North Carolina Passes "Anti-LGBT" Bill

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I never said I wanted centralization to push my ideas. I said I want centralization because states have proven to be incapable of ruling themselves appropriately and almost all, if not all of them are failures at it.

I'm an immigrant. If the country uses its power against me in the future I can leave back to where I came from.

If the voters clearly enjoy failure, let them stew in it. Its your opinion that they have failed. If all the States have failed then how will a Federal government fix that? The Federal Government is a reflection of all the states combined. Combined failure to govern failure doesn't make sense either. Unlike you, I have nowhere I can run to if my ideas go horribly. Its not like the Indian Reservations have been fucked by Federal Power before right?

A Federation with stronger powers can delegate measures to help individual regions of the country unilaterally. Unlike right now that the Federal government is a sitting duck in some ways.

At least, if the entire country fails, is not going to be because of several states being twats while others pulling both the weight of the failed states and their own weight.

[Trotskylvania]

I never said I wanted centralization to push my ideas. I said I want centralization because states have proven to be incapable of ruling themselves appropriately and almost all, if not all of them are failures at it.

I'm an immigrant. If the country uses its power against me in the future I can leave back to where I came from.

If the voters clearly enjoy failure, let them stew in it. Its your opinion that they have failed. If all the States have failed then how will a Federal government fix that? The Federal Government is a reflection of all the states combined. Combined failure to govern failure doesn't make sense either. Unlike you, I have nowhere I can run to if my ideas go horribly. Its not like the Indian Reservations have been fucked by Federal Power before right?

The federal government is not a reflection of the states. As a single institution, it does not fall prey to the collective action problems that states acting independently will fall prey to. There is no institution above it that the elected government can pass the buck to. They must be at minimum more resonsible than state governments in order survive democratic competition. Whereas state governments can be filled with foaming at the mouth anti-government ideologues without much consequence, because the feds will deal with whatever problems they create.

[The East Marches]

When people get more money, they will naturally defend their interests. Thats why you see people 40 + who used to be liberal, vote conservative today. The same effect with wealth will happen. It's foolish to assume that your ideology is anything but temporary and that this trend of "tolerance and diversity" will last. Just 100 years ago to the day we believed eugenics was a decent idea. Now that has flipped. Who is to say what will happen the next 100 years? Just look at the change in the last 20 alone. Its very short-sighted and foolish to push for centralization to force your ideas on the country as a whole. Somebody else will take the lever of power and use it against you in the future. This is the same country that elected Bush twice. Don't think it isn't retarded enough to do something similar in the future.

None of this contradicts what I said.

I said that serious longitudinal studies have found that most people's politics are pretty resilient. There are many wealthy liberals and poor conservatives, and for every liberal turned conservative in their old age is balanced by a conservative who turned liberal.

You are confusing intergenerational political change with intragenerational change. Because now you're talking about changes over the next one-hundred years. The population turnover in that period will be, barring some truly radical scientific advancements reaching wide scale deployment, will approach 100 percent. People's changing opinions over their lifetime is irrelevant in the 100 year case, because almost everyone now living will be dead in 100 years.

Just like eugenics. People didn't stop being eugenicists by and large (it was never an idea that was super popular, rather it had a high concentration of supporters among the wealthy and intelligentsia). They aged out and got replaced by a new cadre of people who were not eugenicists.

Perhaps you are right, I however, read something entirely different in my economics classes while at university. I'd be interested to see your sources and give them a read.

[The East Marches]

If the voters clearly enjoy failure, let them stew in it. Its your opinion that they have failed. If all the States have failed then how will a Federal government fix that? The Federal Government is a reflection of all the states combined. Combined failure to govern failure doesn't make sense either. Unlike you, I have nowhere I can run to if my ideas go horribly. Its not like the Indian Reservations have been fucked by Federal Power before right?

A Federation with stronger powers can delegate measures to help individual regions of the country unilaterally. Unlike right now that the Federal government is a sitting duck in some ways.

