How North Carolina Will Respond To Fed's Request For Stay: Re Tranny Lawsuits

[Silhouette]

The point of this thread is, remember, to discuss which has legal dominance currently: women and girls to expectation of segregated privacy behind doors marked "women", or men in any stage of pretending they are a woman and their "right" (doesn't exist in law) to invade that privacy as they wish.

Where will a federal court err on caution and place the stay?

ie: where will the most damage potentially be done in the interim if certain conditions aren't preserved? To the women and girls expecting privacy from males as they expose their bodies bare? Or men who want to pretend they're something they're not? Where would the most interim damage occur? (Remember, there is a significant portion of women and girls who have been sexually assaulted by males in any given female population; if you're going with the "mental harm" angle..)

 

[Silhouette]

If liberals think it's okay to mandate the denial of reality and play along with delusions, the governor of NC should self identify as the US attorney general and dismiss the lawsuit. Liberals would be hateful bigots if they didn't play along.

At first glance this looks funny. But if they issue a stay protecting delusional men instead of women and girls' privacy, then your "joke" isn't really a joke anymore, is it? Once people are allowed to self-diagnose and then proclaim that aberration "a civil right", then there is no limit to self-diagnosing. If there was a limit, it would violate the 14th Amendment's intent of equality across the board.

What sets one delusion apart from another except for just subjective bias?

 

[Silhouette]

If the Obama Regime wins this one.....it opens the door for all of us to identify as any general or race or ethnicity or age we want.

ALL labels of race, gender, age, ethnicity will be voided.

Statutory rape will no longer be a legal charge since a 35 year old man can just "identify" as a 16 year old.

I you're a little nuts there. Typical for a right winger.

No, he just understands how legal precedent works. The lady of justice wears a blindfold for a reason. If you can pretend you are another gender, it would be discrimination to disallow the pretending of any other non-real situation. It would, in the purest legal sense. bucs90 is absolutely right about what he says.

North Carolina will lose. None of the things Bucs claims will happen.

This thread is about the stay, not the final decision. Will a court consider it an emergency to either 1. Protect women and girls, some of whom have been statistically sexually assaulted by men when they were vulnerable, rights to privacy behind a door marked "women" or 2. Protect men who are pretending to be women to have access to the room behind the door marked "women" clearly outside.?

Where will the court err on caution when placing a stay while these cases are pending?

 

[BULLDOG]

If the Obama Regime wins this one.....it opens the door for all of us to identify as any general or race or ethnicity or age we want.

ALL labels of race, gender, age, ethnicity will be voided.

Statutory rape will no longer be a legal charge since a 35 year old man can just "identify" as a 16 year old.

I you're a little nuts there. Typical for a right winger.

No, he just understands how legal precedent works. The lady of justice wears a blindfold for a reason. If you can pretend you are another gender, it would be discrimination to disallow the pretending of any other non-real situation. It would, in the purest legal sense. bucs90 is absolutely right about what he says.

North Carolina will lose. None of the things Bucs claims will happen.

This thread is about the stay, not the final decision. Will a court consider it an emergency to either 1. Protect women and girls, some of whom have been statistically sexually assaulted by men when they were vulnerable, rights to privacy behind a door marked "women" or 2. Protect men who are pretending to be women to have access to the room behind the door marked "women" clearly outside.?

Where will the court err on caution when placing a stay while these cases are pending?

No, actually, the thread is about how North Carolina will react to the stay. Obviously, they will maintain their belief that they are right.

 

[Silhouette]

No, actually, the thread is about how North Carolina will react to the stay. Obviously, they will maintain their belief that they are right.

Or rather how NC will react to a blatant advertisement of intent to blackmail by Lynch's Justice Department. Read this!

"While the lawsuit currently seeks declaratory relief, I want to note that we retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds," Lynch said.

But for now, NPR's Carrie Johnson reports, the federal government is trying to reach "a resolution in which the state voluntarily complies.... " North Carolina Sues DOJ Over LGBT Law; DOJ Sues Back

So Lynch announces "at any time we will hurt your state with a financial club...until and unless you voluntarily cave to the Fed's demands."

