California law allows jail time for using wrong gender pronoun, sponsor denies

a reply to: tigertatzen

Yes it is perfectly alright to call someone by their physical gender's pronouns.

In all cases by anyone.

Jaden

a reply to: Deaf Alien

They can wander and BITCH like me till we DROP...I'll most likely choke out from mucus first.

a reply to: ketsuko

This was my exact thoughts too..I mean what is to happen..what is the conversation like when 'ted' has a vaginal infection..or ovarian cyst..or any other female ailment..this is all so confusing..

Seriously..if I were a nurse and it came down to following the rules or be fired/sent to jail..'ted' would just have to deal with his/her vaginal infection..cause 'ted' isn't female right? Whatever..this is so messed up..

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: windword

Bullying laws....

Stalking laws..

Harassment laws..

Then Civil suit wise you can sue for ANYTHING..

Doesn't matter. Nobody will be leaving their rooms anyway. You can go to college on your computer and you'll be doing it for decades. AI's and machines will be doing most of the work. And there's less and less reason to get out. Why? It's so much easier to stay on the computer.

On your computer it's easier to control reality. You can ignore and block more easily. It's safer. The same laws will still apply online, but it's the insular nature of computers is a stark contrast to RL.

Just to maintain some real world value we'll be going to college for increasing lengths of time. A small highly skilled work force. Living expenses will be cut by reducing our living spaces to minimum. Nobody will care about that because they have their computes. Do you care about material wealth if you can have mansions and spaceships on your computer? On the computer you can be Elvis, you can be the king. The american dream! A big house. Great wife. Lots of children. Everything is perfect. It's virtual, so no GHG footprint or pollution from all the properties and possessions you own. The only footprint is your small living space and teh computer you use.

Don't dismiss it. In 20 to 50 years computer graphics will look nearly indistinguishable from RL. We're already well on this road. REality is becoming augmented. It's blurring. The ground isn't solid. People and faces are fluid. We're caught in a uncertain dream favoring those who change easily and are self-motivated.

What about reproductioin? There'll be a increasing influence of medical and science and government into family affairs. Someday children will be born by a single parent and moved to nurseries early. There won't be "families" as we know them. Males and females and agenders will have children. There doesn't have to be two parents. Parents will be emissaries of their children, only occasionally being involved directly in their life.

/tongueincheek

Don't read that too seriously. It's not worth reading AFAIK.

originally posted by: PillarOfFire
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

But how can we stop them? They have all the money and power. They're assholes.

One vote at a time, ideally. Holding on to the stuff for which we have the Second Amendment, as well!

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ketsuko

It’s definitely not a form of abuse to not call someone their preferred name and pronoun, so the argument this is to protect the elderly from abuse is absurd.

But some folks just have to find a reason to justify anything. No matter how absurd of a reason they come up with , they will uphold it faithfully

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

The mental never ends, like masta Foshizzle and bizzle da jizz.

Good episode.

a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

That could take years, and by then everything might be in the toilet. Its easier ta wreck things than it is to repair em unfortunately.

I trust nothing I read in the news, so I went to check out the penalties listed in the OP and the referenced links.

I'm no lawyer or politician so having a lot of trouble, but here is the California law being altered: link

And here is the new bill: link

Neither in the bill nor in the law it is altering do I find the penalties Fox news is reporting (and several conservative news sites are parroting) that would make it apply to this section of the law. None of the liberal news sites seem to be covering it at all.

I did find the quote for the "penalty" fox news listed, but it is not applying to the section of the law this bill alters.

Any lawyers or politicians care to read it and see if I'm right or wrong???

a reply to: seasonal

Yep, as learned from the right, pretending to be free speech but really just bullies and facists.

a reply to: 3daysgone

Not a felony= legal, thanks I almost misunderstood.


Where would I be without all this conservative guidance?

Just nillily spreading AIDS, thinking that is okay.

What a close one.

originally posted by: NotTheCIA
a reply to: 3daysgone

Not a felony= legal, thanks I almost misunderstood.


Where would I be without all this conservative guidance?

Just nillily spreading AIDS, thinking that is okay.

What a close one.

Shooting someone on purpose is a felony. Not everyone dies from a gun shot wound. Giving someone HIV should be a felony, not everyone with HIV gets AIDS, but some do. So yeah.

originally posted by: PillarOfFire
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

That could take years, and by then everything might be in the toilet. Its easier ta wreck things than it is to repair em unfortunately.

Yeah, and some sure do seem to prefer wrecking to building, don't they?

Crazy world.....