It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Transgender Issues Finally Gain Recognition On Capitol Hill

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 06:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Bs . I've seen many ladies that could pass for men and vice versa.
Again
No one checks to make sure that person peeing is doing it with a penis or a vagina. The only way to know is to peep

What you are saying is that if it looks like a man its a man. And thats simply not true. Not true at all




posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 06:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: NihilistSanta

The more I looked into it (and I first started looking into it because I was appalled), the more I realized this is a legitimate thing. I'm not hippy dippy and certainly not a fan of PC nonsense. It's an actual thing, nature isn't always perfect. it's not hard to accept that some people are born with webbed toes, or that some people are born crazy, if you look into it you'll see that there are actually marked differences between a normal person's brain and a transgender person's brain. They're not tom boys or fairies, the brain doesn't match the body, they're different.

I think it's freaking weird, and it makes me uncomfortable sometimes thinking about it, but that's the way it is. Those are my problems though, and I'd rather be a little uncomfortable on occasion and grow out of it than trample on these people's right to be who they are.

This made my head explode!

Where is the real domo, what did you do to the real domo, and when did they get to you?


originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Domo1

they already have the rights of heteros or any other group of CITIZEN. They want SPECIAL privileges and recognition that goes beyond the protections that all citizens already enjoy.

Looking forward to your well patrolled and passionately written thread about the removal of religious rights in the work place, champ.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 06:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: Krazysh0t
my point is there is no issue. if you are dressed as a female use the girls restroom. there is no problem . everyone is in a stall so whats the problem? same with chicks in a mens room. use a stall . seriously whats the point of putting these stand up piss machines in the mens room and if you did that then you would have to put urinals in the ladies room. so really whats the point if men can sit down to pee and mens rooms have toilets?


YOU may not see it as an issue, but a lot of people do and THAT is the problem.


there is no point unless someone wants to announce their gender then use he opposite genders restroom. just do it and dont announce your gender. it really is that easy.


You don't need to announce your gender for everyone to know you are transgender.


i dont really care . nor do i care where you piss . the question is why do you need to make an issue out of a non issue?
just a sjw in my opinion. and i dont care for those


I'm not making an issue out of a non-issue. The fact is there are quite a few intolerant people out there who DO care where transgender people pee and they are VERY vocal about it whether you want to believe that is true or not.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

Religious rights? Is someone stopping me from practicing my religion? Is the government persecuting me? Pretty sure I and everyone else can practice religion all we want so what do you mean by "rights"? Oh you mean extra privileges created through legislature to enforce a view upon others? You wont see that from me.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Freija

I have gay relatives and had a gay roommate who often hung out with transsexuals. I worked at an adult store for a time in my early 20s and dealt with that community quite regularly. Have had gay coworkers, friends, and acquaintances. You equate disapproval/non-agreement with hate which is false.

I like how hate is the default position. It just illustrates the point about a victims mentality and how again this whole issue is about controlling peoples thoughts.

How are people protected through laws? You can write all of the anti-discrimination laws in the world and I can still discriminate without anyone being the wiser. Its lip service as a form of protection and more of a Trojan horse form of thought control.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Another_Nut
a reply to: Annee

Bs . I've seen many ladies that could pass for men and vice versa.
Again
No one checks to make sure that person peeing is doing it with a penis or a vagina. The only way to know is to peep

What you are saying is that if it looks like a man its a man. And thats simply not true. Not true at all


Objections are being fought in court.

Fact: "someone" is objecting.

Why do you insist on making it the fault of the transgender.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 10:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Pinke
Religious rights? Is someone stopping me from practicing my religion? Is the government persecuting me? Pretty sure I and everyone else can practice religion all we want so what do you mean by "rights"? Oh you mean extra privileges created through legislature to enforce a view upon others? You wont see that from me.


Things:


In the United States, the view that has generally prevailed is that firing for any cause in general renders a former employee ineligible for unemployment compensation, but that this is no longer the case if the 'cause' is religious in nature, especially an employee's unwillingness to work during Jewish Shabbat, Christian Sabbath, or Muslim jumu'ah.

The University of South Dakota were charged with racial and religious discrimination when they forbade a university dormitory resident from smudging while praying. The policy at The University of South Dakota was later changed to permit students to pray while living in the university dorms.

In 2007, a federal judge confirmed that Asatru adherents in US prisons have the right to possess a Thor’s Hammer pendant. An inmate sued the Virginia Department of Corrections after he was denied it while members of other religions were allowed their medallions.[93]

With reference to the use of animals, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case of the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah in 1993 upheld the right of Santeria adherents to practice ritual animal sacrifice with Justice Anthony Kennedy stating in the decision, “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection”.

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, Pub. L. No. 103-141, 107 Stat. 1488 (November 16, 1993), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb through 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-4 (also known as RFRA), is a 1993 United States federal law that "ensures that interests in religious freedom are protected."[1]

The constitutionality of RFRA as applied to the federal government was confirmed on February 21, 2006, as the Supreme Court ruled against the government in Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 546 U.S. 418 (2006), which involved the use of an otherwise illegal substance in a religious ceremony, stating that the federal government must show a compelling state interest in restricting religious conduct.

In Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981), the Court ruled that a Missouri law prohibiting religious groups from using state university grounds and buildings for religious worship was unconstitutional. As a result, Congress decided in 1984 that this should apply to secondary and primary schools as well, passing the Equal Access Act, which prevents public schools from discriminating against students based on "religious, political, philosophical or other content of the speech at such meetings".

Source
Source 2

There are others. Islamic taxi drivers being allowed to refuse service to the blind and anyone carrying alcohol etc ...

If you're a liberal anarchist or something, and you disagree with all of these laws my next question really becomes why aren't you as passionate about all of these laws? It's a sincere query.

If you're conflating your feelings about removal of legislation with your feelings about intersex and trans* people then that can become quite confusing perhaps. Follow up question would be if you are against all of the above, where do your opinions about the government end and your opinions about trans* and intersex start?

Feel there might be two conversations going on and one of them (reduction of government interference) appears somewhat unrelated to your actual opinions on LGBT etc etc etc ...



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
I have gay relatives and had a gay roommate who often hung out with transsexuals. I worked at an adult store for a time in my early 20s and dealt with that community quite regularly. Have had gay coworkers, friends, and acquaintances. You equate disapproval/non-agreement with hate which is false.


Whoa there! I never said anything about hate at all. I think you've simply shown that you lack understanding of the issues.

My earlier comment about ever having a child or loved one turn out to be trans wasn't insinuating anything negative either. The point I was trying to make was that many people never really have any compassion or understanding for these issues until they have had to deal with someone's gay or trans struggles firsthand that is close to them such as a sibling, parent or child. Something like this can cause attitudes to do a 180. Casual acquaintances and friends of friends, not so much.

I'm not very hopeful that transgender issues gaining recognition on Capitol Hill will amount to much but at least it is a beginning and acknowledgment that there even are issues for these people. At the state level though, things are turning into a patchwork of confusion.

Wiscons in Republicans defend transgender restrictions bill


MADISON, Wis. (AP) -- Republicans pushed Thursday for Wisconsin to become the first state in the nation to prohibit transgender public school students from using a bathroom or locker room assigned to the gender with which they identify.

Opponents, including students who stood and sat on the floor in a packed hearing room, argued the proposal is a violation of federal Civil Rights law. The soonest that the state's GOP-controlled Legislature could act on the bill is January, and it's unclear whether the measure has enough support to pass.

The issue has roiled communities in Wisconsin, including in the district of the bill's lead sponsor, and across the country as more children identify as transgender at younger ages. Several school districts in Wisconsin have their own policies, but Rep. Jesse Kremer said a statewide law is needed to protect them from lawsuits and create a unified standard

But Leland Hilliard, a 15-year-old transgender student, said he prefers to use an all-gender bathroom at his Madison high school, which would not be allowed under the proposal. "I would feel my right to be safe and protected in public schools would be jeopardized," Hilliard said. "My mental health would be flushed down the toilet I'm not even allowed to use."


Yeah, important to pass legislation to prevent schools from lawsuits rather than for the welfare of transgender students.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 01:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

Religion doesn't have anything to do with this issue. PC culture is limiting thought, expression, speech etc. Laws that allow people freedom of choice should be embraced. My opinions shouldn't matter on LGB issues. I should be allowed to have them but it has no bearing on special interest groups using the government to gain special privileges through deceptive campaigns. You are trying to say that one view is tainting the other which isn't the case.

Some of those laws you are showing are necessary in order to keep the government from trampling on a constitutional right to practice religion. Otherwise PC movements like LGB/T would try to have church's shut down on grounds of hate speech for condemning homosexuality which is their right. Which again relates to thought crime. This is the real reason for these movements though to shut down views that don't conform to their flawed thinking by having dissenting opinions labeled as hate speech.



posted on Nov, 20 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Who is trying to Shut Down Churches? "PC" Buzzwords always sound good doesn't? it makes it seem like those of us who have been Suppressed and Oppressed for decades are the ones who are really "Suppressing" the freedoms of you.. or non "PC GLBTQ+ Progressive" people right?



posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 01:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Pinke
Religion doesn't have anything to do with this issue.

Equal application of the law does though.


You are trying to say that one view is tainting the other which isn't the case.

Trying to work out what your actual stance is really.


Some of those laws you are showing are necessary in order to keep the government from trampling on a constitutional right to practice religion. Otherwise PC movements like LGB/T would try to have church's shut down on grounds of hate speech for condemning homosexuality which is their right.

They weren't invented for that purpose. They are also 'special' rights as you would put it.

Government, religion and other groups shut down LGBT for a long enough time so aren't these laws somewhat similar? Religious laws were brought in to maintain peace, respect, and decorum after decades of troubles in Europe. This appears similar. LGBT people have been historically persecuted.

LGBT people are recognized as being valuable to your community. Alan Turing invented the thing you're typing on. If they are welcome in society, they should be treated as welcome. Stands to reason no?


This is the real reason for these movements though to shut down views that don't conform to their flawed thinking by having dissenting opinions labeled as hate speech.