More:

It also accused Lynch of "using divisive rhetoric to advance the Obama administration's strategy of making laws that bypass the constitutional authority of Congress and our courts."

Toward the end of her remarks, Lynch emphasized that the "fear of the unknown" and "discomfort with the uncertainty of change" can cause people to reject what they don't know.

One thing we do know is that men with penises, especially out of their minds with mental illness, do not belong behind doors marked "women" outside. And we also know that about 17 million women have been sexually assaulted by men with penises, out of their minds with mental illness, and that these women would be at risk of extreme distress, fear or PTSD to find a man in their private segregated hygiene retreat denoted by "women" above the door..

 

[BULLDOG]

No, actually, the thread is about how North Carolina will react to the stay. Obviously, they will maintain their belief that they are right.

Or rather how NC will react to a blatant advertisement of intent to blackmail by Lynch's Justice Department. Read this!

"While the lawsuit currently seeks declaratory relief, I want to note that we retain the option of curtailing federal funding to the North Carolina Department of Public Safety and the University of North Carolina as this case proceeds," Lynch said.

But for now, NPR's Carrie Johnson reports, the federal government is trying to reach "a resolution in which the state voluntarily complies.... " North Carolina Sues DOJ Over LGBT Law; DOJ Sues Back

So Lynch announces "at any time we will hurt your state with a financial club...until and unless you voluntarily cave to the Fed's demands."

More:

It also accused Lynch of "using divisive rhetoric to advance the Obama administration's strategy of making laws that bypass the constitutional authority of Congress and our courts."

Toward the end of her remarks, Lynch emphasized that the "fear of the unknown" and "discomfort with the uncertainty of change" can cause people to reject what they don't know.

One thing we do know is that men with penises, especially out of their minds with mental illness, do not belong behind doors marked "women" outside. And we also know that about 17 million women have been sexually assaulted by men with penises, out of their minds with mental illness, and that these women would be at risk of extreme distress, fear or PTSD to find a man in their private segregated hygiene retreat denoted by "women" above the door..

Spout your silly crap all you want. It's in the courts now, and we both know how it will turn out. You might want to start thinking about your next dumb source of outrage, This one is about played out.

 

[Silhouette]

Spout your silly crap all you want. It's in the courts now, and we both know how it will turn out. You might want to start thinking about your next dumb source of outrage, This one is about played out.

What's the need for a court then if we know how it will turn out? Are you saying the courts have already decided before hearing the facts of the case that women and girls who have been raped do not have rights to the expectation of privacy away from men behind doors marked "women" outside?

 

[BULLDOG]

Spout your silly crap all you want. It's in the courts now, and we both know how it will turn out. You might want to start thinking about your next dumb source of outrage, This one is about played out.

What's the need for a court then if we know how it will turn out? Are you saying the courts have already decided before hearing the facts of the case that women and girls who have been raped do not have rights to the expectation of privacy away from men behind doors marked "women" outside?

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

 

[Silhouette]

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

Again, could you please point us to the document or legal language that states "a man having delusions that he is a woman has special rights" that are dominant to women and girls' expectation of privacy behind a door marked "women" outside? The 1964 Civil Rights Act doesn't even remotely approach a man having delusions that he is a woman.

Remember, in the US, about 17 million of the women and girls in question have been raped by men when they felt vulnerable around them. Of those women I imagine a large percentage have PTSD associated with men invading their intimate space where they expected boundaries from men.

 

[Silhouette]

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

Does it bother you at all that women who may have been raped (1 in 6) would be in that bathroom with a man walking in behind a door marked "women"? Do you think we should eliminate the words "women" and "men" from the dictionary? After all, if a word completely loses its meaning, what use do we have for it anymore?

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

Does it bother you at all that women who may have been raped (1 in 6) would be in that bathroom with a man walking in behind a door marked "women"? Do you think we should eliminate the words "women" and "men" from the dictionary? After all, if a word completely loses its meaning, what use do we have for it anymore?

