Fading white evangelicals have made a desperate end-of-life bargain with Trump

Tulc:

How are they going to know who's changed anything without looking? There's nothing that needs to be changed in the bathrooms, but it's cute u seem to think there is.
tulc(thinks these talking points are getting more desperate as time goes on)

Truth7t7 Response:

Because its current government regulation in many States, that accomodation be made for the other .001 thats why.

"Bill" likes to cross dress,mini skirt, wig, high heels, purse, because he feels like being "Shirley" for the day, but he don't like to shave, with a adams apple as big as a hatchet, hairy legs, arms, and back, with a voice as deep as a base drum?

As a store manager, you gonna let "Bill" hangout in the women's restroom, after receiving complaints?

I started a job in a federal facility 15 years ago in maintenance, I had a job order that the light was out in the bathroom, no description to male or female. I looked in both restroomsand the lights were fine, went backto the boss and he stated it's the "Other"restroom?

He then took me to the office of Michelle, that was born Michael.

He took me to the "Other" restroom where I changed the light.

I couldn't believe it then, and I still can't believe it today.

Truth7t7 said:

Do you think business in America should accomodate the .001 Of society that chooses to have a sex change, or chooses to dress in drag for the day, with their personal finace to create indivudual restrooms?

Click to expand...

The same argument could be made for those with other conditions that are unusual. It's the first step to the kind of culling that eugenicists advocated. Not a good thought.

Why would they need individual restrooms?

"Bill" likes to cross dress,mini skirt, wig, high heels, purse, because he feels like he's "Shirley" trapped in a mans body, he has a beard, with a adams apple as big as a hatchet, hairy legs, arms, and back, with a voice as deep as a base drum?

"Bill" will not use the men's facility, because he believes he's a female?

As a store manager, you gonna have "Bill" removed from the women's restroom, after receiving complaints from customers of him being in the women's restroom?

The Barbarian said:

The same argument could be made for those with other conditions that are unusual. It's the first step to the kind of culling that eugenicists advocated. Not a good thought.

Why would they need individual restrooms?

Click to expand...

tulc said:

...how are they going to know who's changed anything without looking? There's nothing that needs to be changed in the bathrooms, but it's cute you seem to think there is.
tulc(thinks these talking points are getting more desperate as time goes on)

Click to expand...

The right isn't the group wanting change. You are.
Male. Female. Easy enough to understand unless
someone is in another dimension mentally.

I have to wonder at those who, with all the real
problems facing us today, choose to make their
life or death issue "allowing men and boys with
delusions to use women's restrooms."

pat34lee said:

The right isn't the wooup wanting change. You are.
Male. Female. Easy enough to understand unless
someone is in another dimension mentally.

I have to wonder at those who, with all the real
problems facing us today, choose to make their
life or death issue "allowing men and boys with
delusions to use women's restrooms."

Click to expand...

My wife don't want "Bill" in post #44 in her restroom, I don't want "Bill" in my wife's restoom, the majority of women would see it the same.

Your the store manager, what ya gonna do?

Respond to post #44

The Barbarian said:

The same argument could be made for those with other conditions that are unusual. It's the first step to the kind of culling that eugenicists advocated. Not a good thought.

Why would they need individual restrooms?

Click to expand...

There should be an award given out for such an absurd use of a slippery slope argument.

It's like saying we shouldn't have height restrictions for roller coasters, since that could conceivably be the first step in a process that ends in the mass murder of all short people.

Now it just might be more likely that enforcing in law the idea that men with delusion of being women are actually women would have the effect of destroying our society's ability to recognize reality or apply basic reasoning. However, I have a feeling that you're not worried about this particular slope.

Truth7t7 said:

My wife don't want "Bill" in post #44 in her restroom, I don't want "Bill" in my wife's restoom, the majority of women would see it the same.

Your the store manager, what ya gonna do?

Respond to post #44

Click to expand...

I'm on the same side here.
Anyone who is delusional enough to think they
can change genders needs to use private restrooms
or stay at home.

MoonlessNight said:

There should be an award given out for such an absurd use of a slippery slope argument.

It's like saying we shouldn't have height restrictions for roller coasters, since that could conceivably be the first step in a process that ends in the mass murder of all short people.

Click to expand...

That's what conservatives in Germany said:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.


Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.


Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.


Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

It's not a difficult concept; it's one the founders of this nation pointed out. You can't take away someone's freedom, without taking freedom away from everyone else. There are a lot of things that people are free to do that I don't like. Doesn't mean that they don't have a right to do them.

And laws don't seem to really protect people in this kind of thing...

pat34lee said:

I'm on the same side here.
Anyone who is delusional enough to think they
can change genders needs to use private restrooms
or stay at home.

Click to expand...

Stalls have doors. Unless you're curious enough to peek over the top of the door, how would you even know?

The Barbarian said:

That's what conservatives in Germany said:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.


Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.


Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.


Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

It's not a difficult concept; it's one the founders of this nation pointed out. You can't take away someone's freedom, without taking freedom away from everyone else. There are a lot of things that people are free to do that I don't like. Doesn't mean that they don't have a right to do them.

And laws don't seem to really protect people in this kind of thing...

Click to expand...

By the same reasoning we could say that since the government is forcing Christians to violate their consciences at the moment, it's only a matter of time before the government rounds Christians up in death camps.

But again, I doubt that you'd be worried about that particular slope. In fact, you aren't really engaging in reasoning at all here, but rather a cheap rhetorical trick of fear mongering. The more that you can get people to think about Nazis and eugenicists killing undesirable races, the less that they'll think about the actual issues.

