is it true that companies boycotting North Carolina do business with countries that execute gays?

[theDoctorisIn]

No, this is a problem that the NC law caused, not "the left".

A year ago, he would have just gone into the men's room, and no one would have known, or cared.

Now, should he venture into NC, he'd be forced to use the same bathroom as your daughters.

No, this is a problem that the NC law caused, not "the left".

A year ago, he would have just gone into the men's room, and no one would have known, or cared.

Now, should he venture into NC, he'd be forced to use the same bathroom as your daughters.

No, this is a problem that the NC law caused, not "the left".

A year ago, he would have just gone into the men's room, and no one would have known, or cared.

Now, should he venture into NC, he'd be forced to use the same bathroom as your daughters.

wr

Wrong.....there is a tiny number of actual transgender people in the country.....tiny. Over 50% of the country is genetically female....who don't like men using their bathrooms....

you insist that men be allowed to use the women's bathroom if they feel like a woman.....so now we have to protect the over 50% of the country from predatory males that you want to give permission to use women's bathroooms.....

So how do we weed out the mentally ill who think that they should be women from the sexual predators you now want to have access to women and young girls...

They come up with a plan to respond to your insanity......anyone who has female on their birth certificate can use a women's public bathroom...there for allowing the tiny number of mentally ill men use the women's bathroom and protecting women from actual predators.....

Then of course the insanity continues and you bring up women who are mentally ill who think they should be men........

trying to accomodate the mentally ill and the left wing regressives is just tiring........

Have you polled all the women in this country to come to that conclusion, or did you just pull that one out of your ass?

From my experience, it's men who are terrified of transgenders, not women. All of the women I know don't give a shit if a trans women pees next to them.

Yeah...ask women if they want strange men using the bathroom with them and their teenage daughters...with parts or without.....see what they say.......

I have. None of them are afraid of transgenders in the bathroom with them, let alone as pants-shittingly afraid as you clearly are.

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Weak. Would you like to try again?

 

[Skylar]

Murder and theft take things from other people. Lives or property. Transgender folks take nothing from anyone by being transgender.

Your circular moral reasoning falls clearly into the 'wrong because I say so' category. And increasingly, no one really gives a shit what you and your ilk say.

it is not that simple.......saying that men who feel like they are women should be allowed to use women's bathrooms creates safety issues for women........you guys don't care about them......the left never cares about women.....except when they want them to kill their babies.......

In terms of 'natural law' and appeals to the 'supreme creator', it is that simple.

And what safety issue is created for women? Think about this logically: if a person is so void of concern for the law or morality that they're going to assault women and children in a bathroom.......do you really think a sign saying they can't go in the bathroom is going to stop them?

It would be like assuming that the Brussel's bombing could have been prevented by a 'Bombing Prohibited' sign on the airport wall. It just doesn't make the slightest sense.

Wrong.....if you allow men to go into a bathroom, legally, they can be in there without being arrested.....they can choose the time and place of their activity.

So if there was a 'No Bombing' sign in Brussels....problem solved?

But hey, by your logic, I have an elegant solution. Have a 'no assaulting women or children' sign on the wall. And by your reasoning, the problem is solved.

So....to be clear.....you are okay with men using the same bathroooms as teenage girls....right?

So.....to be clear.....you think a sign is going to prevent women from being assaulted?

If that's your argument, why wouldn't posting a 'no assaulting women and children' sign resolve the issue?

 

[Skylar]

No, this is a problem that the NC law caused, not "the left".

A year ago, he would have just gone into the men's room, and no one would have known, or cared.

Now, should he venture into NC, he'd be forced to use the same bathroom as your daughters.

No, this is a problem that the NC law caused, not "the left".

A year ago, he would have just gone into the men's room, and no one would have known, or cared.

Now, should he venture into NC, he'd be forced to use the same bathroom as your daughters.

No, this is a problem that the NC law caused, not "the left".

A year ago, he would have just gone into the men's room, and no one would have known, or cared.

Now, should he venture into NC, he'd be forced to use the same bathroom as your daughters.

wr

Wrong.....there is a tiny number of actual transgender people in the country.....tiny. Over 50% of the country is genetically female....who don't like men using their bathrooms....

you insist that men be allowed to use the women's bathroom if they feel like a woman.....so now we have to protect the over 50% of the country from predatory males that you want to give permission to use women's bathroooms.....

So how do we weed out the mentally ill who think that they should be women from the sexual predators you now want to have access to women and young girls...