At least, if the entire country fails, is not going to be because of several states being twats while others pulling both the weight of the failed states and their own weight.

Should we really go with a more Federalized government when the right has the control of districting? (gerrymandering) Your idea of unity of action is admirable but it will only lead to more divisions in the future. Both sides will abuse the new found power of the Federal government to their own advantage. I'm not comfortable concentrating that much ability into the hands of a single entity.

[The East Marches]

If the voters clearly enjoy failure, let them stew in it. Its your opinion that they have failed. If all the States have failed then how will a Federal government fix that? The Federal Government is a reflection of all the states combined. Combined failure to govern failure doesn't make sense either. Unlike you, I have nowhere I can run to if my ideas go horribly. Its not like the Indian Reservations have been fucked by Federal Power before right?

The federal government is not a reflection of the states. As a single institution, it does not fall prey to the collective action problems that states acting independently will fall prey to. There is no institution above it that the elected government can pass the buck to. They must be at minimum more resonsible than state governments in order survive democratic competition. Whereas state governments can be filled with foaming at the mouth anti-government ideologues without much consequence, because the feds will deal with whatever problems they create.

The Federal Government and our State governments are reflection of the people living within them. They are us and we are them. That is what concerns me. The Federal Government has plenty of collective action might on its side already. Just look at its massive (and proper) response to the financial crisis. Just because they can't pass the buck doesn't mean they won't come up with ways of absolving themselves of responsibility. What need is there to give more power to the Federal government?

Gonna go grab lunch, my responses may be delayed.

[Ethel mermania]

How is it impossible to enforce? A trans person goes into a women's room, a woman sees them, screams "help police, there is a masher in the women's room" the cops go in and effect an arrest. This has been the way it is for the past 1000 years. The change is letting trans folks pick the bathroom they want to use.

Simple, a person who looks like a woman enters the men's restroom, how does the police tell if this person is trans and has a right to be there, or a female who does not. TO arrest one needs to have a reasonable suspicion, and by forcing trans who can pass to use the restroom of their born sex, this makes it impossible to form that reasonable suspicion. This law actually lets men and women use the "wrong" restroom because there are trans who do pass and would be forced to use the restroom of their birth sex rather than as the gender people think them to be.

For a second time, the complainant points the trans person out. The cop makes an arrest, all done.

[Trotskylvania]

None of this contradicts what I said.

I said that serious longitudinal studies have found that most people's politics are pretty resilient. There are many wealthy liberals and poor conservatives, and for every liberal turned conservative in their old age is balanced by a conservative who turned liberal.

You are confusing intergenerational political change with intragenerational change. Because now you're talking about changes over the next one-hundred years. The population turnover in that period will be, barring some truly radical scientific advancements reaching wide scale deployment, will approach 100 percent. People's changing opinions over their lifetime is irrelevant in the 100 year case, because almost everyone now living will be dead in 100 years.

Just like eugenics. People didn't stop being eugenicists by and large (it was never an idea that was super popular, rather it had a high concentration of supporters among the wealthy and intelligentsia). They aged out and got replaced by a new cadre of people who were not eugenicists.

Perhaps you are right, I however, read something entirely different in my economics classes while at university. I'd be interested to see your sources and give them a read.

If you have access to university journal lists, you could try Dangelis, N.L., Hardy, M., & Cutler, S.J. (2007). "Population aging, intracohort aging, and sociopolitical aittudes." American Sociological Review, 72, 812-830.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Simple, a person who looks like a woman enters the men's restroom, how does the police tell if this person is trans and has a right to be there, or a female who does not. TO arrest one needs to have a reasonable suspicion, and by forcing trans who can pass to use the restroom of their born sex, this makes it impossible to form that reasonable suspicion. This law actually lets men and women use the "wrong" restroom because there are trans who do pass and would be forced to use the restroom of their birth sex rather than as the gender people think them to be.

For a second time, the complainant points the trash person out. The cop makes an arrest, all done.

How would a complainant know whether a person is a man or a woman?