There are people within LGBT groups that would certainly enjoy this. Not all LGBT people or groups are like this.

This sentence is no more accurate than me saying that the real reason for religious and conservative movements is to control society through morality policing and to ensure I can't ever think about sex.

The real reason for these movements seems straight forward ... the people in those movements have had historically more difficult lives. That's all.

Did you know Americans used to actually be concerned about a conspiracy run by Catholics spanning all the way to the pope trying to take over the country? Sounds a bit similar no?



posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

So what is your point exactly? You feel its the "LGBTQ"s turn now? Kind of like the thread about the feminist teacher not allowing the males to play with Legos because she felt they prevented equal access for the girls?

Anyways this is becoming tiresome. NO ONE has shown in this thread where Transgender people do not have the same "RIGHTS" as other citizens. All we see are appeals to grant special recognition and privileges solely on the disinformation being spread by source like the OP article and the advocacy groups that it sourced which have been shown to be completely dishonest in their representation of "persecution".

Anyone care to address why these groups are being allowed to falsely shape public opinion? Why they can lie and omit without repercussion? Does anyone believe in a "cause" that has to resort to these tactics?



posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta

Anyways this is becoming tiresome. NO ONE has shown in this thread where Transgender people do not have the same "RIGHTS" as other citizens.


None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see.



posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Are we to take the lack of proof as evidence of your capitulation? I asked for proof and you come in with some vague statement as if that is somehow "proof" for your position. Just admit there is no proof because they already enjoy the same rights.



posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Haven't i shown you all the states it's Legal to deny Services, Jobs, housing, property among other things


All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


are you telling me those states are not breaking that constitution?



posted on Nov, 21 2015 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Darth_Prime

You are just proving my own point but I don't think you can see that. Anyhow do you have any actual examples of this persecution or are you going to continue down this path about laws that until you show otherwise are not enforced.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: NihilistSanta
a reply to: Pinke
So what is your point exactly? You feel its the "LGBTQ"s turn now? Kind of like the thread about the feminist teacher not allowing the males to play with Legos because she felt they prevented equal access for the girls?

Not all feminists are a hive mind.

You can't take the most shrill and offensive part of a concept and then just say, 'look at these jerks! It's obviously a conspiracy!' Groups like the Black Panthers existed during the height of civil rights movements. I get the impression if we placed you in a time machine you might be saying some of the very same things about civil rights.


NO ONE has shown in this thread where Transgender people do not have the same "RIGHTS" as other citizens. All we see are appeals to grant special recognition and privileges

Give me a dot point list of the special privileges you would like to discuss and we can maybe do that.

Question: are you saying that hostility towards trans* and intersex people doesn't exist at all? I think that's a good starting point.


Anyone care to address why these groups are being allowed to falsely shape public opinion? Why they can lie and omit without repercussion? Does anyone believe in a "cause" that has to resort to these tactics?

There are too many assumptions in these questions to begin addressing, but again I would point you to various movements which have had extreme elements and ask you to look past that.

Isn't it odd that when we see something like epilepsy and similar conditions where a person can speak in tongues, act out, and physically assault against their will we find this completely acceptable. No one would blame or hold it against that person that this happens to them sometimes.

I think it's common trend in human history to clutch to long held ideas or concepts that within a few hundred will not even warrant discussion or debate.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 09:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke

This whole post is a bunch of assumptions about me which is completely irrelevant. Its like the only thing you can resort to is trying to prove I am some kind of bigot which somehow will invalidate what I have said. Still zero examples of the persecution just the blanket idea of "it happens". Your comparison with epilepsy is interesting. Epilepsy is neurological and has treatments that work to counter act seizures/convulsions. They don't tell epileptics to stand underneath the strobe at the disco tech because its what makes them happy much in the way you are advocating for trans people to just indulge themselves in their fantasies despite the mental health risk.



posted on Nov, 22 2015 @ 09:55 AM
link   
a reply to: NihilistSanta

Apologies you feel that way (sincerely), but no I'm actually genuinely interested and those are genuine questions.

You're not necessarily a 'bigot' if you don't believe hostility towards trans* and intersex people doesn't exist. A bigot might think it exists and believe it should be encouraged etc etc ... but it's a genuine question. To start a discussion I'd want to go back to that basic level of what we both believe and don't.

The civil rights comment ... yes, sorry that was sharp, but I don't see how groups like The Black Panthers are so different from extreme feminists, and I do still believe you think all feminists are a hive mind. I'm a feminist and I don't hold most of the views you might think.

Honestly, I'm trying to understand you ... I can ease up on some of the snark if you can too? I'm sure you find it hard to answer questions when they're framed with emotive language and I do too! Same reason I find your questions difficult to answer.

I can answer a question such as ... do you think trans people need protection at work?

I can't answer a question like:

Anyone care to address why these groups are being allowed to falsely shape public opinion? Why they can lie and omit without repercussion?

It would require an essay and if we keep match each other's tones we'll just get offended.

Anyway, it's an open invite for a serious and toned down conversation if you want it.

P.s ... No one has told me to stand under any disco lights either.



new topics




 
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join