They come up with a plan to respond to your insanity......anyone who has female on their birth certificate can use a women's public bathroom...there for allowing the tiny number of mentally ill men use the women's bathroom and protecting women from actual predators.....

Then of course the insanity continues and you bring up women who are mentally ill who think they should be men........

trying to accomodate the mentally ill and the left wing regressives is just tiring........

Have you polled all the women in this country to come to that conclusion, or did you just pull that one out of your ass?

From my experience, it's men who are terrified of transgenders, not women. All of the women I know don't give a shit if a trans women pees next to them.

Yeah...ask women if they want strange men using the bathroom with them and their teenage daughters...with parts or without.....see what they say.......

I have. None of them are afraid of transgenders in the bathroom with them, let alone as pants-shittingly afraid as you clearly are.

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

 

[2aguy]

wr

Wrong.....there is a tiny number of actual transgender people in the country.....tiny. Over 50% of the country is genetically female....who don't like men using their bathrooms....

you insist that men be allowed to use the women's bathroom if they feel like a woman.....so now we have to protect the over 50% of the country from predatory males that you want to give permission to use women's bathroooms.....

So how do we weed out the mentally ill who think that they should be women from the sexual predators you now want to have access to women and young girls...

They come up with a plan to respond to your insanity......anyone who has female on their birth certificate can use a women's public bathroom...there for allowing the tiny number of mentally ill men use the women's bathroom and protecting women from actual predators.....

Then of course the insanity continues and you bring up women who are mentally ill who think they should be men........

trying to accomodate the mentally ill and the left wing regressives is just tiring........

Have you polled all the women in this country to come to that conclusion, or did you just pull that one out of your ass?

From my experience, it's men who are terrified of transgenders, not women. All of the women I know don't give a shit if a trans women pees next to them.

Yeah...ask women if they want strange men using the bathroom with them and their teenage daughters...with parts or without.....see what they say.......

I have. None of them are afraid of transgenders in the bathroom with them, let alone as pants-shittingly afraid as you clearly are.

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

If it is legal for men to be in the bathroom, a cop can't arrest them and they can sit in there as long as they want till they find their victim.

your post is the stupid one...this whole topic is a stupid one....the left wing regressives are nuts

 

[Vigilante]

 

[Skylar]

Have you polled all the women in this country to come to that conclusion, or did you just pull that one out of your ass?

From my experience, it's men who are terrified of transgenders, not women. All of the women I know don't give a shit if a trans women pees next to them.

Yeah...ask women if they want strange men using the bathroom with them and their teenage daughters...with parts or without.....see what they say.......

I have. None of them are afraid of transgenders in the bathroom with them, let alone as pants-shittingly afraid as you clearly are.

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

 

[2aguy]

Yeah...ask women if they want strange men using the bathroom with them and their teenage daughters...with parts or without.....see what they say.......

I have. None of them are afraid of transgenders in the bathroom with them, let alone as pants-shittingly afraid as you clearly are.

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

Men should not be using the women's public bathroom...if you are so eager to do it...open up the bathroom in your home to people walking by.......

Don't force women who don't want to share a bathroom with strange men to do so......

I get it....rape and sexual assault of vulnerable women and girls are a perk for being a left wing regressive male......I get it....but for normal people......not so much....we don't think women and girls are there to be raped........

I know....it is odd to you...but that is what you call "normal."

 

[Skylar]

I have. None of them are afraid of transgenders in the bathroom with them, let alone as pants-shittingly afraid as you clearly are.

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

 

[2aguy]

Yeah....until something happens.....and knowing the type of women you know.....did they answer your question before or after you paid them......

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.


there you go......end of story.

Your way....man is just hanging out in women's bathroom, women complain...cop informs them, there is nothing he can do...he says he's a woman.....later, a lone woman or girl enters......and gets attacked......

thanks left wing regressives....

 

[Skylar]

Something has already happened: Transgendered people are being assaulted. The policy of forcing them to go the bathroom that don't match their gender identity causes genuine harm.

So you're literally ignoring the *reality* of harm for a hypothetical that doesn't make the slightest sense. As its predicated on the idea that a predator of women and children will be thwarted by a *sign*.

Which is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

 

[2aguy]

No......if it is against the law for a man to be in a woman's bathroom...he can be arrested when he is found in the bathroom.