[Ethel mermania]

For a second time, the complainant points the trans person out. The cop makes an arrest, all done.

How would a complainant know whether a person is a man or a woman?

A trans person with a beard, or the complainant hears their voice.

My sole point is for the most of history using the wrong bathroom by sex has been the law, it's been enforced just fine. Saying it's unenforceable is absurd. Whether it should be enforced is a different question.

[Holy German Realm]

The entirety of the LGBT community has been ruined by SJW Tumblrinas for the sake of attention gain.

We're breaking our backs for a few landwhales who want to make obesity a gender and claim "PATRIARCHY" each time they don't get their way.

It's fine for LGBT to remain as is, but this exposé for their shenanigans has to be put down one way or another, whether it be the "If one person does it wrong, everyone else gets punished" or individual punishments.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

How would a complainant know whether a person is a man or a woman?

A trans person with a beard, or the complainant hears their voice.

My sole point is for the most of history using the wrong bathroom by sex has been the law, it's been enforced just fine. Saying it's unenforceable is absurd. Whether it should be enforced is a different question.

A woman who is transitioning as a man and has a beard would be ousted from the restroom, under your notion.

And true, that's a good point. I don't think it should be enforced, but I also got convinced by Gallo in a prior thread about restrooms that unisex restrooms is the way to do in facilities.

[Wallenburg]

The entirety of the LGBT community has been ruined by SJW Tumblrinas for the sake of attention gain.

We're breaking our backs for a few landwhales who want to make obesity a gender and claim "PATRIARCHY" each time they don't get their way.

It's fine for LGBT to remain as is, but this exposé for their shenanigans has to be put down one way or another, whether it be the "If one person does it wrong, everyone else gets punished" or individual punishments.

I highly doubt that the North Carolinian legislature consists of "SJW Tumblrinas".

[Philjia]

The entirety of the LGBT community has been ruined by SJW Tumblrinas for the sake of attention gain.

We're breaking our backs for a few landwhales who want to make obesity a gender and claim "PATRIARCHY" each time they don't get their way.

It's fine for LGBT to remain as is, but this exposé for their shenanigans has to be put down one way or another, whether it be the "If one person does it wrong, everyone else gets punished" or individual punishments.

But this legislation is trying to send us backwards from where we are now.

[Ethel mermania]

A trans person with a beard, or the complainant hears their voice.

My sole point is for the most of history using the wrong bathroom by sex has been the law, it's been enforced just fine. Saying it's unenforceable is absurd. Whether it should be enforced is a different question.

A woman who is transitioning as a man and has a beard would be ousted from the restroom, under your notion.

And true, that's a good point. I don't think it should be enforced, but I also got convinced by Gallo in a prior thread about restrooms that unisex restrooms is the way to do in facilities.

My first argument in this thread was a wrong one, as I did not understand the bill does define protected classes.

This arguement. About whether it can be enforced is a silly one it has been enforced for years. If it was never enforced there would be no need to extend the protected class.

I don't have a problem with unisex bathrooms, I have used them they are fine. I don't think it will add a y protection for trans folks, but that is another topic for a different thread.

[Liriena]

The entirety of the LGBT community has been ruined by SJW Tumblrinas for the sake of attention gain.

We're breaking our backs for a few landwhales who want to make obesity a gender and claim "PATRIARCHY" each time they don't get their way.

It's fine for LGBT to remain as is, but this exposé for their shenanigans has to be put down one way or another, whether it be the "If one person does it wrong, everyone else gets punished" or individual punishments.

Well, you added a lot.

Also, the use of "SJW" and Tumblr as slurs. Because who needs to be original and think outside of the zeitgeist, when you can be lazy and clichéd, and get some enthusiastic clapping from internet reactionaries?

[Grenartia]

Does it discriminate against womenor blacks because the bill lacks protection for them?

It doesn't lack protection for them. It preempts local ordinances with state law that does ban discrimination against the usual protected classes. This is anti-LGBT because it prevents LGBT people from being protected by the law from discrimination, even if their local government wants to extend them that protection.

