NC has responded to the Feds

[Seawytch]

Fantastic! Now git er done. Oh that's right..,you don't actually DO anything about PA laws beyond decrying the unfairness of them on Internet message boards.

Such a rebel!

How do YOU know what anyone is doing about anything? You say the same stupid shit everytime PA laws are mentioned.

Because he's told us he doesn't actually DO anything about it. He considers whining about it on a message board as "doing" something.

Mostly because you know we are right.

Right about what, getting rid of PA laws? I don't know Queen Elizabeth, what do "we" think of them? I think that as long as I am required to serve a Christian in all 50 states, he should be required to serve me or that I should not have to serve him.

Here's a fun fact for you federal PA laws don't grant your perversion the same protection against discrimination as people have for the color of your skin. So why exactly do you defend a law that allows discrimination against your perversion? LOL

Yet. Title II does not include sexual orientation or gender identity yet. Which one do you think is more likely, getting rid of all of them or adding those? (answer in link)

You have serious mental issues.

PA laws OBVIOUSLY give special protections to some classes that other classes don't get. Each time some class whines, a new provision has to be made, and you somehow don't understand that these laws INHERENTLY dont give equal protection of law?

Oh, and I find it unlikely that the law will be changed to include homosexuality on the federal level anytime soon.

I have serious mental issues because I don't want to have to serve a Christian if he doesn't have to serve me? You'll have to explain that one, skippy.

You can "find" anything you like. Try finding your ass with both hands if you can, but President Hillary Clinton will sign the bill if she gets a Congress to pass it.

I fully support your right to not serve a Christian if that's what you choose to do, which of course you can't do on federal level, even though the Christian can refuses to serve your gay ass if he chooses not to.

Your very argument supports a repeal of the PA laws, but you are too stupid to understand that.

Or it supports adding gays to Federal protections. Which one is more likely?

 

[Seawytch]

Fantastic! Now git er done. Oh that's right..,you don't actually DO anything about PA laws beyond decrying the unfairness of them on Internet message boards.

Such a rebel!

How do YOU know what anyone is doing about anything? You say the same stupid shit everytime PA laws are mentioned.

Because he's told us he doesn't actually DO anything about it. He considers whining about it on a message board as "doing" something.

Mostly because you know we are right.

Right about what, getting rid of PA laws? I don't know Queen Elizabeth, what do "we" think of them? I think that as long as I am required to serve a Christian in all 50 states, he should be required to serve me or that I should not have to serve him.

Here's a fun fact for you federal PA laws don't grant your perversion the same protection against discrimination as people have for the color of your skin. So why exactly do you defend a law that allows discrimination against your perversion? LOL

Yet. Title II does not include sexual orientation or gender identity yet. Which one do you think is more likely, getting rid of all of them or adding those? (answer in link)

You have serious mental issues.

PA laws OBVIOUSLY give special protections to some classes that other classes don't get. Each time some class whines, a new provision has to be made, and you somehow don't understand that these laws INHERENTLY dont give equal protection of law?

Oh, and I find it unlikely that the law will be changed to include homosexuality on the federal level anytime soon.

She does have mental issues, but I suspect this one's not that ...

Partisanship to the point where you support a law that goes against your own wishes (she wants to be able to deny service to Christians but supports PA laws) is a sign of mental illness.

I never said I wanted to, I said I should be able to if he can discriminate against me.

 

[TNHarley]

I STILL don't know how making people piss in their proper sex designated bathrooms is discrimination..

In actuality, the discrimination is in allowing SOME men into the women's restroom, but not others.

how does it do that?

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

you are correct, the NC bill says use the bathroom of the gender listed on your birth certificate. I was talking about the letter the DoJ sent NC .

fuck those activists

 

[Fair&Balanced]

In actuality, the discrimination is in allowing SOME men into the women's restroom, but not others.

how does it do that?

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

 

[Ravi]

how does it do that?

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

 

[Pop23]

In actuality, the discrimination is in allowing SOME men into the women's restroom, but not others.

how does it do that?

