Van Zandt: Show nixed because N Carolina law is 'evil virus'

I just don't see how allowing someone with male or female parts using the bathroom of the opposite is a good idea.  Oh, I get that it happens when people take small children in with them for safety.  However, you can bet that as sick with sin as our nation is that this will not go well.  You will have so-called transgendered folks being mistreated this way.  You will have people who just want to be creepers and possible sex crime offenders trying the boundaries without the laws. 

To prove the point, they've already had a man in N.C. who is hanging out nude in a ladies locker room.  He "says" that he is transgendered now even though he has never had issues with it before.  Truthfully, I think he likes the media attention. 

I don't think that this transgendered bathroom thing is going to be fair at all.  It is impossible this time.  They are trying to force this upon us, but this is clearly a case where basic human rights will be violated either way.  If these so-called transgenders are allowed to use the bathroom of whatever they identify with, then that opens the door for more horrid behavior from all sorts of people and strips away my right to not having to be uncomfortable with a woman in the bathroom.  If laws like the ones in N. Carolina and Mississippi pass and stand, then they will say that they have been discriminated against.  No one wins on this one.

I think this whole issue now is showing that we were right about the 'slippery slope' that so many predicted when we legalized and forcibly normalized aberrant behavior like homosexuality.  Now, transgenders want to be in opposite bathrooms.  You already have cases around the country challenging laws about multiple wives.  You have had a case already about marrying an animal.  You have organizations pushing for the age of consent of children to be lowered.

What do I think that the end result?  Look at the Roman Empire.  They were also a Democratic Republic as we are towards their end.  When the door opened for an anything goes mentality towards sexuality, they crumbled.  When all this becomes legal and morals are forgotten, then the USA will also be in ruins.  We are already headed that way.

Now, I will sit back and wait for the bashing to begin.

alldatndensum wrote:I just don't see how allowing someone with male or female parts using the bathroom of the opposite is a good idea.  Oh, I get that it happens when people take small children in with them for safety.  However, you can bet that as sick with sin as our nation is that this will not go well.

Ever share a wide (open) urinal with a gay dude?  Its no different, and no issue.
Being exposed at the urinal doesn't makes him a creep; its not the urinal or the meat.
Most likely, he would be a creep anyway, fully clothed and not peeing.

Bathroom use shouldn't have all this drama.

When I worked at a recovery home multiple years ago, people went into the wrong bathrooms all the time.
If I was firing one out in the john and saw a woman's shoe show up at the stall next to mine, I didn't freak out and call my local congressman.  I thought "Hi Debbie!  How are you today?" was the correct response.

alldatndensum wrote:
I don't think that this transgendered bathroom thing is going to be fair at all.  It is impossible this time.  They are trying to force this upon us, but this is clearly a case where basic human rights will be violated either way.  If these so-called transgenders are allowed to use the bathroom of whatever they identify with, then that opens the door for more horrid behavior from all sorts of people and strips away my right to not having to be uncomfortable with a woman in the bathroom.  If laws like the ones in N. Carolina and Mississippi pass and stand, then they will say that they have been discriminated against.  No one wins on this one.

None of this would happen if there were ugly trannys.  I'm serious.
Some Shemales are prettier than a lot of girls.  No one would KNOW they used the ladies room in NC unless they draw attention to the fact they weren't born a woman.

Its not like there's a gender check happening at any of these doors.  

alldatndensum wrote:Look at the Roman Empire.  They were also a Democratic Republic as we are towards their end.  When the door opened for an anything goes mentality towards sexuality, they crumbled.  When all this becomes legal and morals are forgotten, then the USA will also be in ruins.  We are already headed that way.

A bit over the top to compare the fall of Rome to the state telling people where to poop, don't you think?

alldatndensum wrote:Now, I will sit back and wait for the bashing to begin.

No.

