(April 13, 2016 at 12:16 pm)Crossless1 Wrote:

(April 13, 2016 at 11:58 am)Drich Wrote: then if the LGBT community did not have anything to say about the laws the people in those states wanted to enact, then why were they walked back?

Who the hell said that the LGBT community had nothing to say concerning those laws? Obviously, they had strong opinions and many no doubt voiced them. But that wasn't decisive. They were walked back due to certain corporations (who happened to agree with the LGBT community on this issue) also having strong opinions and the wherewithal to hit the state in the pocketbook. Stop being disingenuous about this. We had this very conversation yesterday.

but again a law was voted through all the due process each state has and retain for it's self. Yet this outside force makes a mandate that circumvents this due process. essentially holding the state's economy hostage till the state concedes.

If the LGBT community want to amend the laws through the proper channels that's one thing, but strong arming a whole state/several states is beyond wrong.

(April 13, 2016 at 9:43 am)Drich Wrote: That's like looking down the barrel of an disassembled gun.

Yes normally looking down that barrel (with all parts intact) can be very intimidating, but when you know the 'bang' is taken out of the gun, then it becomes a paper weight.

If you knew what you were talking about then you would know that putting a male body on a course of female hormone therapy makes that body infertile after three months.

But this is actually a more significant comment from you because it demonstrates the basis of the right wing Christian fear. The view that women are viewed as baby making machines rather than as human beings and the fear of them becoming impregnated.

Women are not objects.

(April 13, 2016 at 12:16 pm)Drich Wrote: Because we live in a country where the majority rules. those who got help number is the thousands maybe hundreds of thousands. verse the hundreds of millions their laws effect. Not to mention this law will allow those who have not received help the freedom to put it off even longer. And it opens the general populace to those looking to exploit the law and the oppsite sex.

For what?

How does society benefit here? or is just all about a political movement flexing it's power?

We do NOT live in a country where the majority rules. We live in a Constitutional Republic specifically because we wanted to avoid majority rule. (Read the Federalist Papers, some time, if you want to know why the founders did this... tl;dr version: they were aware that a majority could trample on the minority, and sought to protect the basic human rights of all American citizens.)

Society benefits here by not trampling on one of its minorities. It's really, really simple.

(April 13, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Mathilda Wrote: Did you decide that you were heterosexual?

According to him, he did. Which is quite telling in itself. Wait for his truck driver story.

(April 13, 2016 at 12:17 pm)Mathilda Wrote:

(April 13, 2016 at 9:40 am)Drich Wrote: Your an idiot to think all people who have GID want to be a transsexual. Just like not all people who have homosexual tendencies want to be gay or live a gay life style. So to do the people with GID may not want sexual reassignment.  especially if they know they can change the way they feel with hormone therapy.

No one wants to be transsexual. No one decides they want to be gay. Did you decide that you were heterosexual?

You don't even know the difference between sexual reassignment and being transsexual or gay.

what happened to your thoughts in the lovly bill marr speech you left me yesterday? or was that only to excuse you from answering a rebuttal you finally got and realized you painted yourself into a no win corner?

Why not simply take you own advise and give up on me. that's the only reason I did not hold you feet to the fire about your ludicrous statement concerning the definition of mental illness, and follow up with a victory lap when I made you conceed.

If your back in the game lets pick up where we left off shall we??

(April 13, 2016 at 9:57 am)ChadWooters Wrote: The denial of access is justified because bathroom segregation is based on objective biological sex not subjective gender identity.

Drich! These guys claim to be all about science and objectivity...except when it comes to sex. Then its all about how people "feel" and not the objective facts.

No it's actually about objective scientific facts. Because the brains of male to female transsexuals has been demonstrated to be the same as that of cisgendered women using brain scans. This has been known for many years and there are many papers in the scientific literature about this. In fact the technology now exists to determine the similarities even before death. The same applies for female to male transsexuals and cisgendered men.

You are your brain, not your body.

(April 13, 2016 at 10:05 am)Drich Wrote: I have read and found definitions that say transsexual means transgendered, and trans gendered means what you claim transsexual means.

So because you have read something somewhere on the internet you are suddenly an expert? A classic case of Dunning Kruger effect.

And do you know the history of these words? Transsexual has historically been a subset of transgendered.

We're also in a state of flux because the very word transsexual was a misnomer, as I already said earlier. It should have been called transgendered and it would be better to get rid of the word transsexual. But then I wasn't the one that started a thread with that title.

(April 13, 2016 at 10:06 am)Drich Wrote: So it is your belief that all people (despite what reference material I listed says) who suffer from GID want to be trans gendered?

No one wants to be transgendered.

You don't even know the meanings of the words that you are using.

(April 13, 2016 at 12:21 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(April 13, 2016 at 12:16 pm)Drich Wrote: Because we live in a country where the majority rules. those who got help number is the thousands maybe hundreds of thousands. verse the hundreds of millions their laws effect. Not to mention this law will allow those who have not received help the freedom to put it off even longer. And it opens the general populace to those looking to exploit the law and the oppsite sex.

For what?

How does society benefit here? or is just all about a political movement flexing it's power?

We do NOT live in a country where the majority rules. We live in a Constitutional Republic specifically because we wanted to avoid majority rule. (Read the Federalist Papers, some time, if you want to know why the founders did this... tl;dr version: they were aware that a majority could trample on the minority, and sought to protect the basic human rights of all American citizens.)

Society benefits here by not trampling on one of its minorities. It's really, really simple.

lol.. we stopped being a constitutional republic a long long time ago. we are chest deep in a full blown democracy.

(April 13, 2016 at 12:20 pm)Drich Wrote:

(April 13, 2016 at 12:16 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: Who the hell said that the LGBT community had nothing to say concerning those laws? Obviously, they had strong opinions and many no doubt voiced them. But that wasn't decisive. They were walked back due to certain corporations (who happened to agree with the LGBT community on this issue) also having strong opinions and the wherewithal to hit the state in the pocketbook. Stop being disingenuous about this. We had this very conversation yesterday.

but again a law was voted through all the due process each state has and retain for it's self. Yet this outside force makes a mandate that circumvents this due process. essentially holding the state's economy hostage till the state concedes.

If the LGBT community want to amend the laws through the proper channels that's one thing, but strong arming a whole state/several states is beyond wrong.

Since you're so scrupulous about your use of words, you might want to learn what 'mandate' means.

In any case, due process wasn't circumvented (you might also want to learn what constitutes 'due process'). Certain corporations threatened to withdraw their operations from a state whose law it found to be obnoxious and discriminatory. It's their right to do so! It's also possible that the elected officials who proposed or passed the legislation could have demonstrated the courage of their supposed convictions. Or maybe they didn't really care and were just pandering to the likes of you from the start. Either way, this is how the sausage gets made in this country. Don't pretend you don't understand that.

Damn, you're all about companies and other institutions having the freedom to act or affect legislation if the aim is congruent with what you'd like to see happen, but when it cuts against your interests it's illegitimate and an assault on democracy.