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

Never said it would prevent crimes.....as we have discussed in the gun threads laws punish when they are broken, they don't prevent crimes. Allowing men to sit in bathrooms waiting for victims can be stopped.....or, it used to be stopped. Now they have the law behind them for waiting in the bathroom as long as they want....they didn't have that before.....in fact...they can stay in the bathroom and use that time to set up cameras..........or whatever else they want because they now have time to do it...before...if they were in the bathroom..they could be arrested....now...hey, you can't arrest me, I am a woman in a man's body......

twist and turn as much as you want.......your lame attempts to draw me into a gun discussion are weak...

 

[Skylar]

He can also be arrested if he's assaulting women and children. If he's willing to assault women and children.....why would he give a fiddler's fuck about a *sign*?

And if signs have that much power, can't we just post a 'no assaulting women and children' sign outside the bathrooms? How about a 'No Bombing Allowed' sign at our airports? Shouldn't that magically resolve the problem?

Like I said.....your reasoning is about the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

Never said it would prevent crimes

Then you just contradicted the entire basis of your 'assaulting women and children' horseshit. As its to prevent such assaults that you justified the law in the first place.

And now you're abandoned it....insisting that you 'never said it would prevent crime'.

Its like watching a dog chase its own tail.

.....as we have discussed in the gun threads laws punish when they are broken, they don't prevent crimes. Allowing men to sit in bathrooms waiting for victims can be stopped.....or, it used to be stopped. Now they have the law behind them for waiting in the bathroom as long as they want....they didn't have that before.....in fact...they can stay in the bathroom and use that time to set up cameras..........or whatever else they want because they now have time to do it...before...if they were in the bathroom..they could be arrested....now...hey, you can't arrest me, I am a woman in a man's body......

If someone is hanging out on the bathroom with *any* intent other than using the facilities, they're already breaking the law. You can already arrest them. Making the law you're advocating gloriously unnecessary and worse than useless.

As first, if someone's going to assault women they're not going to be deterred by a law preventing them from using a bathroom. Second, because trans people are actually being harmed by being forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. They're be assaulted and harassed.

Your law actually *causes* the very crimes its supposedly intended to prevent. As I said, your argument is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

 

[2aguy]

Where do you get the "sign" from........if it is illegal to for a man to be in the women's bathroom...he can be arrested just for that....no need to wait till he assaults someone to arrest him.....

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

Never said it would prevent crimes

Then you just contradicted the entire basis of your 'assaulting women and children' horseshit. As its to prevent such assaults that you justified the law in the first place.

And now you're abandoned it....insisting that you 'never said it would prevent crime'.

Its like watching a dog chase its own tail.

.....as we have discussed in the gun threads laws punish when they are broken, they don't prevent crimes. Allowing men to sit in bathrooms waiting for victims can be stopped.....or, it used to be stopped. Now they have the law behind them for waiting in the bathroom as long as they want....they didn't have that before.....in fact...they can stay in the bathroom and use that time to set up cameras..........or whatever else they want because they now have time to do it...before...if they were in the bathroom..they could be arrested....now...hey, you can't arrest me, I am a woman in a man's body......

If someone is hanging out on the bathroom with *any* intent other than using the facilities, they're already breaking the law. You can already arrest them. Making the law you're advocating gloriously unnecessary and worse than useless.

As first, if someone's going to assault women they're not going to be deterred by a law preventing them from using a bathroom. Second, because trans people are actually being harmed by being forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. They're be assaulted and harassed.

Your law actually *causes* the very crimes its supposedly intended to prevent. As I said, your argument is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Sorry...wrong on all counts. Allowing men into women's bathrooms is wrong...and will lead to sexual assaults against women.......just like you nuts want to force people to rent to criminals. You are giving them legal access to young girls....anywhere else where a grown man is in the same room with a young girl disrobing.....he would be put in jail....and you want to give them legal cover......

 

[Skylar]

If he's going to assault women and children, why would a law the says he can't go into a bathroom prevent him from doing so? After all, there's already a law saying that he can't assault women and children, right? If that's not going to stop him, why would he honor a bathroom law?

Your argument is just beyond silly. And completely hypothetical.

Worse, transgender people are being assault in truth when forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. You're literally arguing that *real* harm should be inflicted on transgender people to prevent hypothetical harm based on wildly stupid reasoning. Where a law forbidding assault is meaningless.....but a law forbidding entry into a bathroom magically prevents it from happening.

No thank you.

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

Never said it would prevent crimes

Then you just contradicted the entire basis of your 'assaulting women and children' horseshit. As its to prevent such assaults that you justified the law in the first place.

And now you're abandoned it....insisting that you 'never said it would prevent crime'.

Its like watching a dog chase its own tail.

