| Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| NC school allows students to carry pepper spray in case they encounter trans classmates in bathroom | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 11 2016, 01:52 PM (2,041 Views) | |
| Demagogue | May 11 2016, 03:20 PM Post #21 |
![]()
Administrator
|
lol, you posted a topic from a source where the article author twisted the story to meet his agenda despite the fact that the actual story had very little to do with said agenda. Then you posted a second source that proved that the first source twisted the story. There is merit to the discussion of the badly written NC law but this particular story does not have much merit. There is an old adage that I usually find to be good advice. "When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."
Edited by Demagogue, May 11 2016, 03:22 PM.
|
| People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm. | |
![]() |
|
| clone | May 11 2016, 03:21 PM Post #22 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
They could miss on the first shot?
|
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| CautionaryTales | May 11 2016, 03:23 PM Post #23 |
|
What didn't twist is the fact that they will now allow students to use pepper spray as a weapon if they feel threatened in the restroom by that "transsexual" lurking around in their 14 18 year old imagination. The author pointed out the flaw in the schools logic. The flaw that there is a predictable consequence. Edited by CautionaryTales, May 11 2016, 03:25 PM.
|
|
Have you paid your internet taxes? | |
![]() |
|
| clone | May 11 2016, 03:26 PM Post #24 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
Hillary carries a bottle of hot sauce in her purse...perhaps that could be the compromise...
|
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| Dem4life | May 11 2016, 03:28 PM Post #25 |
|
Can someone explain to me when transgender people started attacking children in public restrooms... |
![]() |
|
| Demagogue | May 11 2016, 03:29 PM Post #26 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Never, not one time, did any of the school officials state that an actual transgender person would be the threat that might need the pepper spray. That part was invented by the article author. |
| People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm. | |
![]() |
|
| Demagogue | May 11 2016, 03:32 PM Post #27 |
![]()
Administrator
|
The problem is not the transgender folks. Never has been. The problem is a badly written ordinance which opened the door for anyone to use any bathroom even if they were not really transgender. The sad part is that it was an ordinance that was completely unneeded. That ordinance spawned the badly written state law which used gender at time of birth as it's standard. That standard is something that is frankly, unenforceable in the real world. So we have a case of two badly written laws that never should have been. Edited by Demagogue, May 11 2016, 03:32 PM.
|
| People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm. | |
![]() |
|
| clone | May 11 2016, 03:33 PM Post #28 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
Sorry dude...after the last time I have drawn the line of googling anything with the word tranny in it....the mental image of Hillay naked is bad enough but her sporting a schlong was more than one person should be made to endure.... |
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | May 11 2016, 03:34 PM Post #29 |
|
So where is this crisis of men entering women's bathrooms and assaulting them, because the men think they're permitted to enter the women's bathrooms legally? You do understand that assaulting a woman is illegal, even if you can enter a bathroom without it being a crime, right? And that in most states it has NEVER been a crime for someone to enter a bathroom different from their gender? |
![]() |
|
| Dr. B | May 11 2016, 03:36 PM Post #30 |
|
Member since 2004
|
Why are leftists wasting so much time and taxpayer money on such a stupid crusade? |
| #BringWilmyBack | |
![]() |
|
| clone | May 11 2016, 03:38 PM Post #31 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
Remember the Occupoopers? |
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| CautionaryTales | May 11 2016, 03:40 PM Post #32 |
|
They changed the rule and the author pointed out what it meant... Are you seriously saying they did this by accident? What a coincidence?
|
|
Have you paid your internet taxes? | |
![]() |
|
| Dem4life | May 11 2016, 03:41 PM Post #33 |
|
I remember when cons wasted nearly $100 million trying to repeal the ACA... |
![]() |
|
| coverpoint | May 11 2016, 03:41 PM Post #34 |
|
A "boy" does not have grounds to sue a teacher for questioning him about his desire to enter a bathroom either before or after the Charlotte ordinance. The ordinance deals with discrimination, not the rights and duties of school staff. That is like saying that a teacher can be sued by a black student because there are laws that prohibit discrimination of public access based on race; or questioning a Christian student because there are laws that prohibit discrimination of public access based on religion. The Charlotte ordinance just adds gender identification to the list of those that cannot be discriminated against. |
![]() |
|
| Dem4life | May 11 2016, 03:43 PM Post #35 |
|
While there is much racism in the south, the most viewed porn in the bible belt is blacks having sex with whites. Methinks these laws against transgender people are just cons projecting again. You for example admit to googling tranny's and I'm certain there are many more like you out there... |
![]() |
|
| Demagogue | May 11 2016, 03:49 PM Post #36 |
![]()
Administrator
|
What the Charlotte ordinance did is make it permissible for a man to enter the women's room. Prior to the Charlotte ordinance if a man entered the women's room the folks who run the facility could intercept the man prior to his entering and tell him that he can not go in. If the man were to tell those questioning him that he "identifies" as a female then the person who runs the facility would have to decide if he wanted to allow the man to enter based on that assertion. If the person who runs the facility told the man they he was not permitted to enter the women's room then there was nothing that the man could do other than accept their decision or choose to violate the law by committing what would then be considered trespassing. After the Charlotte ordinance, in the same situation the folks who run the facility could question the man who was about to enter the women's room but they could not stop him. If they tried to stop him then they would open themselves up to a discrimination lawsuit. So, even if the man looked like a guy, walked like a guy, talked like a guy, and was pretty obviously some kind of perv, they can not stop him from entering the women's room to peep at women or just be creepy in general. As you yourself pointed out, the Charlotte ordinance was not necessary as trans folks were already using the bathroom of their choice but the loosely written nature of that ordinance forced a response at the state level. That response was also badly written. So we have two laws being written by people with different political agendas about something where no law was actually needed.
Edited by Demagogue, May 11 2016, 03:56 PM.
|
| People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm. | |
![]() |
|
| Demagogue | May 11 2016, 03:53 PM Post #37 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Actually, many teachers have been sued for discrimination against blacks and other protected classes where no discrimination occurred. So yes, adding another protected class will eventually lead to law suits by greedy lawyers looking to make a quick buck because they know that the school system and other government agencies will almost always settle even when no discrimination occurred. As others have pointed out, real transgender folks have been using the bathroom of their choice all along at it was not a problem so why was the ordinance needed? It was needed because some lawyers saw an opportunity to create business. |
| People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would do them harm. | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | May 11 2016, 03:58 PM Post #38 |
|
So what I hear you saying is that there has been no actual rash of men peepers hanging out in women's bathrooms. The people who wrote the second law are just assuming that this would be the case because "reasons". Well, that makes perfect sense. Clearly the assumption that significant numbers of men would reveal themselves to be creepy peepers who like to hang out in women's bathrooms is a rational reason for passing a law that makes it illegal for transgenders to use the bathroom of their choice. In conservativeville... |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | May 11 2016, 04:03 PM Post #39 |
|
If no discrimination has actually occurred, then discrimination could not proved. If discrimination cannot be proved then either the case is dismissed for lack of evidence, or if there is sufficient evidence to take it to trial, a verdict of not guilty is returned. The thing is, for a case to go past the very initial stages without being dismissed requires that enough evidence be presented to the court that the question as to whether or not discrimination occurred is open to some debate. No evidence of discrimination, at all, results in a quick dismal for lack of evidence. |
![]() |
|
| Coast2coast | May 11 2016, 04:07 PM Post #40 |
|
The hate crusade is not coming from liberals. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · UnitedStates.com DOMESTIC U.S. news · Next Topic » |








8:38 PM Jul 10