Trump Reverses The Transgender Bathroom Directive

[United Muscovite Nations]

Because, according to Novus America, no one should be able to force their views of morality on others.

You are not bothered by people for practicing your religion and people are not bothered by you practicing your religion.

What exactly is the problem?

Actually, I am bothered by plenty of people for practicing my religion. The media often publicly attacks my religion, and even supports people who vandalize our Churches.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Because, according to Novus America, no one should be able to force their views of morality on others.

Seems like a pretty sound policy to me. We force people to conform to what everyone can consent to - murder being wrong, rape being fucked up, theft being a big inconvenience - but no-one should be able to force their personal morality on others.

For example, I'm refraining from forcing people to get sterilized and have abortions.

Not everyone consents to murder and rape being wrong. If they did, no one would commit murder and rape.

[Mechanisburg]

And we should protect traditional values, that can't stand to the test of the times, because ... ?

Wasn't slavery a traditional value, too? Or women not being allowed to vote or work or do anything that wasn't pop out babies or become a nun? Even throwing ill babies off a cliff was pretty traditional.

Because those traditional values were those passed down by the Prophets and Patriarchs, received from the God of Abraham, Issac, and Jacob.

All of which means less than nothing to me, as I stopped believing in fairy tales since I was about three.

I grew up listening to the stories of Ulysses during his Odyssey, and reading of the Greek cosmogonies. Those stories, as unlikely as they were - the universe being born from a giant egg, really? - still sound better to me than what is in the bible. Wonderful stuff like "oy d00d y u no kill ur son for me?" and "y'know, you dun goofed up by eating the fruit I wanted you to not eat but couldn't bother to put somewhere safe, so Imma going punish you and every one of your descendants with eternal damnation".

The Spartans' tradition of throwing ill babies off a cliff was antecedent to that, and both slavery and the treatment of women that was traditional a century ago is enshrined in the bible.

[The V O I D]

Its not a decision.

The decision to transition is.

Oh, sure, let's force transgender people to feel dysphoria until their bodies develop into the sex that they don't want to be, that'll make sure they won't have dysphoria or will make them able to make a decision better, and will definitely in no way be harmful based on the evidence. /sarcasm

[United Muscovite Nations]

The decision to transition is.

Oh, sure, let's force transgender people to feel dysphoria until their bodies develop into the sex that they don't want to be, that'll make sure they won't have dysphoria or will make them able to make a decision better, and will definitely in no way be harmful based on the evidence. /sarcasm

I think it is reasonable to allow people to think about matters of morality before making an important moral decision.

[Salandriagado]

Pretty disappointed with Trump on this tbh, but this kind of thing was inevitable in some sense.

Just end bathroom segregation altogether or don't bother with this issue imo, it's a waste of everyones time.
Grandfather clause in current bathrooms and say future ones should be unisex. Done. Now everyone is grudgingly grumbling while taking a piss instead of doing a tug of war over a "Ladies" sign.
Personally I'm pro-trans but ultimately the country has to get along, and either way large sections of people are gonna get pissed and disagree with who should be allowed to use the women/mens room, but if you just make it unisex then both sides of this debate can pretend they won and got their way.
Ultimately if we keep it as is, it's not going to go away. We'll be having this debate forever, and it's just so fucking trivial. I don't get why trans advocates on this issue didn't see it that way too. They seem super pissed it was reversed. Well yeh. You're not going to get people to agree on this, not for decades at least. You tried to force people into something they weren't comfortable with instead of seeking a way to accomodate people who disagree with you. We'll be flipping back and forth on it constantly as a result and getting more and more pissed at eachother.
I understand you think their discomfort is wrong, but that's beside the point when there's a clear solution available that doesn't involve trying to make them see you as the gender you are when they don't want to.

You don't even need to grandfather them in completely: just declare that the signs on their doors have no meaning and are entirely unenforceable.

[Mechanisburg]

Seems like a pretty sound policy to me. We force people to conform to what everyone can consent to - murder being wrong, rape being fucked up, theft being a big inconvenience - but no-one should be able to force their personal morality on others.

For example, I'm refraining from forcing people to get sterilized and have abortions.

Not everyone consents to murder and rape being wrong. If they did, no one would commit murder and rape.

Nah. Plenty of people who know murder and rape is wrong, but tell themselves "it's not really rape if she's blackout drunk/my wife, is it?" or "he wasn't human, he didn't deserve to die!" and still do it. Or, especially in the case of murder, do it when out of sorts and so enraged they can't engage the "what the hell am I doing?" circuitry.