If, somehow, the federal government prevented state governments from passing laws protecting black people from discrimination and undid any such existing laws, would you say that this move was not anti-black?

Silly Iffy, only the federal government can oppress people.

[Grenartia]

1. I don't see anything wrong with the bill. 2. People's privacy, both girls and boys, needs to be protected 3. and transgender people need help not coddling.

1. Of course you don't, since you know nothing about the issue, as you've already demonstrated.

2. This bill does nothing to protect anybody's privacy. In fact, it actively harms transgender people's privacy, and puts us at real risk of being beaten, raped, and even killed.

3. Define "help" and "coddling".

[Grenartia]

I'd rather have more power concentrated in the Federal government than in the states.

Things in American politics operate on a pendulum. While our generation may be fairly liberal now, it will get more conservative as it ages. It would be foolish to open Pandora's box and then later complain about the consequences when that large Federal power gets used against you. At least with the states, if you don't like how things are being run, you are always welcome to move another state. Whereas it is much more difficult to switch whole countries.

Trots has already established the facts as bullshit, so I'm going to address what passes for logic in your post.

Why should I have to move just to be treated like a human fucking being? What's the point in even having a bill of rights if "muh states rights" justifies the states oppressing people at every turn?

[Grenartia]

Simple, a person who looks like a woman enters the men's restroom, how does the police tell if this person is trans and has a right to be there, or a female who does not. TO arrest one needs to have a reasonable suspicion, and by forcing trans who can pass to use the restroom of their born sex, this makes it impossible to form that reasonable suspicion. This law actually lets men and women use the "wrong" restroom because there are trans who do pass and would be forced to use the restroom of their birth sex rather than as the gender people think them to be.

For a second time, the complainant points the trans person out. The cop makes an arrest, all done.

And this doesn't sound like a problem to you? That somebody can be arrested just for trying to piss in safety?

[Neutraligon]

For a second time, the complainant points the trans person out. The cop makes an arrest, all done.

And this doesn't sound like a problem to you? That somebody can be arrested just for trying to piss in safety?

Plus an arrest needs to be on reasonable suspicion of breaking a law. If trans people are forced to use the the restroom of their birth sex, then how can cops form a reasonable suspicion?

[Ifreann]

Simple, a person who looks like a woman enters the men's restroom, how does the police tell if this person is trans and has a right to be there, or a female who does not. TO arrest one needs to have a reasonable suspicion, and by forcing trans who can pass to use the restroom of their born sex, this makes it impossible to form that reasonable suspicion. This law actually lets men and women use the "wrong" restroom because there are trans who do pass and would be forced to use the restroom of their birth sex rather than as the gender people think them to be.

For a second time, the complainant points the trans person out. The cop makes an arrest, all done.

The complainant points someone out. A cop asks to see their birth certificate, since that's how one's sex is determined for the purposes of these laws. They don't have their birth certificate on them, and aren't inclined to go get it because someone thinks they're in the wrong bathroom. So I guess the cop needs to find a judge who'll issue a warrant to search someone's house for their birth certificate.

---

It doesn't lack protection for them. It preempts local ordinances with state law that does ban discrimination against the usual protected classes. This is anti-LGBT because it prevents LGBT people from being protected by the law from discrimination, even if their local government wants to extend them that protection.

If, somehow, the federal government prevented state governments from passing laws protecting black people from discrimination and undid any such existing laws, would you say that this move was not anti-black?

Silly Iffy, only the federal government can oppress people.

Them and city governments.

[54e]

This is very very simple to understand. Anyone who thinks that this law is remotely logical or enforceable is an imbecile fool. There are no exceptions.

[Jamzmania]

1. I don't see anything wrong with the bill. 2. People's privacy, both girls and boys, needs to be protected 3. and transgender people need help not coddling.

1. Of course you don't, since you know nothing about the issue, as you've already demonstrated.

2. This bill does nothing to protect anybody's privacy. In fact, it actively harms transgender people's privacy, and puts us at real risk of being beaten, raped, and even killed.

