North Carolina Loses 400 Jobs as PayPal Pulls Facility over ‘Bathroom Bill’

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: JDmOKI
This is a Status Quo law making it so the genitalia you have at birth corresponds to the bathroom you use. period

Refer back a post.

And we'll ask the same of you.

Would you feel comfortable sending your 6 year old girl in the bathroom with Buck Angel?

Who sends a 6 year old girl into the bathroom alone?

a reply to: Annee

He (McCroy) mostly certainly did. This all stems from Charlotte passing an ordinance allowing for unisex (not sure of the proper nomenclature) bathrooms. NC is also a right-to-work state and the governor is backed by both houses of the general assembly - NC is my home state and I can't think of a time in which it was more log rolled by far, far, far right agendas. It's puzzling, honestly. McCroy also happened to be Charlotte's mayor, adding to the confusion of what's going on in Raleigh...

a reply to: StoutBroux

I'm sure he knew exactly what was in the bill. Everybody who paid any attention to the news had an inkling what the bill was about.

That being said, the republicans added all this stuff in that goes beyond "not letting people use whatever bathroom they want to use" in a special session of the state legislature. And that is, by and large, what has people pissed off.

And with THAT being said, all the democrats in the legislature did was refuse to take part in the debate and walk off the floor. Really helped their cause there.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: JDmOKI
a reply to: Annee

"LGBT can now be refused employment, housing, medical care, etc etc."

You can't openly discriminate in NC....

This is a Status Quo law making it so the genitalia you have at birth corresponds to the bathroom you use. period

I don't even really agree with this law but also, transsexuals aren't by default homosexual or even bisexual.

Do you know what the acronym LGBT means? Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgendered

You're kidding, right?

How about the "O"?

a reply to: Annee

There's an O in the acronym now? I knew about the Q, which is for queer, but not any O's. Plus I was piggybacking off of the acronym used by that poster.

a reply to: Annee

would you feel comfortable in a women's restroom with him/ her...whatever!!!

seriously, the way restrooms are set up at least here in the US, I hear it's different in Europe, is dehumanizing anyways! if we truly have the right to privacy, then well, this is one of our most private bodily functions, we deserve more privacy than that!

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Annee

would you feel comfortable in a women's restroom with him/ her...whatever!!!

seriously, the way restrooms are set up at least here in the US, I hear it's different in Europe, is dehumanizing anyways! if we truly have the right to privacy, then well, this is one of our most private bodily functions, we deserve more privacy than that!

You don't get enough privacy sitting in a stall?

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

The ordinance didn't have anything about "unisex restrooms." It allowed TG people to use "the restroom of their choice in public areas."

Ie a person identifies as a male can use the male restroom, despite having lady parts.

Because some of us sane folks don't want pedos to decide they identify as a woman today so they can peep on young girls?

Sexual offenders are gonna find a way regardless of laws in place.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
no, matter of fact I don't, those other people sitting in the stall next to me don't need to know about my case diarrhea, and well, I am pretty sure that they are sorry to learn I have it sometimes.

but seriously, there are people who well, just can't do the public bathroom bit...

originally posted by: Sargeras
BS!!!

It is already against federal law...

Please cite the federal law. You can't. You just made it up. There is no federal statute prohibiting discrimination against LGBTs. They are not a "protected class" under the Civil Rights Act of '64 or any other statute.

I'm torn on this issue. I can see both sides and I'm not sure which way to go. I don't want anyone discriminated against but I can also see how these new gender dynamics can be abused.

There is nothing stopping any teenage boy (Nothing stopping a grown man either for that matter) from walking into the girl's locker room and showering with them - all he has to say is "he is a woman trapped in a man's body" and he can creep on them to his hearts desire. If you say anything to the contrary you're looking a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

We've all seen news stories where someone has installed a hidden camera to film people in toilets, showers, changing rooms, etc. and the justifiable outcry due to the invasion of privacy that resulted. But now you don't need to film. You can literally walk in and stare. If anyone says anything just say you're "gender fluid" and keep on gawking. Sue them if you don't get your way.

And somebody already mentioned pedos so I don't want to be redundant.

So how do you prevent this new system from being abused?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: JDmOKI
This is a Status Quo law making it so the genitalia you have at birth corresponds to the bathroom you use. period

Refer back a post.

And we'll ask the same of you.

