Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/ben-carson-loretta-lynch-crap-222983

I think unfortunately the message is lost because the article has Ben Carson being the one saying comparing it to Jim Crow is silly lol. So you see you can see just by the comments on the article a lot of the stupid shit Carson has said has made people not take him seriously.

Though yeah, this new bathroom discrimination isn't even actually happening. There aren't people whose job it is to stand outside bathrooms and check to make sure you are using the right kind of bathroom. The law in North Carolina isn't even really enforceable.

Jim Crow had an ACTUAL effect on people lol. The worst thing to come out of the bathroom thing is some hurt feelings.

There is discriminating happening in regards to transgender people and public restrooms, but yes, saying it's equal (if that was the actual argument) to what Black people went through after the end of slavery and through the Jim Crow years does a disservice to those people.

Originally posted by Robtard
There is discriminating happening in regards to transgender people and public restrooms, but yes, saying it's equal (if that was the actual argument) to what Black people went through after the end of slavery and through the Jim Crow years does a disservice to those people.

You know what you just said got me to thinking..have we actually heard stories of transgender people being discriminated against in public bathrooms? I realize people say the law in NC is discrimination, I'm just wondering about actual acts of discrimination. I'm sure they happen, but I guess I figure when they do it would be bigger news? Something people could point to and say "see what this law is doing".

The law is the discriminating.

But it is the LAW!? I thought you LIBERALS always favored what the courts did? They have more rights then letting people decide things by voting.

Hey, I never said that!

Originally posted by Robtard
The law is the discriminating.

Okay so maybe you didn't actually read my full post. I just asked you for examples of transgender people suffering from this law. I did not ask you about the law itself. Like I said I'm sure they exist...I was just curious as to what the most egregious cases have been?

Oh and just out of curiosity what do you feel about the threats to pull funding over this law because it breaks "federal law" or some shit, but at the same time Obama said he'd veto anything to try to defund states with Sanctuary Cities, which I also think break the law technically?

Originally posted by Surtur
Okay so maybe you didn't actually read my full post. I just asked you for examples of transgender people suffering from this law. I did not ask you about the law itself. Like I said I'm sure they exist...I was just curious as to what the most egregious cases have been?

The law has not gone into effect, and the state is being sued to prevent it from being implemented.




Originally posted by Surtur
Oh and just out of curiosity what do you feel about the threats to pull funding over this law because it breaks "federal law" or some shit, but at the same time Obama said he'd veto anything to try to defund states with Sanctuary Cities, which I also think break the law technically?

Apples and oranges.

HB2 violates Title VII and IX of the Civil Rights Act.

"Sanctuary Cities" do not violate immigration law because mayors have discretionary authority with regard to enforcement.

So then the law thus far hasn't hurt anyone, and couldn't even really be enforced anyways if it did come into effect. Have I said anything incorrect?

Also btw, Sanctuary Cities do not violate any laws at all then? Or do you mean they only violate the law if a mayor decides to allow it or what? On what basis then did they want to pull funding from these cities(or states)?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The law has not gone into effect, and the state is being sued to prevent it from being implemented.






Apples and oranges.

HB2 violates Title VII and IX of the Civil Rights Act.

"Sanctuary Cities" do not violate immigration law because mayors have discretionary authority with regard to enforcement.

When are you going to go through with your sex change?

Surtur,

"It hasn't affected anyone, yet." That's a silly dismissive stance, don't you thing?

The only thing more ridiculous than this was someone from this forum (I believe), comparing the plight of homosexuals to the Civil Rights movement..

Originally posted by Robtard
Surtur,

"It hasn't affected anyone, yet." That's a silly dismissive stance, don't you thing?

I see, so it bothers you when people dismiss things for silly reasons? Yeah I definitely agree with you on that and just wish it'd bother you more often with other issues too, but baby steps.

But you see you didn't mention what I said after. I said it hasn't hurt anyone and it can't be enforced. Do you disagree?

Originally posted by Surtur
So then the law thus far hasn't hurt anyone, and couldn't even really be enforced anyways if it did come into effect. Have I said anything incorrect?

The law has not hurt anyone because it has been blocked from going into effect.

And it most certainly could be enforced.

Prior to this law, transgender people have used the public restrooms that correspond to their gender expression without incident.

What this law does, is make that a crime, when it was not before.

It forces people who, for all intents and purposes, appear to be women to use men's restrooms, and vice versa, or be criminals.

It does the exact thing it aims to prevent, which is to put people who appear to be one gender in the restroom of the other.

It is a solution in search of a problem.




Originally posted by Surtur
Also btw, Sanctuary Cities do not violate any laws at all then? Or do you mean they only violate the law if a mayor decides to allow it or what? On what basis then did they want to pull funding from these cities(or states)?

If someone is in the country unlawfully and witnesses a crime, he may not come forward or cooperate with authorities if he risks deportation in doing so.

Mayors of so-called sanctuary cities are using their discretionary authority in enforcing the law to not arrest or prosecute material witnesses to crimes.

It is not blanket immunity for unlawful immigrants.

If constituents do not approve of how a mayor executes the law, they are free to recall him or elect a different mayor in the next term.

State legislatures, however, do not have the right to interfere with the lawful executive actions of an elected representative, because they do not like them.

Explain how it could be enforced. Or rather, explain how it can be enforced without hiring dick checkers outside every public bathroom. Has there been any talk of doing this? Or of any bathroom police of any kind that would enforce this?

