Houston Subpoenas Pastors' Sermons re: Unisex Toilet Law

[Olerand]

Your assertions mean nothing. You are unqualified to speak of this issue as much as I am to speak of geology. If you wish to refute actual scientific statements and state your opinions as fact, then go ahead. You should be ignored however, as much as I should if I were speaking of geology.
Anglo-Saxon liberalism perverts the idea of "everyone being heard" by asserting that "everyone, even those with no qualifications, must be heard". That is simply untrue, and a big part of why America cannot function correctly today.

Your opinion is relevant to the topic you have studied and mastered, otherwise it is not.
Doctors cannot lecture about astrophysics, astrophysicists cannot cannot lecture about medicine.

You are not qualified to make assertions that are contrary to established scientific opinion, therefore, don't do it.

That's not even a thing.

Yes, it most certainly is.

It is also known as the Anglo-Saxon model, or Anglo-Saxon capitalism. It is a system of governance, economic, social, societal, and cultural, that places the individual as the prime center of political existence. There are alternatives, even within "liberalism".
The French and German models, while both being "liberal", do not share the same values or individual obsession as the Anglo-Saxon model.

[Genivaria]

That's not even a thing.

Yes, it most certainly is.

It is also known as the Anglo-Saxon model, or Anglo-Saxon capitalism. It is a system of governance, economic, social, societal, and cultural, that places the individual as the prime center of political existence. There are alternatives, even within "liberalism".
The French and German models, while both being "liberal", do not share the same values or individual obsession as the Anglo-Saxon model.

What's the difference?

[Olerand]

Yes, it most certainly is.

It is also known as the Anglo-Saxon model, or Anglo-Saxon capitalism. It is a system of governance, economic, social, societal, and cultural, that places the individual as the prime center of political existence. There are alternatives, even within "liberalism".
The French and German models, while both being "liberal", do not share the same values or individual obsession as the Anglo-Saxon model.

What's the difference?

More social aspects, more "group" focus, less "individual" primacy.
The systems of governance of the West, while being broadly similar, are very different in detail. The rights of a French citizen are different to those of an American; a French citizen has the constitutional right to unionize, an American to bear arms. Rights granted to Americans are done so by the "Creator", not so in France. Only individuals have rights in the American Constitution, groups and the nation have rights in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

Anglo-Saxon culture, society, and economy, are much more individualistic than other Western nations'. Especially nations with strong social contracts, such as France.
In France or Germany, making assertions in fields which you do not specialize in, or have studied, will get you laughed off stage. One can argue it is due to the bureaucratic society that ensures that you "know your place".
Unless if you are a philosopher or a politician, who get away with more than most, but not all.

[Genivaria]

What's the difference?

More social aspects, more "group" focus, less "individual" primacy.
The systems of governance of the West, while being broadly similar, are very different in detail. The rights of a French citizen are different to those of an American; a French citizen has the constitutional right to unionize, an American to bear arms. Rights granted to Americans are done so by the "Creator", not so in France. Only individuals have rights in the American Constitution, groups and the nation have rights in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

Anglo-Saxon culture, society, and economy, are much more individualistic than other Western nations'. Especially nations with strong social contracts, such as France.
In France or Germany, making assertions in fields which you do not specialize in, or have studied, will get you laughed off stage. One can argue it is due to the bureaucratic society that ensures that you "know your place".
Unless if you are a philosopher or a politician, who get away with more than most, but not all.

I think I prefer the French model now.

[Galactic Assembly of Free Planets]

What's the difference?

More social aspects, more "group" focus, less "individual" primacy.
The systems of governance of the West, while being broadly similar, are very different in detail. The rights of a French citizen are different to those of an American; a French citizen has the constitutional right to unionize, an American to bear arms. Rights granted to Americans are done so by the "Creator", not so in France. Only individuals have rights in the American Constitution, groups and the nation have rights in the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

Anglo-Saxon culture, society, and economy, are much more individualistic than other Western nations'. Especially nations with strong social contracts, such as France.
In France or Germany, making assertions in fields which you do not specialize in, or have studied, will get you laughed off stage. One can argue it is due to the bureaucratic society that ensures that you "know your place".
Unless if you are a philosopher or a politician, who get away with more than most, but not all.

Same here.

[Rebellious Fishermen]

On a scale of one to ten with one being don't care and ten being care a lot my preference on this is a two.

I think it's silly to go about changing all our bathrooms because a few people are upset.

EDIT: I'll change it from three to two because I really can't find this issue as anything more then silly.

Its not "because a few people are upset". Its because trans people need a restroom where we can piss/shit in peace and safety, without having to worry about being kicked out/arrested/fined/whathaveyou for not being able to pass when we use one restroom, and without having to worry about being beaten/raped/killed for using the other restroom.

But who cares if 'a few dumb trannies' get beaten/raped/killed, amirite?