This is about transgender people. Your misdirection doesn't change anything.

 

[Stephanie]

this Federal Government under Obama has become a TYRANT. we tried to tell people about putting him office.

not only are they SUEING us and our states (that we will have to pay for) to try to force something on them and using the treat of loss of funds which I believe is called, blackmail, extortion and they should be charged for a crime. but they came after WE THE PEOPLE using the IRS.

THE STATES needs to all come together on this and tell them too go to hell

 

[guno]

this Federal Government under Obama has become a TYRANT. we tried to tell people about putting him office.

not only are they SUEING us and our states (that we will have to pay for) to try to force something on them and using the treat of loss of funds which I believe is called, blackmail, extortion and they should be charged for a crime. but they came after WE THE PEOPLE using the IRS.

THE STATES needs to all come together on this and tell them too go to hell

still the idiot who doesn't know what the law is about

 

[BULLDOG]

this Federal Government under Obama has become a TYRANT. we tried to tell people about putting him office.

not only are they SUEING us and our states (that we will have to pay for) to try to force something on them and using the treat of loss of funds which I believe is called, blackmail, extortion and they should be charged for a crime. but they came after WE THE PEOPLE using the IRS.

THE STATES needs to all come together on this and tell them too go to hell

Or you could just pack up your stuff and go somewhere else if you don't like our country. We don't need unpatriotic troublemakers whining all the time.

 

[Silhouette]

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

Does it bother you at all that women who may have been raped (1 in 6) would be in that bathroom with a man walking in behind a door marked "women"? Do you think we should eliminate the words "women" and "men" from the dictionary? After all, if a word completely loses its meaning, what use do we have for it anymore?

This is about transgender people. Your misdirection doesn't change anything.

No....this is about men suffering from delusions (you call them "transgender people") who want to invade the private segregated hygiene retreats denoted by the word WOMEN on the door, of women and girls. THIS IS ALSO ABOUT WOMEN AND GIRLS. You're complete dismissal of their interests in this debate is telling. VERY telling. You want the world to think of men as superior and women as having to just put up with whatever they want to do to them. Women have civil rights too you know. After all, Justice Ginsburg agrees:

In an article in The Washington Post in 1975, Ginsberg wrote to dispel the fear that the Equal Rights Act would “require unisex restrooms in public places.” According to Ginsberg, “Emphatically not so.”

The now-Supreme Court justice continued, “Separate places to disrobe, sleep, perform personal bodily functions are permitted, in some situations required, by regard for individual privacy.” Ginsburg In 1975: Separate Bathrooms Are ‘In Some Situations Required’

So the constitutional rights of women in this regard has already had the pathway paved. Men are men, even if they're wearing a wig and pumps.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

Does it bother you at all that women who may have been raped (1 in 6) would be in that bathroom with a man walking in behind a door marked "women"? Do you think we should eliminate the words "women" and "men" from the dictionary? After all, if a word completely loses its meaning, what use do we have for it anymore?

This is about transgender people. Your misdirection doesn't change anything.

No....this is about men suffering from delusions (you call them "transgender people") who want to invade the private segregated hygiene retreats denoted by the word WOMEN on the door, of women and girls. THIS IS ALSO ABOUT WOMEN AND GIRLS. You're complete dismissal of their interests in this debate is telling. VERY telling. You want the world to think of men as superior and women as having to just put up with whatever they want to do to them. Women have civil rights too you know. After all, Justice Ginsburg agrees:

In an article in The Washington Post in 1975, Ginsberg wrote to dispel the fear that the Equal Rights Act would “require unisex restrooms in public places.” According to Ginsberg, “Emphatically not so.”

The now-Supreme Court justice continued, “Separate places to disrobe, sleep, perform personal bodily functions are permitted, in some situations required, by regard for individual privacy.” Ginsburg In 1975: Separate Bathrooms Are ‘In Some Situations Required’

So the constitutional rights of women in this regard has already had the pathway paved. Men are men, even if they're wearing a wig and pumps.