3. Define "help" and "coddling".

It helps to protect the privacy of men and women in spaces that are specifically exclusive to them. A man is not supposed to use the women's locker room and vice versa and it is a violation of people's privacy when the locker room, restroom, or other space that is supposed to be exclusive to their own sex is allowed to be used by people of the opposite sex.

Transgender people need "help" as in "medical and psychological help." They have a mental disorder that is being left untreated - actually, even worse, their delusions are being encouraged and reinforced. The search for actual solutions to gender identity disorder has halted, or at the very least greatly slowed, because the left thinks that THE solution is to encourage them to dive deeper into their disorder-induced delusions, which is only resulting in the extremely high suicide rate among transgender people and trouble for the rest of us.

[Vassenor]

1. Of course you don't, since you know nothing about the issue, as you've already demonstrated.

2. This bill does nothing to protect anybody's privacy. In fact, it actively harms transgender people's privacy, and puts us at real risk of being beaten, raped, and even killed.

3. Define "help" and "coddling".

It helps to protect the privacy of men and women in spaces that are specifically exclusive to them. A man is not supposed to use the women's locker room and vice versa and it is a violation of people's privacy when the locker room, restroom, or other space that is supposed to be exclusive to their own sex is allowed to be used by people of the opposite sex.

Transgender people need "help" as in "medical and psychological help." They have a mental disorder that is being left untreated - actually, even worse, their delusions are being encouraged and reinforced. The search for actual solutions to gender identity disorder has halted, or at the very least greatly slowed, because the left thinks that THE solution is to encourage them to dive deeper into their disorder-induced delusions, which is only resulting in the extremely high suicide rate among transgender people and trouble for the rest of us.

What makes it a delusion? And it's rhetoric like this and what it leads to that is the leading cause of transgender suicide. Supported transition actually makes a person less likely to commit suicide, not more.

[Grenartia]

1. Of course you don't, since you know nothing about the issue, as you've already demonstrated.

2. This bill does nothing to protect anybody's privacy. In fact, it actively harms transgender people's privacy, and puts us at real risk of being beaten, raped, and even killed.

3. Define "help" and "coddling".

1. It helps to protect the privacy of men and women in spaces that are specifically exclusive to them. A man is not supposed to use the women's locker room and vice versa and it is a violation of people's privacy when the locker room, restroom, or other space 2. that is supposed to be exclusive to their own sex is allowed to be used by people of the opposite sex.

3. Transgender people need "help" as in "medical and psychological help." 4. They have a mental disorder that is being left untreated - actually, even worse, 5. their delusions are being encouraged and reinforced. 6. The search for actual solutions to gender identity disorder has halted, or at the very least greatly slowed, 7. because the left thinks that THE solution is to encourage them to dive deeper into their disorder-induced delusions, 8. which is only resulting in the extremely high suicide rate among transgender people and 9. trouble for the rest of us.

1. Then this law fails, since it absolutely puts men in women's rooms, and women in men's rooms. Proof:





2. Which is bullshit because such spaces are defined based on gender, not sex, or else there's be pictures of penises and vaginas on the different rooms. That man in that picture? He was born with a vagina. That woman in the other picture? She was born with a penis. See the shitty consequences of this law?

3. That's the whole point of transitioning. You really don't get how this works.

4. Transition IS the treatment for gender dysphoria.

5. Not a delusion, sorry to burst your bubble. Your ideas on this subject are really about as incorrect as the Flat Earth Society's ideas on geography.

6. No. The 'solutions' you speak of have been tried, and they have failed.

7. Not a disorder, not a delusion. And you know the reason why transition is established (by the non-politically-biased APA) as the solution? BECAUSE IT FUCKING WORKS. And, it works better than anything tried before.

8. Which was undoubtedly even higher before transition was an option. And you know why its so high now? Because of people pushing shitty laws like this.

9. "Trouble for the rest of us." How fucking dare you. You don't get to say that we're causing you problems when you and your ilk have been the root cause of our problems for centuries.