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

[Burgold]

I know and I'm not offended by the line of questioning.

 

In the past I've argued and believe that Neonazis have a right to march,  speak, and spread their literature. I support that though it causes me pain. I can even imagine a thin line that separates philosophy from religion allowing the neonazis to claim their belief system is a religion.

 

I would still say "no" to them even as a religion (and certainly as a philosophy) as their religion directly acts as an assault on mine. You are allow to have your beliefs, share your beliefs, and act on those beliefs up to the point where it causes harm to me. There may be some legal gray here if they became a religion, but I wouldn't feel any moral gray.

 

This particular example is easier because you can use hate laws as a defense.

[The 12th Commandment]

I'm sorry, what's smug about it? Burgold assumed help meant money. I did not.

To me, as a non-believer, the idea that faith in Jesus (which is what I'm assuming you meant) is all the Koch's (as figureheads) need to be conscientious citizens is smug.  I get that it isn't for you and I respect the difference.  Like I said my experience doesn't show much correlation between piety and good citizenship.

 

Burgold was being facetious.

[Burgold]

 

 

Burgold was being facetious.

Yep. And over the top.

[Larry]

Was discussing this topic last night on another venue. What if a Jewish baker was asked to bake a neo-nazi cake? Or photograph a neo-nazi wedding? Those are unlikely because I doubt they would want a Jew at their event, but same premise. Its subjective isn't it?

 

Or what if the Nazis wanted to have a march in a Jewish neighborhood?

[Burgold]

Or what if the Nazis wanted to have a march in a Jewish neighborhood?

I'd actually support that. Find it ugly as hell, but I'd support their right to do it.

[Bang]

Like normal, you miss the point. If you're going to preach it, you gotta live it. Deserve's got nothing to do with it.

 

And yes, they do need help, but not the kind you reached for.

Was discussing this topic last night on another venue. What if a Jewish baker was asked to bake a neo-nazi cake? Or photograph a neo-nazi wedding? Those are unlikely because I doubt they would want a Jew at their event, but same premise. Its subjective isn't it?

 

What if Burgold decides to sell ad space in the back panel of a new book or something like that, and Donald Trump wants to buy it?

Are there instances in history in which homosexuals attempted to kill every straight Christian on the continent?

 

Because the nazi is a direct threat to the existence of the Jewish baker by demonstrated history and by the very philosophy he espouses as a nazi... the essence of which is hatred directed at the jew, with unlimited examples of violence and destruction carried out to further this philosophy.

The jewish baker has reason to actually fear for his safety or that of his business,, because one of Nazi tenets was that no jews could own a business... followed of course by No jews shall live until we've squeezed every ounce of work from them, every gold filling from their teeth, stretched every tattoo into a lampshade, and robbed them of everything their family ever had or built.

 

100% stupid comparison.

 

I mean, unless you can show me how homosexuals compare to what Nazis are and what they stand for in anything resembling a real sense.

 

~Bang

[skinsmarydu]

Like normal, you miss the point. If you're going to preach it, you gotta live it. Deserve's got nothing to do with it.

 

And yes, they do need help, but not the kind you reached for.

He absolutely did not miss my point. I'd like to thank him for helping me make it.

I almost HAVE to support a Koch just to wipe my butt...no ****. Did ya know that? So do you. Research, or just watch some CNBC. It's common knowledge.

Are you now going to tell me about something else YOU should know?

[China]

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

 

How will the state try to enforce its new law, which is the first of its kind to be enacted in the United States? So I picked up the phone and started calling some North Carolina police departments to find out.

 

"That's a very interesting question. We don't have police officers sitting at public bathrooms all day long," a spokesman at the Raleigh Police Department told me with a laugh. Over in Greensboro, the state's third-most-populous city, I received a similar answer. "We would respond if we received a complaint. It's not like we would be standing guard at bathrooms," said Susan Danielsen, a spokeswoman for the local police department, also suppressing a laugh. At the Wilmington Police Department, spokeswoman Linda Rawley said the law struck her as strange. "So that means people have to go to the bathroom with birth certificates? Yeah, that was curious to me." At the Asheville Police Department, spokeswoman Christina Hallingse noted, "We're not checking birth certificates. We just don't have the police power to be able to do that in bathrooms."

 

Since the law was enacted March 23, police departments across the state have been working to determine how they will enforce it. In addition to restricting bathroom use, it bans anti-discrimination protections based on sexual orientation. "Our staff, particularly our attorney's office, is trying to figure out what it all means," says Damien Graham, another spokesman for the Raleigh Police Department. "We haven't mobilized our police force in any kind of different way. We're still digesting." Public universities like Western Carolina University and the University of North Carolina are also assessing the law to determine how it will affect university policies, spokespeople from both universities said.

