Vox: PayPal makes it official: North Carolina's anti-LGBTQ law will cost the state jobs

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

And the laws were needed at that time because a much larger portion of the population were racist ***holes.  It's not that way anymore.  Yes there are still pockets and you won't get rid of it all.  But at least let them show their positions to the public.  One, it allows a private entity to do as they see fit.  Two, it lets us all see that private entity's positions. Three, it lets us go protest and shut them down. 

I'm pretty sure we don't ALL know how that ended.  Ally McBeal?  Really?

 

This is some of the most ass backwards way of thinking I've ever seen.  

[TheGreatBuzz]

Donald F'ing Trump is the frontrunner for the GOP nomination and you believe this?

I said it, didn't I?  

 

I know this seems to get lost on some of the more feeble minded but there are people that support him IN SPITE OF the crap he says.  It has been pointed out numerous times that he is actually the most moderate republican when it comes to the issues.  Now I used to support him because I liked most of his stances and could tolerate some of the dumb stuff he said.  He doubled down on the dumb stuff and since lost my support.  And I bet a large portion of Republicans are moving this way hence why he hasn't locked up the nomination yet (and hopefully won't). 

 

I believe people in general aren't as racist as liberals like to make them out to be.  People are realists though.  I have admitted myself that I'm not racist but am definitely class-ist, if that is a real thing.  And I think a lot of people are that way even if they won't admit it.

This is some of the most ass backwards way of thinking I've ever seen.  

You may want to got edit that.  Apparently the filter is broken.  Didn't catch mine either.

 

And what is the problem?  Wanting to protect private entity's rights to do dumb stuff or wanting it to be made public so I know not to go there?

[visionary]

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/north-carolina-lgbt-bathrooms-hb2-enforcement

We Asked Cops How They Plan to Enforce North Carolina’s Bathroom Law

[Jumbo]

Bur, IME few things (if any) are fundamentally simple. That's a human (ego) projection. That candy dish is amazingly complex if you know enough---even just its molecular vibration is distinct and intricate.  And I'd suggest that just about zero is simple in such human affairs. Knowing/seeking/finding/showing the complexity in things is part of a more complete way to understand them and better affect them. *

 

But yes, what you describe is much in play. Distraction is often a coping mechanism.

 

 

*Remember what the Arisians from  E.E. 'Doc" Smith's Lensman series <nerd smiley> said (I paraphrase from ancient memory): "A truly competent mind can define all existence from the study of a single grain of sand." Now I can tell many here have that capability from their multiple fields of expertise, but I still struggle.

 

(OT--how's that for a reference ---that series really get overlooked the last couple decades...love to see that stuff and Adams' Horseclans hit the screen).

[Bang]

Sounds to me if a person supports a candidate DESPITE what he says,,  the words feeble mind should never be directed towards anyone else.

 

 

And you're failing to account for the times being changed because people are afraid to be prosecuted by the laws that force them to be civil and not discriminate.

You way way way over-estimate your fellow human beings and their capacity to be really ****ty people unless forced to stop. 

 

~Bang

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Donald F'ing Trump is the frontrunner for the GOP nomination and you believe this?

 

Not to mention that NC Governor Pat McCrory is campaigning for re-election.  This bill brings all the bigots/racists out in support of him, which translates into votes.  

 

Sure there are people like me that will vote for the best candidate regardless of their political affiliation and my voter registration, who are not racist and believe in equality for every man and woman.  

 

But in good ole NC, there are a lot of backwoods, racist bigots that have not evolved and all they see is "Pat McCrory is protecting our women against the evil homosexuals and transgenders."

 

Which plays along nicely with NC being in the Bible Belt, so it also attracts the support of the hell fire and brimstone christian population who condemn homosexuality.

 

And then you have the ones that are going to vote for a Republican no matter what, with no care how bills like this impact other peoples lives, including theirs and their friends and families.

You may want to got edit that.  Apparently the filter is broken.  Didn't catch mine either.

 

And what is the problem?  Wanting to protect private entity's rights to do dumb stuff or wanting it to be made public so I know not to go there?

 

I'm pretty sure it's always allowed that word to go unfiltered.  Anyhow, the problem is you don't revert to the stone age just to start over and remake a point or stand.  You move forward and continue to push.  

[Burgold]

Bur, IME few things (if any) are fundamentally simple. That's a human (ego) projection. That candy dish is amazingly complex if you know enough---even just its molecular vibration is distinct and intricate.  And I'd suggest that just about zero is simple in such human affairs. Knowing/seeking/finding/showing the complexity in things is part of a more complete way to understand them and better affect them. *

 

But yes, what you describe is much in play. Distraction is often a coping mechanism.

