DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Parent's Sing "Jesus Loves Me" to drown out support for trans-gendered bathroom policy

thats what it seems like.

people are more concerned over legislating morality.

That's very true. I just find it odd how the discussion across the country seems to focus on the least significant part of the bill while ignoring the rest of it.

Least significant is a matter of perception though.

For trans people, it's a huge deal.

For me, keeping pervs away from my daughters in the restroom is a huge deal. Where does the line get drawn?

Everything that happens is already and remains illegal.

If the pervs were gonna get in the bathroom, without bathroom police, they were ALREADY doing it.

Y'all acting like this is some new situation is mind boggling.

So, bathroom police or nah? You gonna volunteer to post guard all night and check Id cards?

Anybody else?

And ya'll acting like making it easier and legal is going to change something.

Hey, here's a novel idea you might like: Let's take what is currently illegal, and make it easier for it to occur.

Wow, man, nobody is denying anyone the right to use a bathroom.

So bathroom police or nah?

So, deny your right to challenge someone going into the bathroom with your daughter, or nah?

LMAO!

Make it legal for ANYONE who simply SAYS they identify as a certain sex use any bathroom they want just because they SAID SO?

Yes, because everyone is so trustworthy!

Bathroom police or nah?

Nah, just don't create new laws that make me a criminal for protecting those I love.

His question has been answered several times, I'm not sure what more he wants.

It hasn't.

Do you want bathroom police or nah, arch?

You gonna stand guard and check ID cards?

Y'all complain about everything.

Asked and answered.

Educate yourself.

Pointless

I'm so concerned about strangers looking at my child's genitals that I want strangers to personally look at my child's genitals to make sure they use the right bathroom.

Has anyone explained how a cop can enforce a bathroom bill like what NC and other states propose without seeing your genitals? This is worse than Ohio's state law that says you can't get a fish drunk. At least the fish would have had a good story to tell. In the former case me and my kids would be fondled by a stranger with a badge.

That's why I said before bro, this is nothing but a feel good law. It's not gonna actually prevent anything.

Combined the fact that even Pit said all the other crap in the bill, and I'm left wondering why anybody supports this.

But ya know. I gotta educate myself. I'm not allowed to look at the big picture.

Has it though? I didn't do a deep search on this thread but I didn't really see any links posting how the state of NC was gonna police this law.

Take out the whether its right to certain people, or the children, or what have you. How do law enforcement officials in NC enforce this law? How do they enforce it with respect to privacy laws?

One thought that came to mind would be TSA style body scanners, but that would require a large expense to every business in the state. Plus you currently still have some guy/gal in a room checking over the image. Also right now body scanners are meant to NOT overtly show your genitals, so we'd have to reprogram them... to you know. be more accurate. So every time someone used a public bathroom, there is the potential for someone to hack that machine and get your nudes.

In which case I'm even further perplexed conservatives would want this bill, because adding laws by its very nature expands the governments reach. Laws that can't be enforced are a waste of both time and money.

You shouldn't be surprised bro.

I said it before, big government is only hated by conservatives with regards to business.

Indivual citizens? It's free game. They love legislating morality.

Law enforcement only gets involved if there's an issue. If transgenders are legally allowed to use the wrong bathroom, and you question them, bam, you're a law breaker.


People, we're talking about using the bathroom. Not one person's right to use a bathroom has even been questioned.

And how will they know there's an issue without checking skirts?

Pointless bill.

Arch, explain it to me like I'm 5. How does law enforcement enforce this law? "Getting involved" isn't clear enough language.

The question isn't using *A* bathroom, it's using a specific bathroom. The law as I understood it is meant to state that it would be illegal for someone with a penis to use a bathroom assigned for someone with a vagina. I'm merely asking how a policeman, or shopowner, or ANYONE would be able to prove I have a penis without looking down my pants.

I thought you knew I was being coy? I'm just demonstrating the cognitive dissonance

Ahh, my bad.

It's fine, especially because I do have a legit question in this thread, on enforcement. Besides, sarcasm in text is really hard to pull off, and I forgot to use purple

To my understanding, if the law didn't pass, it would be illegal for you to even question someone walking into a bathroom.