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

I find this fascinating

Let's change everything in this realm to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

And you realize, that if the DOJ wins, it's not simply restrooms, it's lockers and showers.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

how does it do that?

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

I find this fascinating

Let's change everything in this realm to fix a problem that doesn't exist.

And you realize, that if the DOJ wins, it's not simply restrooms, it's lockers and showers.

And you KNOW that the first thing that is going to happen is some idiot is going to challenge the law by going into the ladies room just to ogle the women. It WILL happen.

However, in the case of government offices. I believe they should harbor ZERO discrimination, so same sex facilities for all. For private businesses, do what you want with your bathrooms and such.

 

[Ravi]

im so confused. lol
The way it took the bill was the male bathroom is for males, the female is for females. They even defined the terms to mean biology.

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

 

[TNHarley]

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

So, basically, unisex bathrooms would literally take us back centuries? LOL

 

[Silhouette]

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

And there's a reason they wanted segregated hygiene retreats denoted by the word "women" or "ladies" in front of the door:

1 out of every 6 American women has been the victim of an attempted or completed rape in her lifetime (14.8% completed rape; 2.8% attempted rape).1

17.7 million American women have been victims of attempted or completed rape Who are the Victims? | RAINN | Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network

that reminds me...what side of caution do you think the courts will err when considering the stays both sides (Fed & NC) will be asking for while these cases are pending the final decision? On the side of the 17.7 million women and girls who have been raped and would suffer PTSD finding a man in their private hygiene retreats? Or on the side of the infinitesimally smaller number of men wanting their "protected right" to pretend to be a woman and use the women's bathroom?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Correct, it's done in a non arbitrary, therefor completely legal way.

If the DOJ forces a change, to meet the non arbitrary criteria, they can't just allow trans males in woman's restrooms, they must allow all men in.

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

Feel free to point out where in that link it shows that women were ever denied use of a bathroom.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

So, basically, unisex bathrooms would literally take us back centuries? LOL

That's odd, I thought liberals claimed that it was conservatives who wanted to return to the way things used to be? What's next, liberals start wanting a return of slavery.

 

[Ravi]

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

So, basically, unisex bathrooms would literally take us back centuries? LOL

No, but keep pretending otherwise.

 

[Ravi]

Great! We will have unisex restrooms. It works in Europe. Then we can put all this hysteria behind us.

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

Feel free to point out where in that link it shows that women were ever denied use of a bathroom.

Here's another article for you not to read in an effort to confirm your bias.

The Biggest Obstacle to Gender Neutral Bathrooms? Building Codes.

 

[TNHarley]

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

So, basically, unisex bathrooms would literally take us back centuries? LOL

That's odd, I thought liberals claimed that it was conservatives who wanted to return to the way things used to be? What's next, liberals start wanting a return of slavery.

Ancient Romans also enjoyed bestiality and incest was pretty prevalent during early Rome as well.

 

[TNHarley]

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

So, basically, unisex bathrooms would literally take us back centuries? LOL

No, but keep pretending otherwise.

So unisex bathrooms aren't ancient? Im confused..

 

[Fair&Balanced]

At one time , we DID have unisex bathrooms in this country, then women demanded their own restrooms LOL that's the hilariousness of the situation. WOMEN wanted separate bathrooms and now liberals are saying "guess what women, what you want isn't as important as what mentally ill folk want"

Talk about a war on women.

They didn't demand their own restrooms. Public restrooms were usually only allowed to be used by men. In other words, women were not allowed to use public toilets.

Fair and balanced my ass.

LOL bullshit, show me one solitary instance of a woman ever being denied use of a public bathroom in our past. LOL

The odd history of our gender-separated public bathrooms

Feel free to point out where in that link it shows that women were ever denied use of a bathroom.

Here's another article for you not to read in an effort to confirm your bias.

The Biggest Obstacle to Gender Neutral Bathrooms? Building Codes.

What bias you fucking idiot? I have said in THIS thread that government buildings should all have to convert a portion of their bathrooms to non gender, which of course solves the problem, women who only want women in their restroom have a place they can be comfortable, transgenders have a place where they can feel comfortable. DONE

Private businesses should be free to do whatever they want with their bathrooms.