.....as we have discussed in the gun threads laws punish when they are broken, they don't prevent crimes. Allowing men to sit in bathrooms waiting for victims can be stopped.....or, it used to be stopped. Now they have the law behind them for waiting in the bathroom as long as they want....they didn't have that before.....in fact...they can stay in the bathroom and use that time to set up cameras..........or whatever else they want because they now have time to do it...before...if they were in the bathroom..they could be arrested....now...hey, you can't arrest me, I am a woman in a man's body......

If someone is hanging out on the bathroom with *any* intent other than using the facilities, they're already breaking the law. You can already arrest them. Making the law you're advocating gloriously unnecessary and worse than useless.

As first, if someone's going to assault women they're not going to be deterred by a law preventing them from using a bathroom. Second, because trans people are actually being harmed by being forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. They're be assaulted and harassed.

Your law actually *causes* the very crimes its supposedly intended to prevent. As I said, your argument is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Sorry...wrong on all counts. Allowing men into women's bathrooms is wrong...and will lead to sexual assaults against women.......just like you nuts want to force people to rent to criminals. You are giving them legal access to young girls....anywhere else where a grown man is in the same room with a young girl disrobing.....he would be put in jail....and you want to give them legal cover......

Nope. You just abandoned any crime prevention value with your 'never said it would prevent crime' admission. So crime prevention is out.

And if *anyone* is hanging out in the bathroom for any purpose beyond using the facilities, that's already a crime. And they can already be arrested. Meaning that your brain dead law is completely unnecessary.

And if a person is willing to assault women and children its ludicrous to conclude that they will abide a law that says they can't go into a bathroom. As women and children being assaulted already in bathrooms demonstrates. And not by transwomen, by the way.

And finally, your law *cause* assaults and harassment by forcing trans people to use bathrooms that don't match their gender identify. Demonstrating that your law is not simply stupid....its worse than useless.

 

[2aguy]

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

Never said it would prevent crimes

Then you just contradicted the entire basis of your 'assaulting women and children' horseshit. As its to prevent such assaults that you justified the law in the first place.

And now you're abandoned it....insisting that you 'never said it would prevent crime'.

Its like watching a dog chase its own tail.

.....as we have discussed in the gun threads laws punish when they are broken, they don't prevent crimes. Allowing men to sit in bathrooms waiting for victims can be stopped.....or, it used to be stopped. Now they have the law behind them for waiting in the bathroom as long as they want....they didn't have that before.....in fact...they can stay in the bathroom and use that time to set up cameras..........or whatever else they want because they now have time to do it...before...if they were in the bathroom..they could be arrested....now...hey, you can't arrest me, I am a woman in a man's body......

If someone is hanging out on the bathroom with *any* intent other than using the facilities, they're already breaking the law. You can already arrest them. Making the law you're advocating gloriously unnecessary and worse than useless.

As first, if someone's going to assault women they're not going to be deterred by a law preventing them from using a bathroom. Second, because trans people are actually being harmed by being forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. They're be assaulted and harassed.

Your law actually *causes* the very crimes its supposedly intended to prevent. As I said, your argument is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Sorry...wrong on all counts. Allowing men into women's bathrooms is wrong...and will lead to sexual assaults against women.......just like you nuts want to force people to rent to criminals. You are giving them legal access to young girls....anywhere else where a grown man is in the same room with a young girl disrobing.....he would be put in jail....and you want to give them legal cover......

Nope. You just abandoned any crime prevention value with your 'never said it would prevent crime' admission. So crime prevention is out.

And if *anyone* is hanging out in the bathroom for any purpose beyond using the facilities, that's already a crime. And they can already be arrested. Meaning that your brain dead law is completely unnecessary.

And if a person is willing to assault women and children its ludicrous to conclude that they will abide a law that says they can't go into a bathroom. As women and children being assaulted already in bathrooms demonstrates. And not by transwomen, by the way.

And finally, your law *cause* assaults and harassment by forcing trans people to use bathrooms that don't match their gender identify. Demonstrating that your law is not simply stupid....its worse than useless.

Nope....just being in the room with a young teenage girl in public who, is in a state of undress used to be against the law....teachers go to jail for that.......do you imagine that if a high school male coach walked through the girls locker room to use the bathroom he wouldn't be arrested....?

Now...he just says...today I am self identifying as a teenage girl...go ahead girls...shower up....

 

[2aguy]

Nope.....woman: officer, there is a man just hanging out in the women's bathroom......cop arrests man.

If its simple as that, then why do women and children get assaulted now in bathrooms?

