And how did that turn out? People who saw value in their position sent them donations, patronized their business (when open), and so on. The free market at work.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Am I Vulgar for not wanting men in woman's bathrooms?
- Thread starter DragonGunner
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
And how did that turn out? People who saw value in their position sent them donations, patronized their business (when open), and so on. The free market at work.
hoosierdoc
Freed prisoner
Targets policy does not say it's only for transgendered people. It says go with whichever you feel is right.
I have said this a thousand times. What makes you transgendered enough? A purse? A wig? Pant suit? Heels? 4 of 12 factors? What if you're a male living life as a female but cross dressing as a male?
are they going to investigate your personal life and commitment to gender in order to determine if you qualify for the bathroom you used?
I have said this a thousand times. What makes you transgendered enough? A purse? A wig? Pant suit? Heels? 4 of 12 factors? What if you're a male living life as a female but cross dressing as a male?
are they going to investigate your personal life and commitment to gender in order to determine if you qualify for the bathroom you used?
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
If we set up financial and psychological support for rape victims, does that make rape morally acceptable?
Rape victims don't choose to be raped. On the other hand, no one is forcing businesses to take a stand on social issues, in either direction. Those that do so accept the results, both positive and negative.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
I don't know what to say at this point other than that people like you are a disgrace to civilized society.
A family business deserves to be on the business end of an organized and highly destructive national smear campaign for daring to honestly answer a question?
It is perfectly acceptable to force normal people to hide while allowing mentally defective people to impose themselves on society? You really believe that? It seems to be what you are saying.
You believe that anyone dissenting with the social re-engineering promoted by a microscopic deserved to be terrorized into submission but consider it barbaric to think that these people might push back?
You, sir, do not deserve the freedom you have. People who do would not deprive others of the same, to be able to live their lives in peace, NOT SOME MISGUIDED NOTION OF A "RIGHT" TO IMPOSE ONE'S SELF ON OTHERS.
That there is even an argument to this is amazing.
If you have a package use the "I have a package" restroom.
If you are not endowed with a package use the "I do not have a Package" restroom.
Pretty damned simple really.
2% of the population is swinging a huge hammer on this. PC thought/actions will be the ruination of us as a society. Period.
Human rights.....LGBT rights have not a damn thing to do with this issue.
If you have a package use the "I have a package" restroom.
If you are not endowed with a package use the "I do not have a Package" restroom.
Pretty damned simple really.
2% of the population is swinging a huge hammer on this. PC thought/actions will be the ruination of us as a society. Period.
Human rights.....LGBT rights have not a damn thing to do with this issue.
Is that to imply 48% of the population is swinging a medium or small sized hammer, while the other 50% have no hammer at all?
I'm thinking we should just label doors either XX or XY.
Liberty Sanders
Master
You've lost me here. Who is being forced to hide? Who are you describing as "mentally defective?" Who is trying to impose themselves on others?
Good point I guess.
Meh, I guess? I don't see how declining to shop somewhere, and letting others know why, is "terrorizing" someone. That's setting a pretty low bar compared to actual terrorism, don't you think?
Personally, your idea of "terrorism" reminds me of the time Huckabee called boycotts against Chik-Fil-A "economic terrorism.". Oddly enough, when Doritos introduced rainbow-colored snacks, his views on boycotts changed. Convenient.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
When the owners of a family business can't give an honest answer to an unanticipated question, or have to preemptive anticipate in order to anticipate a ruinous smear campaign, that constitutes being forced to hide in my reckoning.
Anyone who can't understand what gender he or she is has a serious problem. Inability to tell the difference constitutes a mental defect turning on the inability to understand and/or accept objective reality.
Believing that the rest of us should live our lives at the mercy (obtained only through capitulation) of these freaks is truly reprehensible.
Liberty Sanders
Master
Live our lives at their mercy?
I don't understand why people are transgender. I've certainly seen enough about it now to see that it is a genuine condition, and that people who have it can't wish it away. It is a mental defect? I suppose that terminology is accurate. But describing such people as being unable to understand objective reality is absurd. They're painfully aware of what their gender is or is SUPPOSED to be. Their reality is that their hardware and their software is incompatible.
If such a person enters my restroom, or my wife's (I asked her and she is utterly indifferent to the possibility) discreetly enters a restroom stall, takes care of business and leaves, this imposes nothing on me. Or on you.
Can't handle it? Pee at home.
