U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:19 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
21,876 posts, read 27,138,998 times
Reputation: 8943

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by vulfpeck View Post
There's nothing wrong with you suing for harassment or bad treatment, but there shouldn't be laws allowing you to sue for it but not your coworker, who may not be a race, gender or "identity" singled out for special treatment.

HB2 didn't take away your ability to sue, only your ability to sue for "discrimination" in a state court.



I'm pretty sure Karma is on the side of fairness and freedom so I'll take my chances
You clearly don't understand what's involved in a discrimination lawsuit. This thread is not the place to elaborate, so I won't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:21 AM
 
1,351 posts, read 740,875 times
Reputation: 913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stagemomma View Post
,
Ah, you have a valid opinion about that, nicely stated. In a democratic society we should be free to choose that framework for our government, and many states do vary on how to approach this.

Presuming you are correct, wouldn't the better course of action be to remove existing anti-discrimination laws from the current state code?
Of course, no one prefers contradictory legislation, but you have to start somewhere. As you know, it's very hard to get rid of laws that people perceive as personally beneficial, even if they know they are unconstitutional.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:25 AM
 
234 posts, read 361,637 times
Reputation: 264
The right to sue needs to be changed. I don't like individual cities setting minimum wage. I don't like individual cities passing any laws on constitutional sweeping issues. Those should be for state and federal courts. I am always for a citizens right to seek justice when they think they have been wronged.

However people keep clouding this issue where most people disagree with it. Most of us who disagree with it say a few things to ourselves.....

1)We have been relieving waste in the presence of trans folks for years with no issues. With the exception of where minors are involved, most of us don't have a problem with trans folks. The # of incidence you will even knowingly encounter a conflict is so low, we were never worried about it.
2)If there was an issue with 1 above, businesses and police had some recourse to remove the offender from the facility....trans or not
3)The law doesn't require proof of your idea that your believe you are the opposite gender than your biology (really it's impossible to), so any man, who believes they are a man can walk into a womens facility and now the business and police have no recourse for removal.
4)Men don't care what facilities women use....use ours, theirs...whatever
5)Restate, most of us don't care what facilities trans folks use but the law throws minors/adults/trans/non-trans all into a big pot and says......"You can no longer be asked to leave based on your sex, so now it's a free for all because legal recourse.....is now illegal"

People are trying to make this as a hate issue, and it's not. Most of us are worried about 1)Minors (especially girls) and women (especially locker rooms).....and heterosexual male monsters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:28 AM
 
1,351 posts, read 740,875 times
Reputation: 913
Quote:
Originally Posted by arbyunc View Post
I thought about addressing the false assumptions in your post, but then I thought "What's the use"? Probably better just let it go, and leave you to wallow in the ignorance of your words.
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbound_295 View Post
You clearly don't understand what's involved in a discrimination lawsuit. This thread is not the place to elaborate, so I won't.
Seems like we have a couple graduates from the Trump School of Debate lurking today. Words are hard, I know. Especially if your argument forces you to confront the concept of fundamental rights when you're used to assuming that darn near everything should be a government-mandated "right".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:32 AM
 
1,351 posts, read 740,875 times
Reputation: 913
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneluckymug View Post
1)We have been relieving waste in the presence of trans folks for years with no issues. With the exception of where minors are involved, most of us don't have a problem with trans folks. The # of incidence you will even knowingly encounter a conflict is so low, we were never worried about it.
2)If there was an issue with 1 above, businesses and police had some recourse to remove the offender from the facility....trans or not
3)The law doesn't require proof of your idea that your believe you are the opposite gender than your biology (really it's impossible to), so any man, who believes they are a man can walk into a womens facility and now the business and police have no recourse for removal.
4)Men don't care what facilities women use....use ours, theirs...whatever
5)Restate, most of us don't care what facilities trans folks use but the law throws minors/adults/trans/non-trans all into a big pot and says......"You can no longer be asked to leave based on your sex, so now it's a free for all because legal recourse.....is now illegal"