 

 

*Remember what the Arisians from  E.E. 'Doc" Smith's Lensman series <nerd smiley> said (I paraphrase from ancient memory): "A truly competent mind can define all existence from the study of a single grain of sand." Now I can tell many here have that capability from their multiple fields of expertise, but I still struggle.

 

(OT--how's that for a reference ---that series really get overlooked the last couple decades...love to see that stuff and Adams' Horseclans hit the screen).

I agree and disagree. Complexity abounds, but some things are abundantly simple despite our best efforts at obfuscation and sleight of hand. This particular one probably has multiple sources, but I think the power of "other" and creating a "them" plays a huge role.

 

They are evil.

They are the enemy.

Beware of them for they will seek to corrupt you.

 

It's a very basic part of the human pack mind. We do it in sports, politics, and certainly with religion too... often to our detriment. There are other factors at play, but I think if we distill it what we find at its base is pretty simple. 

 

Mind you, if we oversimplify, we can see truth and still get it wrong.

[Major Harris]

Why else do we give great leeway to sins mentioned in the 10 Commandments like Adultery or greed or sloth and yet turn so much attention to something like homosexuality?

an interpretation i was given when being kicked out of my childhood baptist church, (not for homosexuality , but it did have to do with what they perceived as sexual immorality), was that God destroyed cities for certain sins.

this certainly wouldn't explain the church's focus on homosexuality while blind-eying / glossing over adultery, etc....but this church wouldn't overlook an engaged couple closing on a house prior to the wedding ceremony. i guess i was in a pretty consistent church, at least.

[Jumbo]

Yes, Bur, we still kinda disagree fundamentally (or "philosophically" if you like) there, but agree pragmatically. The projection (label) of simplicity makes things easier  or more "efficient" to handle and works well (even "better") in many matters, especially those we generally deem of basic and routine nature. It's not about "thinking everything to death", though all your examples actually aren't simple matters at all. Think about it. You're just summarizing (and reducing) complex matters in simple ways that follow the norm for most of us to "keep (make) it simple, stupid"  for ease (pragmatic and productive).

 

And obfuscation etc. isn't inherent to either simple or complex analysis. It's a separate choice (kinda weird to me you linked it that way). Just because one doesn't engage the complexity (for whatever reason, pragmatic or otherwise) doesn't mean it isn't there, and the idea that this stuff in particular isn't subject to it is misplaced.  You simplify the range of motivations/drives too much with your comment (too much reduction).  This is, logically enough, an area I've worked in extensively on "all sides", and that is part of what informs my take. But I'm mainly just trying to get back into typing. 

[PleaseBlitz]

Why else do we give great leeway to sins mentioned in the 10 Commandments like Adultery or greed or sloth and yet turn so much attention to something like homosexuality?

 

Because "they" are doing it.  People don't condemn "us" they condemn "them."

[jpage520]

an interpretation i was given when being kicked out of my childhood baptist church, (not for homosexuality , but it did have to do with what they perceived as sexual immorality), was that God destroyed cities for certain sins.

this certainly wouldn't explain the church's focus on homosexuality while blind-eying / glossing over adultery, etc....but this church wouldn't overlook an engaged couple closing on a house prior to the wedding ceremony. i guess i was in a pretty consistent church, at least.

 

I had been told by a few folks heavily involved in their church. I believe it was a Baptist church. That all sin was equal minus the one ultimate sin of turning your back on god. Is this a denominational belief? Or perhaps just misinformation?

[Zguy28]

I had been told by a few folks heavily involved in their church. I believe it was a Baptist church. That all sin was equal minus the one ultimate sin of turning your back on god. Is this a denominational belief? Or perhaps just misinformation?

http://billygraham.org/answer/are-all-sins-the-same-in-gods-eyes/

 

 

And Jumbo, yes you annoy terribly at times, when I can understand what you've written.

 

Love ya big guy.

[twa]

I had been told by a few folks heavily involved in their church. I believe it was a Baptist church. That all sin was equal minus the one ultimate sin of turning your back on god. Is this a denominational belief? Or perhaps just misinformation?

 

all sin is equal as far as separating us from God is a Baptist belief, but sins and the church response certainly differs.

 

Public vs private,continuing sins , these all have different reactions from the church....just as God has treated different sins differently(such as Annanias and Saphira) in the NT

 

clear as mud now?

[visionary]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/07/as-lgbt-rights-controversy-heads-south-top-democrats-begin-to-invoke-slavery/?postshare=2641460058343797&tid=ss_tw

Democratic governor on LGBT fight: ‘This is no different’ from the debate over ending slavery

 

Opponents of the recent spate of so-called religious freedom laws have long tried to frame the debate as a civil rights battle. Laws protecting business owners from refusing to serve an LGBT couple, for example, risk making LGBT people second-class citizens, they argue. Proponents say the laws are an affirmation of people's First Amendment rights and religious liberty.