Would you feel comfortable sending your 6 year old girl in the bathroom with Buck Angel?

Who sends a 6 year old girl into the bathroom alone?

Ask Megan's parents......

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Edit: Oh sorry.....she was 7.

a reply to: Foundryman

you see men walking into shower rooms a problem?? what about homosexual women who might be getting off from taking showers with the women, that isn't a problem? why are these women being force to give up their privacy and having to take showers with others anyways?

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
You don't get enough privacy sitting in a stall?

Do you feel very private with another man shatting next to you even if you are in a stall?

I don't.........

originally posted by: Sargeras

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: dawnstar
Your link doesn't work, Dawn. Taking this at face value for the moment, I can understand people wanting their privacy in the bathroom, and like your idea of smaller, unisex bathrooms. This battle is going to rage on for a while, because most people are stuck in a rigid, legalistic, mindset of the past. It seems some people would go back to segregation, witch-hunts, and stoning people outside the city if they could. "Some" referring to domionists and others who would like to convert the world to a theocracy, and others who just have insecurities about their own sexual identity. Whatever the case, they're meeting resistance, which is a good thing.

Because some of us sane folks don't want pedos to decide they identify as a woman today so they can peep on young girls?

Thats pretty funny. What in the world would this law do to stop pedos from dressing up as ladies or men and using the restrooms?

Pretty knee jerk reaction. Perverted acts are already illegal. This law would not effect them at all. Considering these pedos can already do what you are suggesting.

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: JDmOKI
This is a Status Quo law making it so the genitalia you have at birth corresponds to the bathroom you use. period

Refer back a post.

And we'll ask the same of you.

Would you feel comfortable sending your 6 year old girl in the bathroom with Buck Angel?

Who sends a 6 year old girl into the bathroom alone?

Ask Megan's parents......

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Timmendequas lured Kanka into his house, raped her, and then killed her. He then placed her body in nearby Mercer County Park. The next day, he confessed to investigators and led police to the site.

Megan Kanka's rape and murder had nothing to do with LGBTQ people or bathrooms.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: Annee

would you feel comfortable in a women's restroom with him/ her...whatever!!!

seriously, the way restrooms are set up at least here in the US, I hear it's different in Europe, is dehumanizing anyways! if we truly have the right to privacy, then well, this is one of our most private bodily functions, we deserve more privacy than that!

Would I feel comfortable with a lesbian?

Everyone has to pee.

a reply to: windword

I could have swore the story was he raped and killed her in a public restroom.

Is there another story like that?

In any event a 6 year old was raped in Raleigh NC church bathroom last year.........

abc11.com...

Maybe we should ban church?

originally posted by: Foundryman
I'm torn on this issue. I can see both sides and I'm not sure which way to go. I don't want anyone discriminated against but I can also see how these new gender dynamics can be abused.

There is nothing stopping any teenage boy (Nothing stopping a grown man either for that matter) from walking into the girl's locker room and showering with them - all he has to say is "he is a woman trapped in a man's body" and he can creep on them to his hearts desire. If you say anything to the contrary you're looking a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

We've all seen news stories where someone has installed a hidden camera to film people in toilets, showers, changing rooms, etc. and the justifiable outcry due to the invasion of privacy that resulted. But now you don't need to film. You can literally walk in and stare. If anyone says anything just say you're "gender fluid" and keep on gawking. Sue them if you don't get your way.

And somebody already mentioned pedos so I don't want to be redundant.

So how do you prevent this new system from being abused?

Gawking at people in the shower is always going to be crime and not protected by this law at all. If some dude is gawing at you in the health club or a highschool shower or reverse for females in same sex bathrooms/showers are you saying there is no way to stop it? Of coarse there is.

A lot of places in Scandinavia and Europe already have bathrooms and some showers that are unisex. They have entire nude beaches yet people don't get assualted. Pedos and pervs will do what they do regardless. This arguement is like saying we can't have banks because there are bank robbers.

If legislators did their jobs they would work on the bills language to clearly protect from perverts not discrimination of trans people. Most trans folks are not going to be taking public showers. Nobody in my highschool took public showers. They waiting until they got home. There is barely even gym class anymore today so even less kids take public showers.

This law will be shut down anyway by a federal court. It's simply symbolic for the governor. The corporate world has for the most part already adapted to trans protection laws and NC is going to loose millions or more on this