Going to cost NC a boat load in lost fed $ but hey it’s worth it to keep icky people out of bathrooms.
/sarcasm off.
Can’t wait to see the backtracking that’s about to happen. Now we’ll see whether their fear and hatred is worth hundreds of millions (if not billions) in federal funding.
Surely it’s worth hundreds of millions to fix a problem that doesn’t exist?
I winder how this affects UNC housing issues that came up in the previous thread?
Another overreach of the executive. TG is not mentioned in the law at all. It was passed in 1964.
Thing is… those ‘icky people’ have been in the stalls next to every one of us all along. But NC feels they must posture themselves - whatever.
Of course TG individuals weren’t mentioned explicitly. The people who wrote the bill are bigots, not idiots.
@teriwtt, I hope you realize I was being sarcastic.
Oh, yes, I knew - I’ve read enough of your posts to speculate where you stand on the issues. My comments were most probably intended for people who will never know CC even exists! Because those people are likely majorly undereducated and college is not a priority for them. But I needed to vent anyway, even if they don’t read it. 
phew I was worried for a minute there.
I get the need to vent, too.
The other, non bathroom stuff in the bill is horrendous too. I don’t understand how any legislature in this day and age think it’s okay to legalizie discrimination of any group. It’s like Jim Crow all over again in these states and it’s sickening.
People on this thread are mostly liberal, I can tell. My personal opinion is the bill is NOT discriminatory at all. Transgendered individuals aren’t mentioned in the bill, it only states that you use the bathroom based off of the gender on your birth certificate. If transgendered individuals want to change the sex on their birth certificate their are a number of other states which allow them to do this.
This is more of a common sense law. The backlash unleashed by lgbt groups and so called rights groups is a result of misinforming others, intimidating and bullying people to go against the bill. I doubt that most the CEOs that declared they are against the bill actually give a crap or have read the bill in the first place.
This also shows the power of the lgbt lobby with big media and corporates. Almost all the articles produced on this bill are extremely one sided with supporters of he bill labelled “bigots” by lgbt groups and the left.
Also, since when did celebrities become authorities or experts in politics. They simply go up to them and tell them if they are against an “Anti-LGBT” bill, I don’t blame them for saying yes. The whole premise of the question is false and I doubt any of these celebrities know anything about the bill in detail, they just hear the word Anti-LGBT from the leftist media and assume it’s discriminatory.
The bill was made to protect young girls and women in general under the risk of being attacked by a sex offender. No one in the left takes this seriously they would rather stomp on people’s religious liberty and security concerns of females to protect their precious LGBT minorities. Being liberal is about putting minorities and their interests first, anyone in the majority who disagrees is an intolerant bigot.
Here is good legal breakdown of why the law is not discriminatory under this statute and why this is DOJ overreach to further an agenda. The DOJ argument only reads logically to people who do not know the statue. The DOJ knows the level of knowledge of the crowd it is playing towards.
This issue will come down to a right to privacy, as well as on religious grounds.
sigh. I feel like we already did this thread…
Until this law was passed, it was legal to use whichever bathroom you felt like. Why did that only become a problem now, as opposed to 5, 10 20 years ago? If people were truly in danger, it seems like they were ignoring it for a long time. What changed recently?
I’ll give you a hint- It wasn’t an epidemic of bathroom based assaults.
It should boggle the mind that there are adults who actually think that teaching young females and women who are walking into a female locker room, bathroom, or any female-designated area that is an obvious looking male following them in or in there when they enter is now nothing to be concerned about. Absolutely mind-bogging that there are adults who are willing to put females, especially young girls, at such risk.
It’s not just liberals or LGBT groups angered by these laws. Families of special needs people are pretty furious as well.
If those passing these laws were truly worried about the welfare of women and children, they would do more to address the fact that overwhelmingly women and children are in danger from men they know. Their fathers, uncles, husbands, boyfriends, uncles, bosses, coaches, etc. It’s really disingenuous to assert that these laws aren’t anti- transgender.
Women and young girls were NOT being attacked in restrooms by men dressed in women’s clothing - so why does there need to be a law to protect them against something that isn’t happening? If someone hides in a women’s room and assaults anyone else in the women’s room, gender and orientation of either person is irrelevant, because there are already laws protecting everyone from assault!
Personally, if an individual presents as a female, I believe it would be much more disruptive for them to use the men’s room. And I’d be much more suspicious of someone presenting as male entering the women’s room - how do you KNOW they’re designated female? Do we now have the right to demand that every person in the woman’s room who isn’t wearing a dress, heels, and pearls present a birth certificate prior to entering?
Many of us in NC are horrified at the damage being done to the economy - and to average working folks. How many people lost wages who would have worked setting up/tearing down Bruce Springsteen’s show or the Cirque du Soleil shows? Most of the vendors in the Greensboro Coliseum are volunteer/charity groups who lost significant revenue when shows canceled. Hotels lost bookings, restaurants lost patrons. I applaud those celebrities who performed anyway but donated proceeds to EqualityNC and other organizations (Cyndi Lauper, Louis CK, Mumford and Sons to name a few).
Because you are limited in your argument, and what you say is incorrect, as it is being applied now. Using a bathroom with a stall or separate door is one thing altogether.
However, it is only until recently that anatomical males who say they are now females think they can be nude in female locker rooms and freely enter any female-designated places where women are in various stages of being disrobed. 5, 10, 20 yard ago anatomical males were not disrobing and thinking they should/could be nude in female areas, as security would have been a called pronto.
And more importantly, it has only been until recently that these anatomical males think they can use female communal showers next to actual nude anatomical females, particularly with females they do not know. Know any anatomical males that thought they could casually shower with females 5, 10, 20 years ago without getting in trouble and being cited for indecent exposure? May exist, but never heard of it.
The only cases I can find of “anatomical males” geting nude in female locker rooms are where men have been deliberately provocative to protest the ordinances or laws. They expose themselves to females because they want to show it can happen. Websites are encouraging this behavior as protest against the possibility men will expose themselves in women’s locker rooms.