Cops don't get involved unless a law is broken. That is true in just about all situations (not talking transgenders and bathrooms here, ok)

You keep forgetting the rights of middle school girls who don't want to see male body parts or do not want to be seen naked by a person w/male body parts.

I don't know why they have laws against child pornography. (as an extreme example) They just love legislating controls over our behavior.

I don't know why we have laws against stealing, They just love legislating morality.

I don't know why they have laws against a man beating up his wife. They just love legislating morality.

I don't know why they have laws against theft. They just love legislating morality.

Almost every single criminal law, and most civil laws are attempts at legislating one kind of behavior or another, and most make a kind of moral judgement, saying that this is bad, unacceptable, and illegal.

This law is no different.

Do I expect that it will keep every pervert out of the girl's bathroom? Of course not. However, what it might do is cut down on the number of people using the "wrong" bathroom, and so we look closer at someone doing so, especially if there are children in there.

We lock our doors at night, not because we judge all people to be bad, evil thieves, but because bad, evil thieves do exist. We are making a moral judgement there too. We know that our doors and locks may not keep a truly committed thief out of our house, but we make it harder for the to break in and take our stuff.
We don't want to make it easier for them to do so.

We have alarms on cars because we want to make it harder for people to steal them. We are not judging all people, and saying that they are all evil thieves, but we are saying that there are thieves in the world, and we need to protect ourselves from them the best we can.

It seems to me that this bathroom law is designed to cut down on the opportunities some people would have to commit acts of violence against the women and children we love. A man walking into a girl's restroom right now draws attention, and the person seeing this can either observe the situation, or call for help. If we just accept that everyone who walks into a particular restroom belongs there, then we ignore the possibilities of an evil act occurring. I understand that attacks can happen by an evil person against another person of the same gender, and that is also a concern. However, just because one is harder to control by law doesn't mean that we should ignore reality, and make it easier for these kinds of things to occur.

That's not big government. It's common sense.

NOPE we should have men using mens rooms and ladies using ladies rooms. Plain simple, and commen sense.

Wait a minute Y-town-common sense? Aaaaand liberals?

Nnnnnope.

It's absolutely big government.

The only way this law can even be enforced is with cops.

So thanks for clarifying that we need bathroom police, checking every skirt that goes into the restroom.

Also, your post doesn't make a lick of sense.

Those laws violate others rights. A trans person wishing to use a bathroom they identify with does not.

As for Ted, that applies to you as well.

I guess equality and conservatism doesn't go together. Thanks for letting me know that.

If you have a penis, you go to the mens room. If you have a vagina, you go to the womens room. Problem solve.

Of course, you will argue that. And of course, you will be wrong.

It's really simple.

At first I was wondering why rocket posted the pick of the white/black water fountains.

Thanks to Arch, I now know why, and agree.

"Hey, you see that fountain marked white? That's for white people,that found is for colored people. It's really simple".

Right arch?

It's already illegal to murder, but that doesn't stop you from wanting to ban the 2nd amendment.

Seriously dude, why is it that only the perverted get their rights defended by you guys?

Like Vers said, what about the rights of the people who don't want members of another gender in the bathroom they're using?

Why don't they matter to you?

When have I ever said that I wanted the 2nd amendment banned?

Me thinks you can't prove that statement.

They do matter.

Because what I'm seeing is way more females defend trans people using the bathroom than not.

You get that right? On this stance, you're actually the minority.

Feels funny, doesn't it.

How many females have gay best friends, or trans friends and such they go into the bathrooms with all the time?

Hell, my wife works with 3 of them, 2 already going through with surgeries.

So trans people are perverted now? That's the narrative were going with?

Ah, an attempt to make me look racist. Nice try, race baiter

Here's how it should be: If you have a black penis, or a white penis, or a brown penis, or a yellow penis, or a red penis - you should use the restroom designed for penises.

See? That's inclusive. You have a penis, go to the mens room. It's really not hard to follow along there, is it, race baiter?