Personally, I find this entirely ridiculous. First off, I don't get the appeal to the supposed loss of the "America that was". Last I checked, that America included racism, government enforced segregation, forcing American citizens into concentration camps based on their ethnicity, genocide against native peoples, and a myriad of other abuses. Why the hell anyone would want America to return to that, I have no idea.
Second, I don't quite get this conflation of trans-gendered people with child molesters. They aren't even remotely the same groups. It would be like me getting upset at the US government allowing immigration of Cambodians because they might be Nickelback fans. While, it's certainly possible that one of these Cambodian immigrants might be a Nickelback fan (poor taste knows no national boundaries after all), it would be literally the height of insanity to assume they all are and make policies based on that assumption.
Finally, for those who are getting their underwear in a knot, just to be clear:
You want this person to go into the bathroom with your wives and daughters...
and you want this person to go into the bathrooms with your husbands and sons...
Do I have that right?
Second, I don't quite get this conflation of trans-gendered people with child molesters. They aren't even remotely the same groups. It would be like me getting upset at the US government allowing immigration of Cambodians because they might be Nickelback fans. While, it's certainly possible that one of these Cambodian immigrants might be a Nickelback fan (poor taste knows no national boundaries after all), it would be literally the height of insanity to assume they all are and make policies based on that assumption.
Finally, for those who are getting their underwear in a knot, just to be clear:
You want this person to go into the bathroom with your wives and daughters...
and you want this person to go into the bathrooms with your husbands and sons...
Do I have that right?
Liberty Sanders
Master
Personally, I find this entirely ridiculous. First off, I don't get the appeal to the supposed loss of the "America that was". Last I checked, that America included racism, government enforced segregation, forcing American citizens into concentration camps based on their ethnicity, genocide against native peoples, and a myriad of other abuses. Why the hell anyone would want America to return to that, I have no idea.
Second, I don't quite get this conflation of trans-gendered people with child molesters. They aren't even remotely the same groups. It would be like me getting upset at the US government allowing immigration of Cambodians because they might be Nickelback fans. While, it's certainly possible that one of these Cambodian immigrants might be a Nickelback fan (poor taste knows no national boundaries after all), it would be literally the height of insanity to assume they all are and make policies based on that assumption.
Finally, for those who are getting their underwear in a knot, just to be clear:
You want this person to go into the bathroom with your wives and daughters...
and you want this person to go into the bathrooms with your husbands and sons...
Do I have that right?
The first person depicted is not transgender.
Should the same logic be directed at people that get upset because there are separate restrooms for the two genders? If you're a dude, pee in the men's room. If you're a lady, pee in the ladies' room. If you can't handle that, pee at home.
Target can do whatever they want. I'll make my shopping decisions with all of their policies in mind. On my property, my business, I'd like to reserver the right to set my own policies. In schools, court houses, post offices, etc. I'm ok with status quo. I don't need the government social engineering with the rest rooms.
- Jan 12, 2012
- 27,286
- 113
I see a few problems here:
You are right. People who suffer from such defects cannot wish them away, otherwise we would have no need for psychiatric treatment.
I do not buy for one instant into the notion that there is an inherent incompatibility aside from a delusional fantasy of being other than one is.
If it were that discreet, then why are we having a national temper tantrum for legal protections? Why was the little freak in Colorado in court demanding (and receiving) access to the girls' room when the school bent over backward for him right down to and including making available the staff single-user facilities?
You may wish to notice that the demand isn't even for receiving any particular conditions but rather using the force of government to force acceptance of their issues. Discreetly do their business or have a third option? Rejected because it doesn't come with official imprimatur on their behavior. Now, I am going to broaden the discussion to further illustrate this point. Accept civil unions with all the legal implications of marriage minus the 'm' word? Hell no! It doesn't come with official imprimatur and legally mandated acceptance. This isn't about live and let live. It isn't about any real grievance. It is about acceptance and pushing a social agenda.
Can't handle it you ask? That is a two way street. Why should it be expected of most all Americans to accept it or go elsewhere but we have to make clear the way for a sub-single digit percentage minority on their terms?
Liberty Sanders
Master
Why?
Because in this country a majority cannot suppress the basic rights and human dignity of a minority, particularly when exercise of those rights harms no one.
No, "defense of marriage" amendments often included "or marriage-like status" clauses specifically to prevent that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._state_constitutional_amendments_banning_same-sex_unions
Besides, how did they even propose that without getting laughed out of the room? "Sure, separate but equal didn't work last time, and it's a reminder of one of the most shameful episodes in our nation's history, but let's try it again and see if it sticks this time." Really?