Frankly, you should go to the restroom for the genitals you have. I don't mind if we started having unisex bathrooms, but I do see some serious issues with men creeping on women and women not having the privacy they want from men. It's so heavily engrained into our culture that I genuinely do not think it is a good idea, but personally it wouldn't bother me.

EDIT: In regard to trans people being beaten or killed in restrooms, that is a real tragedy, but you have to know that it isn't the bathroom itself that is causing this issue. This is an issue with our society that needs to be addressed, not an issue with the bathrooms.

[Geilinor]

What's the difference?

a French citizen has the constitutional right to unionize, an American to bear arms. .

The right to unionize isn't specifically mentioned in the US Constitution, but it's there.

[Olerand]

a French citizen has the constitutional right to unionize, an American to bear arms. .

The right to unionize isn't specifically mentioned in the US Constitution, but it's there.

It is explicitly stated in the French Constitution however, along with other social rights from the legally recognized preamble of the Fourth Republic's Constitution of 1948. Some of those rights include but are not limited to, and I am sure not all of them are American rights:
"The law guarantees to the woman, in all domains, rights equal to those of men.
Every person persecuted due to his actions in favor of liberty has a right to refuge on the territories of the Republic.
Everyone has the duty to work and the right to receive employment. No one can be discriminated against, in their job or employment, for reasons of his origin, opinions, or beliefs.
Every person can defend his rights and his interest by union actions and to adhere to a union of his choice.
ETC.
ETC."

The US Constitution explicitly guarantees political rights, and some Courts have deduced that it guarantees social rights as well.
The French Constitution explicitly guarantees social rights.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

Its not "because a few people are upset". Its because trans people need a restroom where we can piss/shit in peace and safety, without having to worry about being kicked out/arrested/fined/whathaveyou for not being able to pass when we use one restroom, and without having to worry about being beaten/raped/killed for using the other restroom.

But who cares if 'a few dumb trannies' get beaten/raped/killed, amirite?

"safety" ya, have you looked at this law? 1)it says that any gender can go in any restroom. 2)and your not going to get killed in a restroom. way to over exadurate, pass it on.

1) No, it doesn't. As I understand, an early draft had that as a part of the law, but it was removed in favor of the addition of unisex bathrooms. 2) There have been links to studies and news articles already showing that people have been beaten or killed by people who refuse to see the distinction between gender and sex, and seeing a transgendered person of their sex sends them into a murderous rage for some reason.

[The Floating Island of the Sleeping God]

I believe this quick summary by the World Health Organization can set your mind at ease concerning these issues which you are clearly not qualified to speak of, but still make false assertions about:
What do we mean by "sex" and "gender"?


Here is Oxford Dictionaries doing it for you as well:
Sex:

Gender:


You're welcome.

Ok, so do you believe that a mammal can change gender by the process of thought? and all of a sudden be that of a female even tough born a man? No. and scientifically, still No. also in that definition look at the word typically, this is not saying anything about true or false, its relating it to modern thoughts. Do me a favor an look up the definition of Male and then look up Female, both of these are much more than what you "think" you are. because you would be very much WRONG if you where to think of yourself a female when you have a Y chromosome and follow the details lined in the definition. What you say is ridiculous. I'm a male, oh wait now i'm a Female... OH WAIT now i'm a male again. if this goes through your head are you magically changing genders? NO. you are still a male because of your Y chromosome and other details. If a dog just one day THINKS he is a different gender than he really is, (once again a mammal just like you) does that mean a thing? No I could care less whats going through the mammals head. gender is determined at birth and it can not be changed by your MIND.

No, no more than I believe someone can change their sexuality by process of thought. It's a part of their mind, not their body. Unless, of course, you're going to say that homosexuals don't really exist because the parts they're born with are only compatible fully with the opposite sex.

I'd like to let you know, in what I think is the last post where I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt as being simply wrong instead of willfully ignorant, that your espoused opinions about sex and gender, which fly in the face of reason and science, lead me to believe that you're the kind of person who actually would believe that there's no such thing as gay people because of a flawed perception of the difference between psychology and biology. If you're okay with giving off that vibe of intentional disregard for facts and refusal to address the scientific sources presented as contradictory to your views, then that's your prerogative, but I thought you might like to know that so far your arguments have made you seem quite foolish or even intentionally uninformed.

[Autumn Wind]

The secularists would have banned Christianity long ago if they had the chance, I reckon.

Given that Christianity has spent the past 2000 years trying to ban secularism, I'd say it's goes around comes around

[Gauthier]

The secularists would have banned Christianity long ago if they had the chance, I reckon.

Given that Christianity has spent the past 2000 years trying to ban secularism, I'd say it's goes around comes around

Not just trying to ban secularism, trying to ban SCIENCE!

[Othelos]

See androgen insensitivity syndrome

I've already posted the link on here twice. Women can be XY.

