it.

 

[Silhouette]

1. Just admit that all this butt hurt is over gay marriage, which the country wanted, and the entire LGBT bathroom thing is your childish last ditch effort to continue that battle after you already lost. 2. Your entire argument is crap because there is not, and has not been a problem with transgender people molesting women in bathrooms. Rape, assault, molestation, and statutory rape are still illegal just like always, no matter who does it.

1. Is that why most states voted DOWN gay marriage by majority vote? And why 90% of people in this poll feel it's important for a child to have both a mother and father (a thing gay marriage takes away from any children involved 100% of the time, for life)? Poll. Please Vote. Did You Have a Mother & Father in Your Life?

2. You might want to watch this video for why men wanting to use the women's bathroom isn't going to win in court: pre-existing rights dominate men with delusions: women's expectation to segregated privacy behind doors marked "women" outside:

 

[BULLDOG]

1. Just admit that all this butt hurt is over gay marriage, which the country wanted, and the entire LGBT bathroom thing is your childish last ditch effort to continue that battle after you already lost. 2. Your entire argument is crap because there is not, and has not been a problem with transgender people molesting women in bathrooms. Rape, assault, molestation, and statutory rape are still illegal just like always, no matter who does it.

1. Is that why most states voted DOWN gay marriage by majority vote? And why 90% of people in this poll feel it's important for a child to have both a mother and father (a thing gay marriage takes away from any children involved 100% of the time, for life)? Poll. Please Vote. Did You Have a Mother & Father in Your Life?

2. You might want to watch this video for why men wanting to use the women's bathroom isn't going to win in court: pre-existing rights dominate men with delusions: women's expectation to segregated privacy behind doors marked "women" outside:

Hell, I think it is important for kids to have a mother and a father. Most people do, I also know that many kids have neither, and a loving same sex couple is a gift from heaven to many of those children. Marriage isn't only about procreation anyway. Like I said, before, you lost, and you can either be an adult and accept it, or whine like a baby. At least you are finally admitting that's what your butt hurt is about. I guess that is a step in the right direction even if it is a small one.

 

[Silhouette]

Hell, I think it is important for kids to have a mother and a father. Most people do, I also know that many kids have neither, and a loving same sex couple is a gift from heaven to many of those children. Marriage isn't only about procreation anyway. Like I said, before, you lost, and you can either be an adult and accept it, or whine like a baby. At least you are finally admitting that's what your butt hurt is about. I guess that is a step in the right direction even if it is a small one.

Did you interview those children? Ask them if they wanted both a mom and dad? Or is this just more of your guessing? Marriage was created over a thousand years ago to provide BOTH a mother and father to children everyone anticipated would arrive or were already there.

Hundreds of millions of Americans are 'butt hurt' about Obergefell because they voted in their state to not have gay marriage (or polygamy, another orientation made legal at the same time by the 14th's equality intent). I'm in good company. And, this isn't over yet...

 

[BULLDOG]

Hell, I think it is important for kids to have a mother and a father. Most people do, I also know that many kids have neither, and a loving same sex couple is a gift from heaven to many of those children. Marriage isn't only about procreation anyway. Like I said, before, you lost, and you can either be an adult and accept it, or whine like a baby. At least you are finally admitting that's what your butt hurt is about. I guess that is a step in the right direction even if it is a small one.

Did you interview those children? Ask them if they wanted both a mom and dad? Or is this just more of your guessing? Marriage was created over a thousand years ago to provide BOTH a mother and father to children everyone anticipated would arrive or were already there.

Hundreds of millions of Americans are 'butt hurt' about Obergefell because they voted in their state to not have gay marriage (or polygamy, another orientation made legal at the same time by the 14th's equality intent). I'm in good company. And, this isn't over yet...

Yes, the Gay marriage question has been answered. Get used to it.

 

[Silhouette]

No.

Another thing that hasn't been laid to rest are the women rape survivors you want men to have access to.

 

[BULLDOG]

No.

Another thing that hasn't been laid to rest are the women rape survivors you want men to have access to.

So I want men to molest rape survivors? You have really gone nuts. I'm going to slowly back away now, in hopes that you don't start biting now.