The Barbarian said:

That's what conservatives in Germany said:
First they came the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Sociaist

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.


Then they came for the Jew?
And I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.


Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

It's not a difficult concept; it's one the founders of this nation pointed out. You can't take away someone's freedom, without taking freedom away from everyone else. There are a lot of things that people are free to do that I don't like. Doesn't mean that they don't have a right to do them.

And laws don't seem to really protect people in this kind of thing...

Click to expand...

You don't take the privacy away from the majority (999) women, to pretend you are giving protected freedom to (1) a mentally ill "Bill" who needs to be in a Psych hospital.

Then (they) come to kill the unborn?
And I did speak out because the unborn are God's creation, human beings.

Then (they) come to establish same sex marriage as normal, and push their agenda upon the majority?
I speak out because homosexuality is not normal, and against nature.

Then (they) come, trying to establish homosexual churches, stating they are representatives of my God's kingdom the church?
I speak out because they are not.

Then (they) come to establish their agenda?
I speak out against their agenda.

Who are (they)?

"The Liberals"!

The Barbarian said:

Stalls have doors. Unless you're curious enough to peek over the top of the door, how would you even know?

Click to expand...

I don't want them at the same sinks and mirrors in
the front area as women.

pat34lee said:

I don't want them at the same sinks and mirrors in
the front area as women.

Click to expand...

I think it's a lost cause.

A majority of Americans do not support laws that require transgender people to use bathrooms based on their sex assigned at birth, a new poll finds.

According to a Public Religion Research Institute survey released Friday, 53 percent of responders said they opposed laws that would limit transgender bathroom rights.

Thirty-nine percent of responders said that they would support such laws, and 8 percent remained undecided.

Opinion was split along party lines, with 65 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents opposing the laws, while 59 percent of Republicans saying they support such laws."This is a case where it really is Republicans kind of pulling away and being more of an outlier to the rest of the country," Public Religion Research Institute chief executive Robert P. Jones told Reuters.
Poll: Most oppose bathroom transgender laws

MoonlessNight said:

By the same reasoning we could say that since the government is forcing Christians to violate their consciences at the moment,

Click to expand...

The same argument was made against giving blacks equal rights as human beings. "If you make us respect their rights, you're violating our religious rights!"

No. No one's freedom of conscience extends to taking rights away from others.

But again, I doubt that you'd be worried about that particular slope. In fact, you aren't really engaging in reasoning at all here, but rather a cheap rhetorical trick of fear mongering.

Click to expand...

It happened in Germany. It happened in the South of the United States. If you think it can't happen again, you're plainly wrong.

The Barbarian said:

I think it's a lost cause.

A majority of Americans do not support laws that require transgender people to use bathrooms based on their sex assigned at birth, a new poll finds.

According to a Public Religion Research Institute survey released Friday, 53 percent of responders said they opposed laws that would limit transgender bathroom rights.

Thirty-nine percent of responders said that they would support such laws, and 8 percent remained undecided.

Opinion was split along party lines, with 65 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents opposing the laws, while 59 percent of Republicans saying they support such laws."This is a case where it really is Republicans kind of pulling away and being more of an outlier to the rest of the country," Public Religion Research Institute chief executive Robert P. Jones told Reuters.
Poll: Most oppose bathroom transgender laws

Click to expand...

This is an issue settled by civility, not by government. Not everything needs government involvement. What pronouns people use and whether they are offended by particular people using a bathroom, is something that should be left up to common sense judgments.

The Barbarian said:

The same argument was made against giving blacks equal rights as human beings. "If you make us respect their rights, you're violating our religious rights!"

No. No one's freedom of conscience extends to taking rights away from others.



It happened in Germany. It happened in the South of the United States. If you think it can't happen again, you're plainly wrong.

Click to expand...

I know that you think that you're responding to what I've said, but all this does is confirm my point: you're going to keep in on insisting that what Christians are doing is going to lead to the return of the Nazis and mass lynchings, while at the same time insist that nothing in the current anti-Christian culture can possibly lead anywhere objectionable. And you do this not by providing any reasoning, but simply declaring by fiat that one slippery slope is inevitable and the other is ridiculous.

The sad thing is that you continue using this line of rhetoric even after it has become abundantly clear that no one in this thread is moved by it. If you're going to try to win the day with a dishonest approach, you should at least have enough sense to try one that actually works.

The Barbarian said:

I think it's a lost cause.

A majority of Americans do not support laws that require transgender people to use bathrooms based on their sex assigned at birth, a new poll finds.

According to a Public Religion Research Institute survey released Friday, 53 percent of responders said they opposed laws that would limit transgender bathroom rights.

Thirty-nine percent of responders said that they would support such laws, and 8 percent remained undecided.

Opinion was split along party lines, with 65 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents opposing the laws, while 59 percent of Republicans saying they support such laws."This is a case where it really is Republicans kind of pulling away and being more of an outlier to the rest of the country," Public Religion Research Institute chief executive Robert P. Jones told Reuters.
Poll: Most oppose bathroom transgender laws

Click to expand...

Your polling agency (PRRI) and Robert P. Jones, nothing but a liberal outlet for fake news in my opinion, a guest host on CNN.

They are partnered with (Berkley Center For Religion, Peace, and World Affairs)

They are partenered with "The Atlantic" Magazine/Publisher, owned by Laurene Jobs, Apple Computers founder Steve Jobs Widow.

San Francisco Bay Area Apple Computer, A Rainbow Apple With A Bite Missing, What Does That Represent?

Nothing Biased Or Liberal In That Line Up Is There?