The pagans want what pagans want, but take heart...God is still in control.

well alldat, I would agree that America is The Newest in a long line of Roman Empires that will fail...sooner than later...but its not like the USA will go away..what is failing is the old ways of the last 60 or so years... The usa will still exist just like europe but just like europe it will be a changed country with new laws... Poll's now show that more than 50% of the American population have no problem with the whole gay/lesbian/transgendered marriage and equal rights issue..For me personally I do think the constitution should guarantee them rights. You say "They are trying to force this upon us" but if more than half the country agrees with the gay/lesbian/transgendered view then they are not forcing anything on you..its the will of the majority and thats how our country works...(I dont think the roman empire failed over sexual anything goes ...I think it was just their time to be beaten and taken over by someone else..its the way of history)

my right to not having to be uncomfortable with a woman in the bathroom.

actually a "woman" in the bathroom wouldn't bother me at all and a transgendered "man" in the bathroom my wife is using wouldn't bother me either.. would you rather the guy comes in the mens bathroom in his dress, pulls down his panty hose and go..are you comfortable with that or are ya gonna bash the guy or say something rude?

How did the " transgendered " people survive 20-30 years ago ?

Why can't we just have some commonsense about bathroom usage, because this isn't rocket science. Unless of course, there is more of a social agenda at play here ?

Looks like North Carolina is giving in...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/north-carolina-softens-anti-transgender-law-215259454.html?ref=gs

And that is why the stuff that we talked about in the Corporate Hostage thread happens.  It is effective.

Savage Amusement wrote:You say "They are trying to force this upon us" but if more than half the country agrees with the gay/lesbian/transgendered view then they are not forcing anything on you..its the will of the majority and thats how our country works...

If you look at democracy purely from a statistical point of view, then I can see why you say this. But democracy shouldn't JUST be about what the majority wants. When the people are deeply divided about a certain subject, then it doesn't look so good when the group that's just a little bigger than the other group, gets its way as soon as they reach this majority. This will only enforce division within the people, and the democracy will decline to become a bland "dictatorship of the majority".

I see alot of laws and principles being pushed down people's throats (also here in Europe), and most of the times I think: how different this would be if only the so called "liberals" would have communicated in a respectful and patient manner with the "conservatives" (and vice versa, of course). Of course some people do not like the change, but at least they could be given the feeling that the other have listened to them (without any contempt, that is).

I understand your point Andreas89 but the truth of the matter is in the USA the constitution is the rule of law...not even the majority can change that..what the majority can do however is elect certain people who appoint like minded judges that uphold and interpret the constitution... Even the will and vote of the people can and is overturned because it goes against what the constitution says..For example: if the USA really wanted marriage to be between a man and a woman only then the constitution must be changed to reflect that...there must be a constitutional amendment that states that marriage is between a man and a woman only and that the rights of certain people (in this example homosexuals) are null and void...of course that would mean changing existing amendments and adding a new one...

Savage Amusement wrote:I understand your point Andreas89 but the truth of the matter is in the USA the constitution is the rule of law...

Sure, but how will it be interpreted ? By the original intent of the authors ? Or by what the people now want it to be interpreted as ?

sentient 6 wrote:

Savage Amusement wrote:I understand your point Andreas89 but the truth of the matter is in the USA the constitution is the rule of law...

Sure, but how will it be interpreted ? By the original intent of the authors ? Or by what the people now want it to be interpreted as ?

Well, since the country and the world in which it exists is a whole lot different in 2016 than in 1789, I'm thinking a more modern interpretation is in order.  After all, some of the authors had no qualms with considering slaves 60% of a person and the Bill of Rights was an afterthought.  Speaking of which, do you want to bring an "original intent" argument into an NRA meeting?

Well, since the country and the world in which it exists is a whole lot different in 2016 than in 1789, I'm thinking a more modern interpretation is in order.

exactly right....Even Thomas Jefferson would agree...he said that he knew that down through time the meanings of the constitution would change (as it should) with the changes that would come to the society around it..
For the record S6 I think you might be surprised at what some of the original framers would think...They may be more open minded than you think.. Remember, not all of them were Christians ...a fair amount of them were deist.. If you study history you find that some of them were in affairs, Some of them had sex with their slaves, Benjamin Franklin was a nudist and Thomas Jefferson created his own Bible (the Jefferson Bible..one I read from sometimes) because he said the apostle Paul was a heretic...

sentient 6 wrote:How did the " transgendered " people survive 20-30 years ago ?

Why can't we just have some commonsense about bathroom usage, because this isn't rocket science. Unless of course, there is more of a social agenda at play here ?

They didn't survive. They used to die all the time from septic shock if they wandered too far from home and couldn't find a bathroom to use. It was tragic....

The feds just told North Carolina their law is unconstitutional and violates civil rights..looks like a lawsuit coming..unless they change the law.