You keep on going on and on and on with SYNDROMES, This has nothing to do with whether you are a female or a male. why don't you go to dictionary.com and just type in female? does it say ANYTHING about your mind being able to change your gender? no it doesn't. and if people with such syndromes are genetically proven to be a certain gender despite there issues than that is what they are.

Transgender people don't "change genders". Not innately. At the most, they discover that their gender is not the one that they were raised to be - and realizing =/= changing.

[Othelos]

Given that Christianity has spent the past 2000 years trying to ban secularism, I'd say it's goes around comes around

Not just trying to ban secularism, trying to ban SCIENCE!

Eh, only certain specific aspects of scientific understanding that seem to violate their understanding of the world.

[Gauthier]

You keep on going on and on and on with SYNDROMES, This has nothing to do with whether you are a female or a male. why don't you go to dictionary.com and just type in female? does it say ANYTHING about your mind being able to change your gender? no it doesn't. and if people with such syndromes are genetically proven to be a certain gender despite there issues than that is what they are.

Transgender people don't "change genders". Not innately. At the most, they discover that their gender is not the one that they were raised to be - and realizing =/= changing.

Besides which, eventually science is going to get to a point where sex change is not going to be the long, painful gruesome ordeal it is right now. Hell, it might be as simple as popping a pill or sitting in a booth for all we know.

[Othelos]

Transgender people don't "change genders". Not innately. At the most, they discover that their gender is not the one that they were raised to be - and realizing =/= changing.

Besides which, eventually science is going to get to a point where sex change is not going to be the long, painful gruesome ordeal it is right now. Hell, it might be as simple as popping a pill or sitting in a booth for all we know.

And not even all trans people want a sex change.

[JesusOfNazareth]

Given that Christianity has spent the past 2000 years trying to ban secularism, I'd say it's goes around comes around

Not just trying to ban secularism, trying to ban SCIENCE!

Bullshit.
And when the Church tries to reconcile with the science, such as the theory of intelligent design, the secularists can't handle it.

[Gauthier]

Not just trying to ban secularism, trying to ban SCIENCE!

Bullshit.
And when the Church tries to reconcile with the science, such as the theory of intelligent design, the secularists can't handle it.

Galileo, Galileo...

And "intelligent design" is as much science as Star Wars.

[Othelos]

Bullshit.
And when the Church tries to reconcile with the science, such as the theory of intelligent design, the secularists can't handle it.

Galileo, Galileo...

And "intelligent design" is as much science as Star Wars.

The stem cell issue is another example.

[Olerand]

Not just trying to ban secularism, trying to ban SCIENCE!

Bullshit.
And when the Church tries to reconcile with the science, such as the theory of intelligent design, the secularists can't handle it.

Or when reality proves your surreal beliefs wrong, amend surreal beliefs to fit reality.

That way you're always right!

[Gauthier]

Galileo, Galileo...

And "intelligent design" is as much science as Star Wars.

The stem cell issue is another example.

The stem cell debate is mostly an ethical issue, concerning the biggest motherloads of viable stem cells.

Galileo is historical, and a much more pertinent example of religion suppressing science because it went against their teachings (that the system revolved around the Earth rather than the Sun).

[United States of The One Percent]

You mean... I shouldn't poop in the wall toilet?

Only if you want to get Mr. Mackey really worked up again.

This is Mr. Venezuela, school janitor, M'Kay. He's the person who has to clean up when some trickster drops a dook in the wrong toilet. Mr. Venezuela makes six bucks an hour at best, M'kay. He's got three kids at home, he's got a car that barely works, he's gotta clean up puke with saw dust, M'Kay. Then he walks into the boys' room and sees a big meaty chud staring him in the face. So when you crapped in that urinal, M'Kay, you might has well have just dropped your pants and laid a turd right on Mr. Venezuela's head.

[United States of The One Percent]

Apologies for any repetition but, hey, ten pages already...

It's not a violation of a church's nonprofit status to support or oppose a ballot measure. It is violative to support or oppose a candidate for public office, certainly in a partisan election. If ministers are making statements from church pulpits that their parishioners should vote for or against a candidate for public office, there could be a prosecutable violation there, hence a basis for a subpoena.

Prosecutors don't issue subpoenas all by themselves, they need to present evidence before a judge. So some Texas judge agreed there was at least the possibility of a violation of law.

Good enough for me.

[Wisconsin9]

Bullshit.
And when the Church tries to reconcile with the science, such as the theory of intelligent design, the secularists can't handle it.

Galileo, Galileo...

Galileo, Figaro!

Too good a chance to pass up.

[Grenartia]

Not just trying to ban secularism, trying to ban SCIENCE!

Bullshit.
And when the Church tries to reconcile with the science, such as the theory of intelligent design, the secularists can't handle it.

Intelligent Design is the church trying to rewrite science. Theistic Evolution is Christianity reconciling with science (TE and science both say that the trigger was pulled, but TE attempts to explain WHO pulled the trigger).