You're lost, as usual. The concern is making a law that states that transgenders can enter their chosen sex's bathroom, and then creepers using that as a window/excuse to enter into the women's bathroom. Why give creepers and perverts an opening to endanger the safety of women and children? So it's not necessarily around the transgenders themselves, but also around others who could take advantage the law and use it as an excuse or loophole to endanger women and children.
Here ya go-- Charlotte city council: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article61786967.html
It doesn't. Typical winger tactic. Create fear from an unproven and unlikely event when the reality is that women and children would be at greater risk of assault by men outside the restroom since there is no evidence showing TG assaults in the restroom. And in the absence of any real evidence, the usual out "its common sense" gets trotted out there.
herp derp fail So you're in favor of making it easier to take advantage of women and children. I guess I'm the minority who still values their safety.
Where's the outrage from the right about the homosexual male conservatives that go to bathrooms to hook up? These guys have made bathrooms very unsafe! Actual secretly recorded quote from Larry Craig Spoiler Honestly...BigTexxx I am outraged by your misplaced outrage and outlandish fear.
based on liltexxx's stupid logic, a man who wants to assault women in bathrooms would be deterred by a law which prevents men from entering their bathrooms, but not be deterred by the law which says it's a crime to assault women.
Sure it does. Creepers can simply claim to be transgender and enter the women's bathroom if there was a law that allowed this. Obvious point.
Alabama passed a law restricting municipal governments from increasing minimum wages. I guess government is better the closer it is to the constituents, unless those constituents are liberal, those people can go f*** themselves... http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/02/2...s-and-towns-from-increasing-minimum-wage.html Alabama passes law barring cities and towns from increasing minimum wage Published February 27, 2016 FoxNews.com Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley signed a bill Thursday barring cities and towns from setting their own minimum wage just as Birmingham was set to raise it to $10.10. The legislation’s passage came after the Birmingham City Council voted to increase the city’s minimum wage, according to AL.com. The block drew criticism from Birmingham council leader Jonathan Austin who said “we will continue to work together to stand and fight for our citizens.” “It’s certainly is unfortunate, if it stands up, it is a loss for those who deserve to earn a livable wage in the city of Birmingham, and, for that matter, the state of Alabama,” Austin said. “But the state obviously disagrees.” Bentley signed the bill less than an hour after it was passed, AL.com reported. Alabama has no state minimum wage and has used the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour since 2009 when it was last raised. The Guardian noted that a full-time employee who works for the entire year will only earn $15,080 per year. State senator Jabo Waggoner, R-Vestavia Hills, argued Thursday that an increased minimum wage would stall economic development in the state. He claims business owners contacted him and asked him if they would have to close up shop because of a possible increased minimum wage, according to The Guardian. “We want businesses to expand and create more jobs – not cut entry-level jobs because of a patchwork of local minimum wages causes operating costs to rise. Our actions today will create predictability and consistency for Alabama’s economy, which benefits everyone,” Waggoner said. Alabama Democrats have said the federal minimum wage is too low for the working poor with families to survive on. “Somebody has to recognize that we have a working-poor class of people that are not just in Birmingham,” state senator Linda Coleman-Madison, D-Birmingham, said. She added that she is sponsoring a new bill that will make the minimum wage in all of Alabama $10.10. “We don’t move until we’re forced to move. For once, I’d like for this legislative body to be the leader.” Birmingham, the state’s largest city, is home to 212,237 residents and its per capita income was about $19,650 between 2009 and 2013, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2014, Oklahoma also passed a bill keeping cities from raising their minimum wage. Arizona passed a similar law in 2013, but it was overturned last June.
[Educational Post] The minimum wage outlaws jobs that pay less than the minimum wage. It does not create jobs. A minimum wage prevents employees and employers from entering into agreements to work for mutually acceptable terms. Fewer jobs is the obvious outcome of any law that outlaws selected jobs. The minimum wage was originally set up to block immigrants from working for below market wages and taking these jobs from existing citizens. Now hilariously the lower classes have been brainwashed into supporting a minimum wage that blocks them from working. This is yet another example of the unintentional harm done to the lower classes by misguided liberal policies. Education is so critically important for a well functioning society. GOOD DAY
Your posts show laziness, probably because it's been hard trying to craft two troll personas at the same time.
As for texxx's absurd argumentation: You'll note the actual experts in reducing sexual assaults for women step up, and not those that lean on this argument when it conveniences them.
[Educational Post] HO HO HO Listen rookie, you are out of your league when you step to The_Conquistador. My intellectual superiority is known far and wide. Women seek out my company not only because of my ravishing good looks, but also because of my rapier wit, and my well constructed political and economic arguments. I won't even detail how beautiful my well manicured lawn is. The_Conquistador is the very definition of industrious. Lazy is a word that has never once been used to describe my posts. I look forward to your apology, and will remind you that this is your first and last warning on this matter.
That may be fair. I can't speak for the trans. For myself, I don't think acceptance needs to be required in a solution. Just equal protection and equal accommodation. For the most part, people self-segregate without any need for enforcement or proof. If there is an incident that blows up the point that law enforcement intervention is necessary, proof is possible. Real trans people will have all kinds of fingerprints when you review their lives -- friends who know they're trans at the least. If something comes to the courts and a guy can't produce anything that supports the idea he self-identifies as the opposite sex, is the court going to believe him? I honestly hadn't considered it, but you're right that it belongs in the debate also, and probably in front. I think the liberal self-identify approach is still the most appropriate here. The prisons would probably vet those self-identifications, but since prisoners' rights are somewhat abrogated I don't know if that's legally all that problematic. I agree on decriminalizing the use of facilities. And, they weren't criminalized in the first place until North Carolina passed a law about it. But, I wouldn't call it a red herring. When we were talking about HERO, it was the liberals who were trying to belittle the importance of regulating bathroom use; now the shoe is on the other foot and conservatives are belittling it. The truth is, as mundane as it is, being able to use the bathroom is pretty damn important to every single person in the country. I agree its a red herring in lawmakers' attempts to centralize power in the state government, but it is not a red herring for LGBT rights. For trans, this is not some feint while trying to accomplish something else -- they need to take a piss somewhere.
bahaha. Dude, you're a broken clock when it comes to trolling. Switch to Honey Bear, the Slavic association is more realistic and I generally enjoy those posts more.
It's not the TGs that are the concern, it was that it made for another way for someone with an ulterior motive to gain an illicit access to a vulnerable place where people are isolated-- now they have an excuse if they want or need it. What was common sense was for nothing to have been done. Go into the bathroom that matches your "presentation" and do your business quietly. That .01 of .003 of the adult population got harssed allegedly because of their TG status is no reason to make a law about it. As others have indicatedd, there are already laws against assault or battery.