I won't argue whether transgender people exist. They obviously do, and your refusal to accept that is your problem. The only question now, is whether they deserve the same rights as everybody else. Just admit that this is a carryover of your butt hurt from your loss on gay rights, and if you can't stop gays from being married, you at least want to deny rights to part of what you consider to be the same group.

 

[Silhouette]

I won't argue whether transgender people exist. They obviously do, and your refusal to accept that is your problem. The only question now, is whether they deserve the same rights as everybody else. Just admit that this is a carryover of your butt hurt from your loss on gay rights, and if you can't stop gays from being married, you at least want to deny rights to part of what you consider to be the same group.

No, there is another question: whether or not their nonexistent "rights" to practice delusions and force others to play along includes the invasion of intimate hygiene retreats behind doors marked 'women' on the outside. Even while we know 1 in 6 of those women have been raped by a man invading their intimate space where they should've had that space respected. WOMEN WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THIS DEBATE. Regardless of your cult's insistence that they not be considered at all.

 

[Pop23]

Gender not the same as sex?

Then trans gender means a feminine male wants to become a masculine male.

I don't really care

 

[Pop23]

I'm saying our laws will allow nothing less than basic rights for everyone, including transgenders. Obviously, it's going to take the courts to prove that to North Carolina politicians.

Does it bother you at all that women who may have been raped (1 in 6) would be in that bathroom with a man walking in behind a door marked "women"? Do you think we should eliminate the words "women" and "men" from the dictionary? After all, if a word completely loses its meaning, what use do we have for it anymore?

This is about transgender people. Your misdirection doesn't change anything.

No....this is about men suffering from delusions (you call them "transgender people") who want to invade the private segregated hygiene retreats denoted by the word WOMEN on the door, of women and girls. THIS IS ALSO ABOUT WOMEN AND GIRLS. You're complete dismissal of their interests in this debate is telling. VERY telling. You want the world to think of men as superior and women as having to just put up with whatever they want to do to them. Women have civil rights too you know. After all, Justice Ginsburg agrees:

In an article in The Washington Post in 1975, Ginsberg wrote to dispel the fear that the Equal Rights Act would “require unisex restrooms in public places.” According to Ginsberg, “Emphatically not so.”

The now-Supreme Court justice continued, “Separate places to disrobe, sleep, perform personal bodily functions are permitted, in some situations required, by regard for individual privacy.” Ginsburg In 1975: Separate Bathrooms Are ‘In Some Situations Required’

So the constitutional rights of women in this regard has already had the pathway paved. Men are men, even if they're wearing a wig and pumps.

I won't argue whether transgender people exist. They obviously do, and your refusal to accept that is your problem. The only question now, is whether they deserve the same rights as everybody else. Just admit that this is a carryover of your butt hurt from your loss on gay rights, and if you can't stop gays from being married, you at least want to deny rights to part of what you consider to be the same group.

The only obvious existence is cross dressers. Then it is simply how obsessed the cross dresser is.

Some take the fetish to the extreme, and it is those that the government has a duty to seek mental health for. No other Duty is the government required to give.

 

[BULLDOG]

I won't argue whether transgender people exist. They obviously do, and your refusal to accept that is your problem. The only question now, is whether they deserve the same rights as everybody else. Just admit that this is a carryover of your butt hurt from your loss on gay rights, and if you can't stop gays from being married, you at least want to deny rights to part of what you consider to be the same group.

No, there is another question: whether or not their nonexistent "rights" to practice delusions and force others to play along includes the invasion of intimate hygiene retreats behind doors marked 'women' on the outside. Even while we know 1 in 6 of those women have been raped by a man invading their intimate space where they should've had that space respected. WOMEN WILL BE CONSIDERED IN THIS DEBATE. Regardless of your cult's insistence that they not be considered at all.

Can you name even one instance where a transgender person raped anyone in the bathroom?