People are trying to make this as a hate issue, and it's not. Most of us are worried about 1)Minors (especially girls) and women (especially locker rooms).....and heterosexual male monsters.
Well said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:36 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
21,876 posts, read 27,138,998 times
Reputation: 8943
Quote:
Originally Posted by vulfpeck View Post
Seems like we have a couple graduates from the Trump School of Debate lurking today. Words are hard, I know. Especially if your argument forces you to confront the concept of fundamental rights when you're used to assuming that darn near everything should be a government-mandated "right".
You dragged stuff up in another HB2 thread that was not related & several pages were delete as unrelated. No thanks. Not doing that again. As the OP went into other aspects of the law I was OK with that, but I'm going no further.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Greenville SC 'Waterfall City'
7,533 posts, read 3,936,834 times
Reputation: 2847
What is confusing to me is we always hear about how people should accept who and what they are, because they were born that way. This is good advice for most people with some exceptions like pedophiles.

But regarding 'transgenders;, we are not supposed to tell them to accept that they are their biological sex, even though it is not possible for a person to change their sex. The former chief pyschiatrist at John Hopkins hospital has said transgenderism is similar to anorexia where skinny girls think they are overweight, and society pandering to 'transgender' beliefs would be lke society pandering to anorexics, accepting their beliefs that they are overweight when they are not.

I think this is an interesting contradiction, especially since 'transgenders' are lumped in with LGB.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:41 AM
 
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
21,876 posts, read 27,138,998 times
Reputation: 8943
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneluckymug View Post
The right to sue needs to be changed. I don't like individual cities setting minimum wage. I don't like individual cities passing any laws on constitutional sweeping issues. Those should be for state and federal courts. I am always for a citizens right to seek justice when they think they have been wronged.

However people keep clouding this issue where most people disagree with it. Most of us who disagree with it say a few things to ourselves.....

1)We have been relieving waste in the presence of trans folks for years with no issues. With the exception of where minors are involved, most of us don't have a problem with trans folks. The # of incidence you will even knowingly encounter a conflict is so low, we were never worried about it.
2)If there was an issue with 1 above, businesses and police had some recourse to remove the offender from the facility....trans or not
3)The law doesn't require proof of your idea that your believe you are the opposite gender than your biology (really it's impossible to), so any man, who believes they are a man can walk into a womens facility and now the business and police have no recourse for removal.
4)Men don't care what facilities women use....use ours, theirs...whatever
5)Restate, most of us don't care what facilities trans folks use but the law throws minors/adults/trans/non-trans all into a big pot and says......"You can no longer be asked to leave based on your sex, so now it's a free for all because legal recourse.....is now illegal"

People are trying to make this as a hate issue, and it's not. Most of us are worried about 1)Minors (especially girls) and women (especially locker rooms).....and heterosexual male monsters.
How about women worry about themselves. Make no mistake, the lawmakers aren't worried about women. They took away the right to sue for gender discrimination, or any other discrimination, in state courts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:44 AM
 
1,351 posts, read 740,875 times
Reputation: 913
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbound_295 View Post
You dragged stuff up in another HB2 thread that was not related & several pages were delete as unrelated. No thanks. Not doing that again. As the OP went into other aspects of the law I was OK with that, but I'm going no further.
The OP's quote referred to Charlotte's ordinance as a legal battle for equality. It surely seems relevant that the discrimination law it created actually guaranteed unequal treatment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2016, 11:45 AM
 
5,078 posts, read 2,461,261 times
Reputation: 4639
Quote:
Originally Posted by vulfpeck View Post
Not directly, but it would mean that colleges would have to let men compete as women, which may eventually affect what the Olympics decides to allow.
That's a good point. Currently, many of the sports scholarships for females are filled by international applicants. Now, those scholarships can be filled by men who want to be women. Imagine a female college level rowing team filled with men who want to be women.

It seems like a huge step back for women's rights.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top