And not by transgender women. Your 'solution' is in desperate search of a problem. As the people you're targeting are not the folks committing the crimes you're seeking to prevent. As your scenario is entirely notional.

Remember, its *already* illegal to go into a public bathroom with any other intent than to use the facilities. If anyone, man or woman, is hanging out without using them.....you can ask them to leave. So.....what's the fucking point of your law?

And of course, trans people are already being harmed by being forced to use bathrooms that conflict with their gender identity. Why would I ignore *real* harm in the face of your absolutely hypothetical imagined 'risk' for which the evidence simply doesn't match up?

Especially when assaults of women and children in bathrooms *already* demonstrate that your 'solution' doesn't prevent such crimes.

Never said it would prevent crimes

Then you just contradicted the entire basis of your 'assaulting women and children' horseshit. As its to prevent such assaults that you justified the law in the first place.

And now you're abandoned it....insisting that you 'never said it would prevent crime'.

Its like watching a dog chase its own tail.

.....as we have discussed in the gun threads laws punish when they are broken, they don't prevent crimes. Allowing men to sit in bathrooms waiting for victims can be stopped.....or, it used to be stopped. Now they have the law behind them for waiting in the bathroom as long as they want....they didn't have that before.....in fact...they can stay in the bathroom and use that time to set up cameras..........or whatever else they want because they now have time to do it...before...if they were in the bathroom..they could be arrested....now...hey, you can't arrest me, I am a woman in a man's body......

If someone is hanging out on the bathroom with *any* intent other than using the facilities, they're already breaking the law. You can already arrest them. Making the law you're advocating gloriously unnecessary and worse than useless.

As first, if someone's going to assault women they're not going to be deterred by a law preventing them from using a bathroom. Second, because trans people are actually being harmed by being forced into bathrooms that don't match their gender identity. They're be assaulted and harassed.

Your law actually *causes* the very crimes its supposedly intended to prevent. As I said, your argument is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.

Sorry...wrong on all counts. Allowing men into women's bathrooms is wrong...and will lead to sexual assaults against women.......just like you nuts want to force people to rent to criminals. You are giving them legal access to young girls....anywhere else where a grown man is in the same room with a young girl disrobing.....he would be put in jail....and you want to give them legal cover......

Nope. You just abandoned any crime prevention value with your 'never said it would prevent crime' admission. So crime prevention is out.

And if *anyone* is hanging out in the bathroom for any purpose beyond using the facilities, that's already a crime. And they can already be arrested. Meaning that your brain dead law is completely unnecessary.

And if a person is willing to assault women and children its ludicrous to conclude that they will abide a law that says they can't go into a bathroom. As women and children being assaulted already in bathrooms demonstrates. And not by transwomen, by the way.

And finally, your law *cause* assaults and harassment by forcing trans people to use bathrooms that don't match their gender identify. Demonstrating that your law is not simply stupid....its worse than useless.

Please....enlighten us......

Is it currently legal, or illegal for a male coach to walk through the shower room of the female locker room and use the bathroom...while the girls are showering?

We will wait for your legal explanation......

 

[NoNukes]

Since when do lefties want oil fro SA? You are just bring ridiculously making things up.

When they vigorously object to off shore drilling rights, Alaskan drilling, etc. They also object to adding nuclear power in this nation. Both then continue a dependence on foreign oil much more so than it needs to be.

There are better, more intelligent energy sources. The left is for getting rid of dependence on oil.

Name one.

Wagon trains?

He said --> "There are better, more intelligent energy sources. The left is for getting rid of dependence on oil."

I say the left is for getting rid of dependence on anything the right proposes no matter how sensible or wise.
They will put this nation at a great security risk just to look like they are wiser. Since they find anything moral or godly to be odious they have no chance of succeeding.

The same can be said against the right. Anything proposed by the left is bad. How is getting rid of dependence on oil bad? How is cleaner energy bad?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

This Internet Porn Giant Had the Best Reaction to North Carolina's Religious Freedom Law
Forget Paypal. Its serious now.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Since when do lefties want oil from SA?

Unless you're rich (oh I forgot liberals don't like rich folks) and can afford a battery powered car, you have to buy gas, which was refined from oil imported from Saudi Arabia.

That is unless you want to ride your tricycle to work each day.

 

[NoNukes]

Since when do lefties want oil from SA?

Unless you're rich (oh I forgot liberals don't like rich folks) and can afford a battery powered car, you have to buy gas, which was refined from oil imported from Saudi Arabia.

That is unless you want to ride your tricycle to work each day.

Your reading comprehension class is failing you.