 

But since the debate has flared up in recent weeks in the South — and especially in Mississippi — the opponents' rhetoric seems to have gotten much more racially charged.

 

Suddenly, fighting religious protection laws isn't just a civil rights issue; it's the 21st-century version of the civil rights battle of the 1960s — or even of the great battle over slavery the 19th century.

 

Just listen to recent comments some opponents have made surrounding Mississippi's law, including those of Vermont Gov. Peter Shumlin, who is one of the most prominent politicians to make that connection.

 

"This is no different" from the debate over ending slavery, Shumlin in an interview with NPR that aired Thursday. (Shumlin is one of two governors — the other New York's Andrew Cuomo (D) — to ban all non-essential government travel to North Carolina and Mississippi.)

 

"I never thought in my lifetime that I would see this kind of extreme hatred and bigotry being played out in states," he told NPR, "where governors are literally signing laws that are no different than saying to people of color: You shall not eat here, you shall not drink out of this water fountain."

 

https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/718162631601885184

Pennsylvania governor signs executive order banning discrimination against transgender people - Reuters
3:44 PM

[grhqofb5]

Someone brought up the parallel to guns recently... that the primary conservative thought is that gun laws are unnecessary because criminals won't obey them. Why here do conservatives think sexual predators, rapists, and other deviants will obey the law?

 

 Isn't that like saying we shouldn't outlaw burglary because criminals won't obey the law anyway, and only commit burglary?

 

Hmmm.... guns.  So I think outlawing guns will definitely reduce gun violence (and all violence, ipso facto).  Seems to me that gun advocates believe that having guns themselves provides a level of protection, which is probably true.  (although I'm sure statistics say that a gun owner is something like 20 times more likely to accidentally shoot a family member than a criminal/intruder). 

 

Not the same argument here when talking about bathrooms.  I know if I see a dude walk into the women's bathroom, I'm either saying something to him (outside of the bathroom), or letting someone know what's happening. And that dude far less likely to simply stroll into the bathroom if he knows that people are going to make noise about it (whether it be to the police or whoever).  Now if its a free for all, then there's not that threshold barrier (i.e. a line that is obviously crossed  such as the entrance to the bathroom) that's breached prior to the real harm (groping, peeping, or worse).

 

And to answer the next question, Dads (or legal guardians) should also be vigilant about who follows their young son into the men's public bathroom, not just who's going into the women's bathroom with their daughter.

[mcsluggo]

I think you're right that there is sexism and bigotry in Judaism, but in the way it is practiced for the most part especially in the US, it's really live and let live. You do see Jews living together and there are still issues surrounding marriage outside of the faith, but in general, they don't tell others how to live or behave.

 

I suspect that's partly because they're such a tiny, tiny minority. It's not Christianity that is the problem here. It's the way in which it is interpreted and practiced. There is a conscious choice about which sins to elevate and which to ignore. The Bible to my knowledge doesn't rank them and yet in our modern society we do. Why else do we give great leeway to sins mentioned in the 10 Commandments like Adultery or greed or sloth and yet turn so much attention to something like homosexuality?

 

 

http://nypost.com/2008/09/12/hasid-lust-cause/

[Burgold]

Yes, Bur, we still kinda disagree fundamentally (or "philosophically" if you like) there, but agree pragmatically.   

See the problem is, I have on my football fan/armchair philosopher's helmet on while you want me to be wearing my scholar's tweed vest. Different level of discourse. Different alpha set to find significance.

 

Simple really.

http://nypost.com/2008/09/12/hasid-lust-cause/

Interesting article. I can see it from their POV, but frankly I find it silly even if it is an offshoot of my own religion. I don't like blaming women for our own lustful thoughts be they in yoga pants or biking get-ups. Technically, the women are covered which is what is demanded (covered up to the ankle I believe, but I'm not sure) It just so happens their covered in skin tight clothing vs. flowing garb.

 

I have much more sympathy for the traffic complaints... though they may just be an excuse.

[Burgold]

 Isn't that like saying we shouldn't outlaw burglary because criminals won't obey the law anyway, and only commit burglary?

I think the biggest difference is one is trying to solve a real problem (people getting shot or people losing property) vs. an imagined problem. These laws being set up by North Carolina are designed to forestall a "what if" a problem which hasn't yet occurred, but these people fear might.

 

People are being injured and killed by guns. They are being robbed. To my knowledge, bathroom harrassment or assault by transgender or homosexual persons has not been a thing. Mind you, the next danger is whether homosexuals should be allowed in same sex bathrooms, right? After all, the person they are sexually interested in is the same gender as the one on their birth certificate.

