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.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,678,989 times
Reputation: 10256
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConcernedCitizenClinton
So with the inverse, you're OK with fake transgenders using the wrong restrooms and creeping out the rest of the patrons? Repealing HB2 would allow that if cities like Charlotte and Seattle have their way.
It says in the law special exceptions are allowed to provide single occupancy restrooms.
I accept that some out of Towner's may be stuck in a hard place. I suggest protesting in their states for the right to change their sex like NC provides. Those states are Idaho, Kansas, Ohio, and Tennessee.
How do you suggest preventing the abuse of Charlotte style laws? The majority of the less than 1% of the population are protected under this law, and the rest of society can use the restroom without creeps.
As a female, I have occasionally been in a ladies room with a woman who I later realized had been born male & might still be. Number of problems? Zero.
If a pervert goes in the ladies room rest assured that they weren't waiting for a law. The Charlotte law made it legal for transgender individuals to use the rest room that they appear to belong in. It did not make it legal for anyone to go in a rest room to get their rocks off.
Yes, yes it did. You are blatantly ignoring the Seattle example.
Charlotte's law let's you self-identify with no requirements to prove you truly believe it. The gentleman in Seattle was not removed from the Ladies locker room because he knew his rights.
Location: The place where the road & the sky collide
23,814 posts, read 34,678,989 times
Reputation: 10256
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConcernedCitizenClinton
Yes, yes it did. You are blatantly ignoring the Seattle example.
Charlotte's law let's you self-identify with no requirements to prove you truly believe it. The gentleman in Seattle was not removed from the Ladies locker room because he knew his rights.
Think whatever you want. You are attempting to argue with unconcerned females. If that makes you feel superior, knock yourself out. I feel no need to continue this. I gave my view.
So with the inverse, you're OK with fake transgenders using the wrong restrooms and creeping out the rest of the patrons? Repealing HB2 would allow that if cities like Charlotte and Seattle have their way.
It says in the law special exceptions are allowed to provide single occupancy restrooms.
I accept that some out of Towner's may be stuck in a hard place. I suggest protesting in their states for the right to change their sex like NC provides. Those states are Idaho, Kansas, Ohio, and Tennessee.
How do you suggest preventing the abuse of Charlotte style laws? The majority of the less than 1% of the population are protected under this law, and the rest of society can use the restroom without creeps.
What were they doing before HB2, then?
I do not recall dozens of creepers in the ladies restrooms and I've been using them in North Carolina without parental supervision for a few decades now.
HB2 was a discriminatory solution to a problem that did not exist, tacked onto a bill about wage and employment rights.
Period.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
You don't recall it because while HB2 was signed into law after Charlotte, it went into effect before Charlotte's. Charlotte's law would have shoved the Seattle mans rights down all private businesses throats. HB2 stopped it before that happened. This information is found in the "Background and Passage" section of the wikipedia article for anyone to verify if they want.
You don't recall it because while HB2 was signed into law after Charlotte, it went into effect before Charlotte's. Charlotte's law would have shoved the Seattle mans rights down all private businesses throats. HB2 stopped it before that happened. This information is found in the "Background and Passage" section of the wikipedia article for anyone to verify if they want.
I really doubt it would have been much of an issue.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
You don't recall it because while HB2 was signed into law after Charlotte, it went into effect before Charlotte's. Charlotte's law would have shoved the Seattle mans rights down all private businesses throats. HB2 stopped it before that happened. This information is found in the "Background and Passage" section of the wikipedia article for anyone to verify if they want.
This is a false narrative being touted by the religicrats.
It's roundly repeated, but not true in the slightest.
And the CLT NDO didn't have any provision for damages. You should read the ordinance if you're going to continue to discuss it. Wikipedia is easily edited, and not a good source for information regarding hot-button topics like this.
Oh come on. Wikipedia is heavily monitored by human and bots. It is a great source of information, regardless of politics. They even list sources, if you don't trust the links to legislature that I provided. That article is very down the middle. Can you disprove that the actions of the guy in Seattle would not be legal in Charlotte? What does religion have to do with this?
Y'all are so funny. When you run out of arguments to facts, you bring in gender, religion, or some other unrelated topic. I accept that Redzin and I will never see eye to eye on the issue, but saying I'm religious, insinuating I enjoy dominating women, or that Wikipedia is not a good source of information is ridiculous.
I said religicrats were touting the false narrative, not that you were a religicrat. And I never even considered whether you "enjoy dominating women", much less insinuated it. Weird.
But tell me, have you bothered to read Charlotte's non-discrimination ordinance? The entire thing? All the way to the end when it talks about violations? If so, please share with us all the penalty for throwing out a man from the women's room. And tell us if you'd allow that penalty to stop you from throwing a pervert out of a private business' bathroom... why, or why not?
I took southbounds post to mean I enjoyed dominating, or expressing superiority, over females.
Do you have a link to the actual full city code? I honestly searched, but only found the amendments to the code that were passed with the Charlotte bill. They did not appear to add any penalties for breaking the ordinance. It's hard to search their site on an iPad. Their website does state violating it is a misdemeanor.
As far as throwing a man out of the women's bathroom when he is allowed to be there, I'm afraid I'd have to let him be there as long as he is not taking pictures. He is quite literally within his rights at that point, as demonstrated in Seattle. A man was thrown out of Target this summer, but only because he took pictures of someone in a stall.
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.
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.