 

Click on the link for the full article

[Zguy28]

To me, as a non-believer, the idea that faith in Jesus (which is what I'm assuming you meant) is all the Koch's (as figureheads) need to be conscientious citizens is smug.  I get that it isn't for you and I respect the difference.  Like I said my experience doesn't show much correlation between piety and good citizenship.

 

Burgold was being facetious.

It looks like we're talking past each other. Not what I meant at all.

He absolutely did not miss my point. I'd like to thank him for helping me make it.

I almost HAVE to support a Koch just to wipe my butt...no ****. Did ya know that? So do you. Research, or just watch some CNBC. It's common knowledge.

Are you now going to tell me about something else YOU should know?

Who said he missed YOUR point?

Are there instances in history in which homosexuals attempted to kill every straight Christian on the continent?

 

Because the nazi is a direct threat to the existence of the Jewish baker by demonstrated history and by the very philosophy he espouses as a nazi... the essence of which is hatred directed at the jew, with unlimited examples of violence and destruction carried out to further this philosophy.

The jewish baker has reason to actually fear for his safety or that of his business,, because one of Nazi tenets was that no jews could own a business... followed of course by No jews shall live until we've squeezed every ounce of work from them, every gold filling from their teeth, stretched every tattoo into a lampshade, and robbed them of everything their family ever had or built.

 

100% stupid comparison.

 

I mean, unless you can show me how homosexuals compare to what Nazis are and what they stand for in anything resembling a real sense.

 

~Bang

Bang, that isn't the point of it. The point is party A is offensive in some way to party B. Doesn't really matter why in my example, its philosophical. Admittedly it does matter as to whether its a protected class or not.

 

It could've been party A is Trump, and party B is BLM. Does that make sense?

[Bang]

No, the point is the Nazis didn't just "offend" people.
they attempted genocide.
this is a HUGE HUGE HUGE difference.

The comparison does not fit the philosophical question you are trying to get across because the philosophies of the two groups you're trying to compare are so radically different not only in "philosophy" but in horrifying and bloody action taken on the grounds of that philosophy.

As far as Trump goes.. i find him utterly despicable,, but I work for news, and we are trying to sell his camp advertising that I may have to make. and I will do my best, if i am asked.

I would expect that if a baker of Mexican descent were asked to make a cake for trump's latest Euro-model trophy bride, that they should.

there's a good philosophical comparison for it.. Trump and a mexican baker, who has reasons to really not like some of Trump's comments and philosophies, but has not actually suffered any harm (yet) as a result of the rhetoric. 

 

 

I don't see why this is hard for people.. simply be professional and at the end of the day everything is fine.

 

~Bang

[Zguy28]

No, the point is the Nazis didn't just "offend" people.

they attempted genocide.

this is a HUGE HUGE HUGE difference.

~Bang

Sure. I'll concede point. Poor example.

[The 12th Commandment]

It looks like we're talking past each other. Not what I meant at all.

My mistake in assuming, and sorry to be a jerk about it.  What do the Koch's need?

[skinsmarydu]

Who said he missed YOUR point?

You did...

OK...I made a post, you responded, and he responded to your response to my post.

Are we all following along now?

Sheesh...and I'm the bartender...

[Zguy28]

My mistake in assuming, and sorry to be a jerk about it.  What do the Koch's need?

They need to be treated the same way as any other person would be. And as a Christian, obviously I believe they need Jesus. But Jesus isn't required for morality or good citizenship.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Can we quit making this thread into another pointless debate on religion?  Damn, haven't enough threads been watered down and ruined with this already?  

 

This bill passed in NC has nothing to do with religion with the exception that you believe your employment was terminated due to your religious beliefs that you can no longer take civil action at the state level and have to pursue justice at the federal level.  

 

News flash, that above point also applies to race, sex, sexual orientation, age, etc.  not just religion.  It's also about how they sneaked this in along with the state wages by making the focal point about which bathrooms transgenders can and can't use.  And about how this bill is pushing away revenue because businesses wanting to relocate/headquarter are disgusted by the bill.

 

Get back on track.

[skinsmarydu]

They need to be treated the same way as any other person would be. And as a Christian, obviously I believe they need Jesus. But Jesus isn't required for morality or good citizenship.

Sure he is. Would he conspire to have more, or would he help those in need with his unending funds?

That is our Shakespearean question, my brethren.

[redskinss]

Im not for discrimination as i could care less if a transgender individual walks into a bathroom and proceeds into a stall then comes out washes his hands and leaves.

That has absolutely no effect on anyone else and i don't see why anyone would have a problem with it.

What i do have a problem with is a locker room, in massachusetts it is legal for someone who identifies as transgender to use the locker room of his or her choice.

There is a local transgender boy (born male) that is 11 years old and is using the girls locker room.

I dont want to make the child feel uncomfortable but what about the feelings of the girls in the locker room?

Another example of where i could see this being a problem is college's.

How do you prevent college age partying and drinking boys from going into the girls locker to get a cheap look.