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
When are you going to go through with your sex change?

If I was interested in changing my sex, then I would not be gay.

Originally posted by Surtur
Explain how it could be enforced. Or rather, explain how it can be enforced without hiring dick checkers outside every public bathroom. Has there been any talk of doing this? Or of any bathroom police of any kind that would enforce this?

Most laws are not enforced in real time like traffic violations.

Usually, someone reports a crime, police gather evidence, and a judge issues an arrest warrant.

There does not need to be a police officer posted outside of public restrooms checking IDs, because the law turns every suspicious busybody into the bathroom police.

Originally posted by Surtur
I see, so it bothers you when people dismiss things for silly reasons? Yeah I definitely agree with you on that and just wish it'd bother you more often with other issues too, but baby steps.

But you see you didn't mention what I said after. I said it hasn't hurt anyone and it can't be enforced. Do you disagree?

Again, the "It hasn't hurt anyone yet" is a silly stance to ignore an unjust law.

It could be enforced like any number of other laws. But even going with your pov that it can't be enforced, that's still no reason to ignore an unjust law.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Usually, someone reports a crime, police gather evidence, and a judge issues an arrest warrant.

Just to be clear, you think they would serve arrest warrants to people who do this? Or are you just talking about the process of how laws are enforced?



I mean if they are just calling up the cops with "creepy dude is creeping around this public bathroom" they'd probably show up regardless of this law, right?

Just out of curiosity, could a cop demand a dick check? Say the law went through and then some lady see's another lady she doesn't think is a real lady and calls the cops. Can the cop demand the person prove what gender they are? Or I suppose the cop could come up with some lame excuse for why a cavity search needed to be done? But then if you've had your dick removed then I..I don't even know what that looks or feels like. I don't know if a person could even tell a faux vagina from a real one? I've never seen what the parts these people have look like once their surgery is over.

This makes me wonder. Male and female bathrooms have pictorials over them to distinguish for those who can't read. What pic would they use for transgende bathrooms?

There are no transgender only restrooms that I am aware of, there are some gender neutral restrooms where anyone can use.

Originally posted by Surtur
Just to be clear, you think they would serve arrest warrants to people who do this? Or are you just talking about the process of how laws are enforced?

I can foresee it happening, yes.




Originally posted by Surtur
I mean if they are just calling up the cops with "creepy dude is creeping around this public bathroom" they'd probably show up regardless of this law, right?

Right. And voyeurism and assault are already illegal, so if someone went into a restroom with the intention of spying on someone or raping them, they would already be breaking the law, regardless of what sign is on the door. Someone who is willing to violate the rights of another person, as well as break the law, is not going to have any compunction about transgressing bathroom etiquette, so the law does not even prevent the thing it purports to.




Originally posted by Surtur
Just out of curiosity, could a cop demand a dick check? Say the law went through and then some lady see's another lady she doesn't think is a real lady and calls the cops. Can the cop demand the person prove what gender they are? Or I suppose the cop could come up with some lame excuse for why a cavity search needed to be done?

Yes. An officer could claim that it is plainly obvious a person is transgender and demand to search her. An officer could arrest a transgender person for suspicion of violating the bathroom law, and search her while she is under arrest. An officer could claim that the very presence of a transgender person in the restroom is existent threat to the cisgender people in the restroom, and demand to search her. An officer could claim that a transgender person leaving the restroom is literally a suspect attempting to flee the scene of a crime, and demand to search her. It is pretty gross.




Originally posted by Surtur
But then if you've had your dick removed then I..I don't even know what that looks or feels like. I don't know if a person could even tell a faux vagina from a real one? I've never seen what the parts these people have look like once their surgery is over.

Vaginoplasties are virtually indistinguishable from natural vaginas.

Except for the fact that they aren't real.

http://www.naturalblaze.com/2016/05/americans-distracted-by-the-transgender-bathroom-argument-while-3-nuclear-disasters-unfold.html

Glad the media has their priorities straight.

http://www.advocate.com/transgender/2016/5/11/north-carolina-police-will-not-enforce-anti-lgbt-house-bill-2

Advocate's a rag, but this is interesting.

Apparently, the North Carolina bill is a toothless law. A police representative claimed not only will they not arrest or force someone to use a bathroom, they aren't even sure how they could enforce this law if they wanted to.

What's going on? I don't really understand what the governor is trying to prove, or what he hopes to gain..

Georgian ALCU leader resigns over transgender movement.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/2/maya-dillard-smith-georgia-aclu-leader-resigns-ove/

North Carolina should exercise its right to secede from the union after all, these transgender people aren't counted as whole people, they are 3/5th gender iirc and are a good resource in picking cotton.

This is just getting tiresome. If you were born with a dick USE THE MALE BATHROOM.

Why the f*ck are we spending so much god damn energy on this shit? We have real problems and our president is issuing orders out about friggin bathrooms.

If using a certain bathroom hurts someone they are mentally ill. Take a piss and be done with it. It's like the entire country has to change because .03% of people are uncomfortable. Stop catering to the mentally ill. If someone thinks they are Superman we aren't going to encourage them to leap off buildings or jump in front of bullets, are we?

A few decades from now are we going to be looking back and wondering how we could ever encourage people, especially young people, to mutilate their genitals in order to better fit with what they IMAGINE themselves to be?