HB2, North Carolina mandate to hate homosexuals.

Actually, no, the title of the thread is incorrect. Just there to make a point. You may have heard about NC's HB2. If you haven't bothered to look into what it actually is, you may have fallen for the trap. Some would like you to believe that our Governor is against the LGBT community and is going out of his way to be mean to them. That isn't the case at all.

What initially happened is Charlotte NC, passed a law that transgender people could use the restroom they "identified" with. Now, before we go any further, am I to understand that prior to this bill, transgender people didn't use the restroom? I know, that's ignorant. Of course they did. And I'd wager the ones who can pee standing up, went to the mens room, and the ones who must sit down, went to the ladies room. So why would this law really be an issue? (the Charlotte law) The next logical step is to make unisex bathrooms available. Now, imagine you are a business owner and the city ordinance states that you must make alterations to the existing bathrooms at your expense? All to satisfy a very, very small portion of the public. It would anger some, and bankrupt others, depending on the profit margin and cost to alter.

The NC bill HB2, made it no longer possible for a city in NC to pass a sweeping law like this. Now it must be done at the state level. That is all. There was no mandate to be mean to LGBT people, or to limit any rights they had previously. Only to put a little common sense into things that shouldn't need to be explained in the first place.

Slowly, our culture is eroding to the point were the majority is demonized for not catering to the extreme minority. This was the case with Universal Health care. (an different subject, but the same result)

If you are member of the LGBT community, and you encounter a situation where only a mens, and ladies room exists, would you not be able to function? Would you have any long lasting medical issues? If so, were there not LGBT people 20 years ago who might have had the same issues? How did they survive?

I fully admit, being a straight white male, I really don't get it. I personally feel like if you are happy, and what you do, doesn't hurt me or anyone else, that's super. You do you. But when you being you, intrudes on others, we all have to look at the collective "big picture" and find a solution. Being as how this is the first most of us have heard of any bathroom issues, I tend to think this is more of a manufactured issue than a real life crisis. If I am wrong, please explain why, and explain what should be done.

www.charlotteobserver.com...

originally posted by: network dude
Being as how this is the first most of us have heard of any bathroom issues, I tend to think this is more of a manufactured issue than a real life crisis. If I am wrong,...

You're not.

a reply to: network dude

They should construct an inbuilt urinal using an outlet pipe as a replacement for their spine, this way they could connect an hose from that outlet pipe into a recyclable bag that fit's neatly into a rucksack... Or maybe use a tube that flows the body waste into a purse?

I really don't see any other alternative.

a reply to: Hex1an

you know....if you invented something like that, the $ would be amazing!

It's forward thinkers like you that might just save us all.

a reply to: network dude

The NC bill HB2, made it no longer possible for a city in NC to pass a sweeping law like this. Now it must be done at the state level. That is all.

That is all.

You spent 90% of the thread talking about bathrooms and completely ignoring the implications of the state law beyond your hypothetical scenario about unisex restrooms. Did you even bother to read your own source?

Yes. The law limits how people pursue claims of discrimination because of race, religion, color, national origin, biological sex or handicap in state courts. The law also means a city or county cannot set a minimum wage standard for private employers.

What they've done is to pass a law that makes it impossible for municipalities within the state to pass any sort of anti-discrimination laws. For instance, if Charlotte wanted to pass a local ordinance that made it unlawful to fire a person because of that person's sexuality. The state law makes that impossible.

For your next trick, maybe you could provide another uninformed opinion in defense of Mississippi's HB 1523.

The law is based on a manufactured issue. Based on the religious right being pissed off that they have lost on major issues like marriage equality.

Transgenders have been going into the bathrooms of their identified gender (not their born gender) for a long time and no one has really noticed. It hasn't been an issue. Now, all of a sudden, since marriage equality has been law, the religious right is all up in arms that some pedo will put on a dress and go in the women's room to rape little girls. Coincidence? I think not.

The law is a last gasp effort by the religious right to gain back some of the control they have lost over recent years.

Also, just to educate: being a homosexual has nothing to do with being transgender, so your thread title is incorrect.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I don't live in Mississippi, so you will have to find someone else to holler at for that. I do realize that HB2 made it so any laws dealing with discrimination need to be done at the state level. So you don't have a mish mash of laws in different parts of the state. See, lots of loud people didn't actually take the time to understand this, they just believed what some other told them and started screaming about inequality.

did you read the whole thing?

a reply to: network dude

I have been told homosexuals and transgenders are not the same thing so how would this affect the homo community in the first place? We are talking about a minority of a minority that doesn't feel 'comfortable'. It isn't like they aren't allowed to take a dump like the rest of us.

a reply to: kaylaluv

I saw it as kind of the opposite, but with the same results.