They shouldn't have HAD to make a law.  To be honest, the media has created this issue. 

Here's the real issue:  what bathrooms have transgendered people used prior to this becoming a media circus?  How about just continue to use those bathrooms and not making a spectacle of it?  If common sense were applied, the whole country would see just how ludicrous this is.

sentient 6 wrote:How did the " transgendered " people survive 20-30 years ago ?

Why can't we just have some commonsense about bathroom usage, because this isn't rocket science. Unless of course, there is more of a social agenda at play here ?

Of course there is more of a social agenda at play, just not the way you see it.  Transgendered folks have been going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with forever.  But for some reason now it's dangerous because we have grown men going into stalls next to little girls just like we have had for decades.  The thing people don't understand is being transgendered isn't just playing dress up.  It isn't just some dude putting on a dress so he can feel pretty.  He truly doesn't see himself as a man.  So here's the common sense--don't legislate problems into existence.  Don't pretend that this legislation is really an attempt to protect anyone.

Here's the social agenda at play.  Conservatives are losing on homosexuality in the courts and really in the court of public opinion.  Americans in general have gotten comfortable with gays living amongst us.  Transgendered people, however, are still kinda icky to a lot of people.  Most of us can't wrap our minds around how a person can think they were born into the wrong body.  So public opinion is still that these people are freaks, and we don't do freaks well.  In fact, we tend to fear freaks.  That is what this legislation taps into.  These lawmakers are being forced to accept that homosexuals are no longer living in the shadows on the fringe of society, but they are not going to let trans people go mainstream.  So they pass legislation to keep our children safe by saying that if you have a penis, you are not allowed in women's restrooms.  Yeah that will do it, because child molesters are good law-biding people.

alldatndensum wrote:They shouldn't have HAD to make a law.  To be honest, the media has created this issue. 

Here's the real issue:  what bathrooms have transgendered people used prior to this becoming a media circus?  How about just continue to use those bathrooms and not making a spectacle of it?  If common sense were applied, the whole country would see just how ludicrous this is.

alldat, we've got a problem.  We are coming too close to being on the same side of a lot of things anymore and I don't know which of us should be more worried.

messiaen77 wrote:

alldatndensum wrote:They shouldn't have HAD to make a law.  To be honest, the media has created this issue. 

Here's the real issue:  what bathrooms have transgendered people used prior to this becoming a media circus?  How about just continue to use those bathrooms and not making a spectacle of it?  If common sense were applied, the whole country would see just how ludicrous this is.

alldat, we've got a problem.  We are coming too close to being on the same side of a lot of things anymore and I don't know which of us should be more worried.

You should be.  It just means that I am taking a few to think rather than just throw together what I say.  I come off as a lot less confrontational that way.  Then, we both have had time to work out what the MAIN points are rather than bumping noggins over the point we've chosen to fight with. 

You're still a poo-poo head with chronic halitosis, though. 

messiaen77 wrote:

sentient 6 wrote:How did the " transgendered " people survive 20-30 years ago ?

Why can't we just have some commonsense about bathroom usage, because this isn't rocket science. Unless of course, there is more of a social agenda at play here ?

Of course there is more of a social agenda at play, just not the way you see it.  Transgendered folks have been going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with forever.  But for some reason now it's dangerous because we have grown men going into stalls next to little girls just like we have had for decades.  The thing people don't understand is being transgendered isn't just playing dress up.  It isn't just some dude putting on a dress so he can feel pretty.  He truly doesn't see himself as a man.  So here's the common sense--don't legislate problems into existence.  Don't pretend that this legislation is really an attempt to protect anyone.

Here's the social agenda at play.  Conservatives are losing on homosexuality in the courts and really in the court of public opinion.  Americans in general have gotten comfortable with gays living amongst us.  Transgendered people, however, are still kinda icky to a lot of people.  Most of us can't wrap our minds around how a person can think they were born into the wrong body.  So public opinion is still that these people are freaks, and we don't do freaks well.  In fact, we tend to fear freaks.  That is what this legislation taps into.  These lawmakers are being forced to accept that homosexuals are no longer living in the shadows on the fringe of society, but they are not going to let trans people go mainstream.  So they pass legislation to keep our children safe by saying that if you have a penis, you are not allowed in women's restrooms.  Yeah that will do it, because child molesters are good law-biding people.