If you dont think it'll happen then you may have to turn that ignorance mirror back at yourself.

I've had a lot of discussions with my wife on how things like that could be prevented and i was thinking maybe if a doctor or psychologist signed off on when someone identified as opposite sex maybe that could be a solution to the latter.

I know it seems discriminatory to make someone go through the screening but its something most people wouldn't do just to get a cheap look and i think its a small price to pay to protect womens privacy.

Then again maybe its a dumb idea but i do know something would have to be done.

[twa]

we should put age limits on it like everything else....21 sounds familiar

[Zguy28]

Im not for discrimination as i could care less if a transgender individual walks into a bathroom and proceeds into a stall then comes out washes his hands and leaves.

That has absolutely no effect on anyone else and i don't see why anyone would have a problem with it.

What i do have a problem with is a locker room, in massachusetts it is legal for someone who identifies as transgender to use the locker room of his or her choice.

There is a local transgender boy (born male) that is 11 years old and is using the girls locker room.

I dont want to make the child feel uncomfortable but what about the feelings of the girls in the locker room?

Another example of where i could see this being a problem is college's.

How do you prevent college age partying and drinking boys from going into the girls locker to get a cheap look.

If you dont think it'll happen then you may have to turn that ignorance mirror back at yourself.

I've had a lot of discussions with my wife on how things like that could be prevented and i was thinking maybe if a doctor or psychologist signed off on when someone identified as opposite sex maybe that could be a solution to the latter.

I know it seems discriminatory to make someone go through the screening but its something most people wouldn't do just to get a cheap look and i think its a small price to pay to protect womens privacy.

Then again maybe its a dumb idea but i do know something would have to be done.

Then you would open up a whole 'nother line of argument over parental consent, just like with abortion.

[Burgold]

I dont want to make the child feel uncomfortable but what about the feelings of the girls in the locker room?

I've thought about this too and I think it's a really valid concern. The easiest fix would be to have a separate (but equal) bathroom for the transgendered kid. Have a girls' room, a boys' room, and a solo room for those who don't quite fit. I do think the sensitivities of the majority ought to be taken into account to. There is an "ick" factor, after all that's not about prejudice just social programming. We don't defecate or urinate together.

 

I don't know if that is possible or if it would satisfy everyone, but I suspect it would work. (Would segregation in this sense be appropriate? I think it might. Haven't completely thought it through.)

[Larry]

No, the point is the Nazis didn't just "offend" people.

they attempted genocide.

The one who's standing at the bakery counter didn't. Wasn't even born yet.

And the same things applies to the white folks in America who want to order a Redskins cake.

[redskinss]

I've thought about this too and I think it's a really valid concern. The easiest fix would be to have a separate (but equal) bathroom for the transgendered kid. Have a girls' room, a boys' room, and a solo room for those who don't quite fit. I do think the sensitivities of the majority ought to be taken into account to. There is an "ick" factor, after all that's not about prejudice just social programming. We don't defecate or urinate together.

I don't know if that is possible or if it would satisfy everyone, but I suspect it would work. (Would segregation in this sense be appropriate? I think it might. Haven't completely thought it through.)

I think this would be seen by the lgbt community as segregation and would be deemed unacceptable.

[Burgold]

I think this would be seen by the lgbt community as segregation and would be deemed unacceptable.

Oh, it absolutely would be segregation... I'm just not sure if it would be a bad fix. It probably is, but on the other hand, it's a sensible one that would satisfy awkwardness. Mind you, if I replace transgender with Black, Jew, or any other group I would think it offensive... so, you're probably right.

[Bang]

The one who's standing at the bakery counter didn't. Wasn't even born yet.

And the same things applies to the white folks in America who want to order a Redskins cake.

Hmm.. no i don't think so.

Have any sports teams adopted a swastika? Maybe a characterized Hitler on their logo?

Not being born yet..   so he just wants to espouse the more cuddly aspects of nazism?

Sorry, the philosophy is inherent in the identifying with nazism.

 

being a fan of the Redskins identifies you as a fan of a football team, not a person who agrees with genocide... although you might be. Being a fan of the Redskins cant tell.

Being a Nazi is a clear sign of what you believe in.

A nazi who doesn't agree to the notion Jews and minorities are sub human to be wiped out or subjected to fascist rule... who does not agree in the superiority of the Aryan  is going to find out real quick that none of his fellow nazis agree with him.

 

~Bang

[Burgold]

 

Being a Nazi is a clear sign of what you believe in.

A nazi who doesn't agree to the notion Jews and minorities are sub human to be wiped out or subjected to fascist rule... who does not agree in the superiority of the Aryan  is going to find out real quick that none of his fellow nazis agree with him.

 

~Bang

Yeah, way too much benefit of the doubt (or devil's advocacy). Nazism today is nearly 100% linked to White Supremacy and racism, bigotry, and antisemitism.