[Novus America]

Ideally. But we cannot because some people do not respect the rights of others.
The government exists to protect your from certain harms. Not to tell you how to live your life.

Rights are just opinions of philosophers, there is nothing binding in them except that the government enforces them.

Hence why we need the government. To keep us from getting raped, robbed and murdered. To keep us from starving to death and what not. Not to tell us how to live our lives. We cannot be free if we live in constant terror of course.

The point is so I can live my life and you can live yours.

[Brkelgarozed]

Children should make those types of decision they are mentally developed enough make a decision that can alter their body forever. Period.

Well? Problem is that and homosexuality isn't a choice.

Homosexuality? What? I have no problem with Homosexuality.

[The V O I D]

Oh, sure, let's force transgender people to feel dysphoria until their bodies develop into the sex that they don't want to be, that'll make sure they won't have dysphoria or will make them able to make a decision better, and will definitely in no way be harmful based on the evidence. /sarcasm

I think it is reasonable to allow people to think about matters of morality before making an important moral decision.

It is not a matter of morality, nor a moral decision.

It's a decision of 'Do I want to suffer with dysphoria, depression and suicidal thoughts and tendencies for the rest of my life?' versus 'Do I want to be happy and start correcting my physical self to match my identity?'

[United Muscovite Nations]

Not everyone consents to murder and rape being wrong. If they did, no one would commit murder and rape.

Nah. Plenty of people who know murder and rape is wrong, but tell themselves "it's not really rape if she's blackout drunk/my wife, is it?" or "he wasn't human, he didn't deserve to die!" and still do it. Or, especially in the case of murder, do it when out of sorts and so enraged they can't engage the "what the hell am I doing?" circuitry.

What of ideologies which believe that killing humans is the correct thing to do? What about the immense amount of rape that occurs in warzones? It is quite clear, from the massive amount of people who do it, that at least some of them do not consider those actions to be morally wrong.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Rights are just opinions of philosophers, there is nothing binding in them except that the government enforces them.

Hence why we need the government. To keep us from getting raped, robbed and murdered. To keep us from starving to death and what not. Not to tell us how to live our lives. We cannot be free if we live in constant terror of course.

The point is so I can live my life and you can live yours.

And that is a moral viewpoint. It is a moral viewpoint that we should be able to live our lives as we please.

[United Muscovite Nations]

I think it is reasonable to allow people to think about matters of morality before making an important moral decision.

It is not a matter of morality, nor a moral decision.

It's a decision of 'Do I want to suffer with dysphoria, depression and suicidal thoughts and tendencies for the rest of my life?' versus 'Do I want to be happy and start correcting my physical self to match my identity?'

Every decision towards actions are moral decisions.

[Novus America]

Seems like a pretty sound policy to me. We force people to conform to what everyone can consent to - murder being wrong, rape being fucked up, theft being a big inconvenience - but no-one should be able to force their personal morality on others.

For example, I'm refraining from forcing people to get sterilized and have abortions.

Not everyone consents to murder and rape being wrong. If they did, no one would commit murder and rape.

But they violate the rights of others. You have a may believe murder is right. As long as your force it on no one. If your murder someone you forced it on someone. Hence you broke the rule of not forcing your views on others.

[Salandriagado]

I'm still waiting for a good reason to have gendered bathrooms at all.

When you're arguing against the Statu Quo, you're kinda expected to be the one to provide arguments rather than merely expect everyone to simply bend to your will.

1) Safer: the more people around, the less likely sexual assaults are. Thus, a single large room is safer than two smaller ones.
2) More convenient: ever had a massive queue for the [gender] loos while the [opposite gender] loos where empty? Problem solved.
3) Cheaper: Seriously, it's ridiculous how much the cost difference is from just having one less wall.
4) Smaller: Because of (2), you need less total facilities due to better utilisation, so you can build a smaller facility, leaving more space for other stuff, allowing for more convenient positioning, and reducing costs.
5) Don't cause problems for trans* individuals and those of non-binary genders.

[The Black Forrest]

Fucking really? We're not going to start murdering people just because some women want to be men and vice versa.

There are those of us who remember that the sexual revolution started with the normalization of fornication and divorce, and now the majority of married couples get divorces. Why should we believe that there won't be continuing pushes in the direction of the destruction of traditional values?

That's not true. People weren't living "chaste" lives before the 60s.

Marriage and divorse followed pretty close lines. For example there were spikes in marriage and divorse before and after WWII. People rushed to get married and then realized they weren't compatible.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... one-chart/

[United Muscovite Nations]

Not everyone consents to murder and rape being wrong. If they did, no one would commit murder and rape.