The ONLY thing I questioned YOU about was your claim that women used to be denied use of public bathrooms. But clearly you are both dishonest and stupid and so went off on some tangent that wasn't even real.

So, I'll ask again, can you show one historical piece of evidence that women were ever not allowed to use public restrooms, particularly in this country?

 

[daws101]

how does it do that?

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?[/QUOTE ]
Also false the tempest in a tea pot is over gender identification not sex.
The "anti trans" among other things is to blur that line and that's what pop is attempting.
By misrepresentation and pseudo intellectual bullshit.

It's not false .

The entire argument of these people is "I identify as a female now" (of course some go the other way as well, but for ease of conversation we'll stick with one)

And the letter the DoJ sent NC says that these people should be able to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with.

Which is ridiculous , because in no other area in life are people allowed to say "I was born a male but now I identify as a female" and partake of things associated with a specific gender.

Take my example, for example. Would that player be allowed to join the women's team? Of course you know the answer is no, so you pretend it is irrelevant damn well knowing that it is very relevant.

Actually that would depend on the team's attitude on the subject.
It's the same lame argument that people in pro baseball and golf use.
Your example fails the smell test.

No it wouldn't depend on the team's attitude. Jesus Christ, every thread I see you in you post the dumbest shit ever.

Educate yourself man.

Here's the NCAA rule

– A transgender male student athlete who has a medical exception for testosterone hormone therapy may compete on a men’s team, but is no longer eligible to compete on a women’s team without changing the team status to a mixed team.


– A transgender female student athlete who has taken medication to suppress testosterone for a year may compete on a women’s team.


– Under the new policy, transgender student athletes who are not undergoing hormone therapy remain eligible to play on teams based on the gender of their birth sex and may socially transition by dressing and using the appropriate pronouns that match their gender identity.

NCAA’s New Rules Ensure Trans Athletes Won’t Play For The Wrong Team / Queerty


Don't even bother commenting on topics you refuse to educate yourself on.

those rules are not written in stone,part of your problem is thinking everything is.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Because a male is a male is a male, what they "identify" as , is irrelevant.

Here, let me prove it to you.

Could a 6'5" 270 lb black male get a nip and tuck, claim they identify as a woman and join the UCONN women's basketball team? Why , or why not?[/QUOTE ]
Also false the tempest in a tea pot is over gender identification not sex.
The "anti trans" among other things is to blur that line and that's what pop is attempting.
By misrepresentation and pseudo intellectual bullshit.

It's not false .

The entire argument of these people is "I identify as a female now" (of course some go the other way as well, but for ease of conversation we'll stick with one)

And the letter the DoJ sent NC says that these people should be able to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with.

Which is ridiculous , because in no other area in life are people allowed to say "I was born a male but now I identify as a female" and partake of things associated with a specific gender.

Take my example, for example. Would that player be allowed to join the women's team? Of course you know the answer is no, so you pretend it is irrelevant damn well knowing that it is very relevant.

Actually that would depend on the team's attitude on the subject.
It's the same lame argument that people in pro baseball and golf use.
Your example fails the smell test.

No it wouldn't depend on the team's attitude. Jesus Christ, every thread I see you in you post the dumbest shit ever.

Educate yourself man.

Here's the NCAA rule

– A transgender male student athlete who has a medical exception for testosterone hormone therapy may compete on a men’s team, but is no longer eligible to compete on a women’s team without changing the team status to a mixed team.


– A transgender female student athlete who has taken medication to suppress testosterone for a year may compete on a women’s team.


– Under the new policy, transgender student athletes who are not undergoing hormone therapy remain eligible to play on teams based on the gender of their birth sex and may socially transition by dressing and using the appropriate pronouns that match their gender identity.

NCAA’s New Rules Ensure Trans Athletes Won’t Play For The Wrong Team / Queerty


Don't even bother commenting on topics you refuse to educate yourself on.

those rules are not written in stone,part of your problem is thinking everything is.

That rule IS written in stone you fucking idiot, that's why it's called a rule.