 

I liken this much more to how Conservatives created a spate a Vote ID laws for the purpose of suppressing votes. When pressed, they claimed it was to reduce fraud. When pressed again, they could produce not examples of fraud.

 

Invented problems to push an agenda are much different than 40,000/year killed needlessly and more than 100.,000 injured.

[TheGreatBuzz]

I'm on my phone so I don't have a link but I just heard Tennessee passed a law that says therapists can refuse to council a gay couple. That seems okay to me because I think it would be hard to guide someone's relationship when you think it's wrong. Thoughts?

[Corcaigh]

but this church wouldn't overlook an engaged couple closing on a house prior to the wedding ceremony. 

 

Which of the commandments does that break?

 

Thou shalt not commit realty.

[Burgold]

I'm on my phone so I don't have a link but I just heard Tennessee passed a law that says therapists can refuse to council a gay couple. That seems okay to me because I think it would be hard to guide someone's relationship when you think it's wrong. Thoughts?

I'm not really opposed to this honestly. It is a private business. Mind you, I think a therapist who is so infused with hatred and bigotry that s/he can't cancel someone solely because they're gay ought to have their head's checked.

[Bang]

OK, so correct this atheist if he's wrong, but isn't the bottom line of the Bible that we should love one another while here, and in the end, God sorts us out?

We are not to judge, etc. etc.

We're on our own to make choices that send us to salvation or damnation when the time comes but between us, we should not try to judge those choices?
Now granted, there are some exceptions. I doubt, if he exists, that God intended us to allow rapists and murderers to just walk around while we smile at them, but as an overall rule of how we should treat one another, we are to love one another.

 

I'm dead serious, no smart-ass remark here.

Isn't that the bottom line of Jesus' message?

 

~Bang

[The 12th Commandment]

I'm not really opposed to this honestly. It is a private business. Mind you, I think a therapist who is so infused with hatred and bigotry that s/he can't cancel someone solely because they're gay ought to have their head's checked.

Any therapist (or baker) that doesn't want to serve someone because of a personal bias should say they're too busy (or something like that) and not accepting clients.  Live by your convictions but don't rub other people's nose in them.

[elkabong82]

And the laws were needed at that time because a much larger portion of the population were racist ***holes.  It's not that way anymore.  Yes there are still pockets and you won't get rid of it all.  But at least let them show their positions to the public.  One, it allows a private entity to do as they see fit.  Two, it lets us all see that private entity's positions. Three, it lets us go protest and shut them down. 

I'm pretty sure we don't ALL know how that ended.  Ally McBeal?  Really?

 

But showing that something was one way 60 years ago does not justify making (or keeping) a law today. 

 

Edit:  Not sure why the profanity filter didn't catch that.  Sorry.

 

Trump is the leading candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination, running on a platform of racism, hatred, and division. A large portion of the population still are racist ass holes. That alone justifies maintaining Civil Rights laws as they pertain to private business.

 

You are assuming that enough people will boycott these places, should your scenario come to fruition, that such places will go out of business. Yet we have even recent events showing bigotry is alive and well, even if not always as aggressively obvious as in the past. The place that refused to make a cake for a gay wedding got a lot of business after it made the news, even though others boycotted. Chick-Fil-A got a significant boom in business when some protested because the owner supported anti-gay movements. 

 

Entire state are significantly voting for Trump, and you mean to tell me there won't be whole towns where "white only" establishments are supported by majority white towns? As I said in my last post, good luck to the black family who's car breaks down in that town. 

 

It would be a major step backwards.

[PF Chang]

I said it, didn't I?  

 

I know this seems to get lost on some of the more feeble minded but there are people that support him IN SPITE OF the crap he says.  It has been pointed out numerous times that he is actually the most moderate republican when it comes to the issues.  Now I used to support him because I liked most of his stances and could tolerate some of the dumb stuff he said.  He doubled down on the dumb stuff and since lost my support.  And I bet a large portion of Republicans are moving this way hence why he hasn't locked up the nomination yet (and hopefully won't). 

 

I believe people in general aren't as racist as liberals like to make them out to be.  People are realists though.  I have admitted myself that I'm not racist but am definitely class-ist, if that is a real thing.  And I think a lot of people are that way even if they won't admit it.

 

 

You did say it. When a person says something profoundly wrong, it's pretty normal to ask "really??"

 

In this thread you've suggested that racism is no longer an issue and that we should replace laws with a protest system that will magically shut down businesses or something.

 

I believe people in general are just as racist as they've always been, they're just better at knowing who to hide it around. I feel the same way about homophobia.