Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders Signs Law Prohibiting Transgender Restrooms in Schools

BTW, I did add a little bit more, to my post, which might apply to the "ugly and derogatory tropes," comment.

 

When you decided to elaborate on 5-14-103, you came to the that consensual sex and rape were the same thing?
Fascinating.

 

Well, I guess I forgot what kind of society we live in now. I was assuming the trans-folk would be modest and discreet.

I also see that this is about building a third bathroom next to the boys' and girls' rooms. built for many people. Perhaps painted yellow.

 

"Penises," is also acceptable. To be fair, it is only a small cadre of persons who will ever have cause, or desire, to refer to multiple penes; and most of those are more likely to, currently, spell the singular, "penus."

I can imagine, then, the teaching of this other plural form, implied in your post, leading mainly to extended classroom debates, that the plural should be "penia"-- contended by the anti-trans student peniuses.

 

We are talking about high school, did you REALLY think no one would know which kid was trans? Come on man.

 

That is exactly the argument of gun rights advocates: that criminals who want guns, will simply find a way around, & not comply with, the law. Likewise, the same person should understand the logic: if you want to rape someone, are you going to be stopped, because of the posting of a sign?

 

While I hate to use their argument, the only people that are going to be impacted by this are the law abiding victims of the policy being made to use the facilities of the sex they do not identify with and likely do not dress or look like.

But cruelty is the point here

 

It might not hurt, if you added a small, cash inducement, to sweeten the pot.

 

LOL-- Those not worried about being punished for rape, but who are less cavalier, when it comes to school regulations?

 

This is broken mentality. Again, should we do away with traffic lights by that logic? They don't physically stop your car from moving after all.

 

You missed his pointing to your own double-standard-- because if you were consistent in believing that the intention of rules & laws is the worthwhile focus, then you would also support the idea of "gun-free zones," being effective, or worthwhile. I would guess, Cd8ed expects that you feel those signs would just be ignored, by those who are ready to kill people; but those who are ready to rape someone, are more compliant with the requests of signage?



I solved the problem! Instead of mandating that only true females can ENTER girls' lavatories & locker rooms, why not just make a rule, & post a sign, saying "No RAPE Allowed?"

 

Huh? If you make it a normal thing to have biological men in women's bathrooms, its gonna happen much, much more. We all know that signs can't physically stop anything so why even play this game?

 

Those against any gun regulation, use your precise argument. So do you side, with those in favor of laws to reduce gun violence-- or does your reasoning do a 180, regarding the very same principle, on that issue?

 

Umm….anyone walking into one will be outed as a T.

 

Do guns have breasts and if so can they be removed? Stop with the lame deflection already. This is a serious topic and i would appreciate serious responses
Thank You

 

Look at your own OP, and tell me why your last line would not apply to that.

It is you, who is playing the double standard game. You say that a sign telling trans women they can't enter the girls' bathroom, will prevent rapes-- but a sign telling people that they can't rape other students, "can't physically stop anything." Logically, then, Governor Sanders' support of rules & signs, can't physically stop anything.

In the Arkansas, anti-trans bathroom legislation of your OP, however, you are contending that it will do some good. There would then be no rational excuse, for you not to have the same opinion of my "No Raping Allowed" suggestion.

I had only been giving you an opportunity to show that you could present a point of view on this, which would not contradict your views on other things: for instance, on the gun issue.

 

I don't want or need your "opportunities"
You are trying to turn a common sense issue into a war of words.
Talking about everything but the OP with your desperate NO RAPE SIGNS.
In the words of your boy Joe
COME ON MAN!!!!!!

 

A gun is not a criminal nor does a gun know how to commit a crime.

 

So then it is "breasts," which are the crucial, differentiating factor? So if a trans girl went into a girls' shower but did not use her penis, but rather, used a gun to rape a female student (or used a dildo-- which, like a gun, has no breasts), you would have a different opinion, on that situation?

 

So it's the tools a criminal uses rather than the criminals themselves?

 

Ummm, i believe I confused thread with the other thread I have where a 13 year old's breasts were butchered thanks to leftist policy. Sorry for the confusion.

 

Wish I'd seen your brilliant argument a moment ago, so I could have included it with Darth's, about breasts, to which I've just replied.

But what exactly is your argument? Do you think that gun regulations are made with the belief that it will be the guns, themselves, which will need comply? FYI, these regulations are aimed at those who would be accompanying the guns, in any act of murder.

Just for the record, my interest here is not so much to support any position, other than logical consistency. For example, by your argument, above, it should not be illegal for someone to use a dildo to rape someone, because a dildo "is not a criminal nor does a dildo know how to commit a crime."

If that seems like an asinine argument to you, perhaps you can explain how it differs from the one you are presenting, about guns.

 

Taking away guns doesn't stop criminals from being criminals.

Taking away boys rights to enter girls bathrooms can get them suspended then expelled from school, which would remove the problem.

By your logic, why have any rules at all, let's just have a free for all in society and best luck to everyone.

 

Other than the fact that you're using a gender filled analogy to rebut her argument I think the obvious point of her argument was that (to use your analogy) a dildo lying on the ground cannot rape anyone. The rapist, absent the dildo, will still find a way to rape the woman. Thus, neither the gun, nor the dildo, can be considered the cause of the crime. In both cases, the criminal/rapist is. Full stop!

 

They should just get rid of all gendered bathrooms and rename them 1 or 0. If you are an outie you are a 1 and innies get to be 0.