People used to get by, so why the push for change?

Oh, and in my defense, I offer this:

I fully admit, being a straight white male, I really don't get it.

a reply to: Metallicus

They demand to be treated equally until they want special treatment.

originally posted by: kaylaluv

Transgenders have been going into the bathrooms of their identified gender (not their born gender) for a long time and no one has really noticed. It hasn't been an issue.

Right. So had all this special treatment not been on high demand of "Give us special treatment, or else!" then none of this would be an issue.

a reply to: LSU0408

I don't know what "special treatment" you're talking about. Specifics?

This is what came to mind for me...

a reply to: network dude

I do realize that HB2 made it so any laws dealing with discrimination need to be done at the state level. So you don't have a mish mash of laws in different parts of the state.

This isn't a very solid argument at all.

So you believe that laws should be uniform throughout the state then? Is it all laws or just laws relating to discrimination? If uniformity is the goal, why stop at the state level?

It's clear that the purpose of the state law isn't uniformity, it's specifically aimed at stopping the proliferation of anti-discrimination laws. Much like how other states' "religious liberty" laws don't actually protect any "religious liberty" and only serve to make it illegal to "discriminate" against people for discriminating against LGBT people.

I read an article on cnn on what " gender fluidity" is and how to accommodate it. I guess I just don't get how you can choose to switch your biology from day to day.

a reply to: network dude


As a lesbian and a citizen of NC, I must confess my confused state of mind on this issue. I am not a lawyer and have difficulty understanding the twists and turns used to write bills such as this. I have scanned through this bill. Are there any lawyers here? Can someone walk me through what is actually in this bill? I do not want a layman's interpretation. I want an actual lawyer's opinion on what is in this bill.

Kind'a gave up caring ... because they want me to care.

I'm a big boy and I can take care of myself in the Men's Room.

Something/anything happens too my wife or daughter in the Lady's Room ... you'll all probably wonder why I gave up on ATS.

a reply to: Khaleesi

Here you go:

A lawyer’s perspective on why HB2 is a plague infested rat

“This Article does not create, and shall not be construed to create or support, a statutory or common law private right of action, and no person may bring any civil action based upon the public policy expressed herein.”

Eliminating “civil actions” simply means “cannot sue” and not being able to sue, or go to court, puts workers right back where they were in the 1970s. That is, for the first time in decades, North Carolina courts closed their doors to those fired because of their race, sex, age, disability, national origin, or religion. Those wrongfully terminated are left with only federal discrimination laws, which are largely inferior to the now defunct state discrimination claims. North Carolina joins Mississippi as the only two states that do not offer their citizens state law protection against the most basic forms of discrimination. Let that sink in.

EDIT to add:

So yeah, on top of barring local governments from adopting any anti-discrimination ordinances, it prevents North Carolinians from suing for violation of state's anti-discrimination laws.

Another legal opinion:

Propublica

The legislation doesn’t stop there, however. Tucked inside is language that strips North Carolina workers of the ability to sue under a state anti-discrimination law, a right that has been upheld in court since 1985. “If you were fired because of your race, fired because of your gender, fired because of your religion,” said Allan Freyer, head of the Workers’ Rights Project at the N.C. Justice Center in Raleigh, “… you no longer have a basic remedy.”

“The LGBT issues were a Trojan horse,” added Erika Wilson, a law professor at the University of North Carolina who co-directs a legal clinic for low-income plaintiffs with job and housing discrimination claims. The broader change hasn’t received much attention, she said, because “people were so caught up in [the LGBT] part of the law that this snuck under the radar.”

Conservative-leaning groups have been trying for decades to reduce the number of civil lawsuits in the states. In HB2, lawmakers accomplished this by adding a single sentence to the state’s employment discrimination law that says: “[No] person may bring any civil action based upon the public policy expressed herein.”

a reply to: theantediluvian

Thank you. I will read and reply in due course.

a reply to: network dude

Discrimination, terrible thing really, nobody should participate in discrimination because it is a bad thing...until it isn't.

LGBT groups argue against discrimination and exclusiion and yet are the greatest proponents of discrimination: try to be a member of an LGBT group if you aren't actually gay/lesbian/bi or trans-sexual.

Religious groups argue against discrimination and yet they are also hugely discriminatory: try to become involved in the Muslim Brotherhood or any other closed religious group.

Social groups are incredibly discriminatory: ever tried to join the Masons without a sponsor? What about the illuminati for fecks sake LOL.

The problem?

We all have been told we have to accept or agree with those we disagree with, we actually don't have to at all. We just need to agree to disagree, and promise not to break the laws of the land whilst practising whatever exclusionary and discriminatory behaviour we see fit to engage in.

The examples I gave are clearly off the top of my head (and in some cases a joke), my point remains the same.