Why do we have to pander to crazy? Especially when doing so releases more evil?

What I can't wrap my head around is how many people who name Christ are so complacent and even celebratory with this.

Why do we have to pander to crazy? Especially when doing so releases more evil?

we all have our ideas of "crazy"...some of the beliefs held in some church's I consider "Crazy"...I dont think it releases any evil...I believe people are born Gay and transgendered..I dont believe it is a chosen way...I dont believe God creates us...our Parents create us and we are all born different...God created the first man and the first woman and the first animals but after that he told all of us to go and populate the earth..
This is a free nation..not a christian nation! The Bible should not be used to create laws..the constitution should be...but just for the sake of the argument they can pass all the laws they want but it really doesn't change anything...its not like we have people going around checking..Its wrong to legislate morality issues..

What I can't wrap my head around is how many people who name Christ are so complacent and even celebratory with this.

you seem to forget that Christianity is made up of hundreds of theology's and beliefs and biblical interpretations (all claiming to be the right way   )...So what your theology calls evil another theology doesn't....In the end all these theology's are man made beliefs...

d@v!d wrote:

messiaen77 wrote:

sentient 6 wrote:How did the " transgendered " people survive 20-30 years ago ?

Why can't we just have some commonsense about bathroom usage, because this isn't rocket science. Unless of course, there is more of a social agenda at play here ?

Of course there is more of a social agenda at play, just not the way you see it.  Transgendered folks have been going to the bathroom of the sex they identify with forever.  But for some reason now it's dangerous because we have grown men going into stalls next to little girls just like we have had for decades.  The thing people don't understand is being transgendered isn't just playing dress up.  It isn't just some dude putting on a dress so he can feel pretty.  He truly doesn't see himself as a man.  So here's the common sense--don't legislate problems into existence.  Don't pretend that this legislation is really an attempt to protect anyone.

Here's the social agenda at play.  Conservatives are losing on homosexuality in the courts and really in the court of public opinion.  Americans in general have gotten comfortable with gays living amongst us.  Transgendered people, however, are still kinda icky to a lot of people.  Most of us can't wrap our minds around how a person can think they were born into the wrong body.  So public opinion is still that these people are freaks, and we don't do freaks well.  In fact, we tend to fear freaks.  That is what this legislation taps into.  These lawmakers are being forced to accept that homosexuals are no longer living in the shadows on the fringe of society, but they are not going to let trans people go mainstream.  So they pass legislation to keep our children safe by saying that if you have a penis, you are not allowed in women's restrooms.  Yeah that will do it, because child molesters are good law-biding people.

Why do we have to pander to crazy? Especially when doing so releases more evil?

What I can't wrap my head around is how many people who name Christ are so complacent and even celebratory with this.

What crazy?  The crazy idea that all people deserve to be treated with a basic level of respect regardless of physiological or psychological differences provided they are not a harm to others?  Or the crazy idea that we have the right to make up laws that marginalize and discriminate against people whose only crime against society is that they don't fit the norm?

What I can't wrap my head around is how many people use the name of Christ to justify discrimination!  Jesus didn't discriminate against anyone.  He associated with sinners and the religious alike.  He was compassionate toward Jews and Samaritans alike.  Do we really think Jesus is pleased because we pass laws about who can pee where or that you don't have to provide good or services to people whose sin you don't approve of?  How many people do you think have been won for Jesus because Kim Davis refused to do her job in the name of Jesus?  How do any of these things advance the Kingdom of God??

Sorry that got a little rant-y.  I don't mean it personally toward you d@v!d.  I may disagree with you but I respect and defend your right to believe the way you do.  At the end of the day, we don't have to understand or approve of a person's lifestyle.  What we have to do is love those people as Christ loves them.

great post M77...isn't it interesting that the ones Jesus went after the hardest...the ones he called vipers and sons of Satan...were the law bringing church leaders of his time...(by the way for those who don't know..Those same church leaders called Jesus and his followers CRAZY)....

Jesus didn't go after the pharisees because of them bringing the law, but because of their hypocrisy.

Jesus was preaching the new covenant and  he knew the law brought sin and punishment and that a new covenant was coming..thats why the good news of the new covenant is we are no longer under the law...where there is no law there is no transgression (Romans 4:15)   those who live under the law are cursed (Galatians 3:10)