But they violate the rights of others. You have a may believe murder is right. As long as your force it on no one. If your murder someone you forced it on someone. Hence you broke the rule of not forcing your views on others.

Rights are a moral point of view. Why should the government endorse that point of view over others?

[Salandriagado]

There should be no "Trans kids".school kids are not old enough make that kind of decision yet. Period.

Ah, the universal bullshit thrown at every trans person ever: come out as a kid, and you're "not old enough". Come out as a teenager and it's "just a phase". Come out as an adult and "it can't be real, or you'd have known earlier".

[Mechanisburg]

Nah. Plenty of people who know murder and rape is wrong, but tell themselves "it's not really rape if she's blackout drunk/my wife, is it?" or "he wasn't human, he didn't deserve to die!" and still do it. Or, especially in the case of murder, do it when out of sorts and so enraged they can't engage the "what the hell am I doing?" circuitry.

What of ideologies which believe that killing humans is the correct thing to do? What about the immense amount of rape that occurs in warzones? It is quite clear, from the massive amount of people who do it, that at least some of them do not consider those actions to be morally wrong.

You are aware you are just nitpicking now? "everyone agrees to" does not mean literally everyone, because obviously newborns and people with late-stage Alzheimer or dementia won't be able to have a say in the matter.

And even the ideologies which believe killing humans is the correct thing to do do so by saying "some people deserve death because they are not like us" (AKA, it's not morally murder). The massive amount of people who do it would still agree rape is wrong - ask them if they would like their sister or wife to be raped, and they'd reply "no what the fuck man" - but everyone has extenuating circumstances.

[The V O I D]

It is not a matter of morality, nor a moral decision.

It's a decision of 'Do I want to suffer with dysphoria, depression and suicidal thoughts and tendencies for the rest of my life?' versus 'Do I want to be happy and start correcting my physical self to match my identity?'

Every decision towards actions are moral decisions.

Maybe to you. Not to most people, though.

I say the decision should be made at the very earliest/latest around puberty [12-14], that way HRT and/or puberty blockers can be administered and thus dysphoria prevented ahead of time, and social/appearance transition can begin shortly thereafter.

SRS limits should be 16-18, just because earlier than that might have higher physical health risks.

[The Black Forrest]

You are not bothered by people for practicing your religion and people are not bothered by you practicing your religion.

What exactly is the problem?

Actually, I am bothered by plenty of people for practicing my religion. The media often publicly attacks my religion, and even supports people who vandalize our Churches.

Example?

[Novus America]

Hence why we need the government. To keep us from getting raped, robbed and murdered. To keep us from starving to death and what not. Not to tell us how to live our lives. We cannot be free if we live in constant terror of course.

The point is so I can live my life and you can live yours.

And that is a moral viewpoint. It is a moral viewpoint that we should be able to live our lives as we please.

Perhaps. But I am not forcing you to believe that. You can believe others should not be trans. Or whatever. You can believe whatever you wish as long as you do not force it on others.

[United Muscovite Nations]

What of ideologies which believe that killing humans is the correct thing to do? What about the immense amount of rape that occurs in warzones? It is quite clear, from the massive amount of people who do it, that at least some of them do not consider those actions to be morally wrong.

You are aware you are just nitpicking now? "everyone agrees to" does not mean literally everyone, because obviously newborns and people with late-stage Alzheimer or dementia won't be able to have a say in the matter.

And even the ideologies which believe killing humans is the correct thing to do do so by saying "some people deserve death because they are not like us" (AKA, it's not morally murder). The massive amount of people who do it would still agree rape is wrong - ask them if they would like their sister or wife to be raped, and they'd reply "no what the fuck man" - but everyone has extenuating circumstances.

Then you think that morality is just based on majority decision, not on any principles.

[Salandriagado]

Why should they oppose them?

Moral reasons that you don't subscribe to, obviously.

That's a mighty fancy way of saying "because I say so, and nobody's opinion other than mine matters" you've got there.

[Novus America]

But they violate the rights of others. You have a may believe murder is right. As long as your force it on no one. If your murder someone you forced it on someone. Hence you broke the rule of not forcing your views on others.

Rights are a moral point of view. Why should the government endorse that point of view over others?

Pragmatism really. So we are not just chimps raping and murdering each other in the jungle. So we can have civilization.
Without that viewpoint I cannot live mostly freely. It is the way to maximize freedom. To accomdate as many viewpoints as possible.