On trans-sexuals and their "right" to use the opposite sex' bathroom

AFAIK, they would need to be certified from a doctor or pshychiatrist?

 

Anybody can say they are a "transsexual". This is the dumbest debate ever. Let's break down the liberal's argument here.

They are claiming that it's their right for men to pee with women.

They are SERIOUSLY using time in government so the left can win their war so grown men can pee with the little girls.

Dumbest (*)(*)(*)(*) I've ever heard. Talk about wasting time in government. This argument is dumber than (*)(*)(*)(*) Trump would say

 

No that is not the argument. We can keep ALL gays out of men's bathrooms if we wanted to. That's the point. We don't do it because most gay men don't engage in such behavior. Most transsexuals don't engage in such behavior so they should not be banned in this way.

The thing is this, like I have said before, the problem is that liberal ideology, in all of its various forms, has created many problems. Although transsexuality has been around since ancient times, the type of problem we are discussing is a result of this foolish ideology. The leadership of human society have accepted these foolish notions and the result is the various types of chaos that we see around the world today. Therefore, we can do nothing but try to manage the chaos as best we can.

 

Regardless of any laws protecting the rights of trans-gender Americans, perverted males have always been able to enter women's restrooms.

For females concerned about the possibility of such individuals in drag - or lesbians, for that matter - stalls afford privacy via locks on their doors.

 

Awww, permanent uncomfort? I didn't even know that was a thing. Imagine her being at home, or in the car permanently uncomfortable! We should change the law and trample on the rights of others so she may live in comfort. This special snowflakes comfort does not trump the law.

 

This is THE central topic in the opposition to these laws. If you do not understand this, you are not informed about the topic with which you are putting forth an opinion. If a person self reports that they identify as a woman, they are allowed to use the women's restroom. That means that a man doesn't even need to bother to dress as a woman, if confronted, he merely has to say that he identifies himself as a woman. This does in fact give license to any pervert that isn't transgendered in the slightest, to be able to use the womens restroom.

It is incorrect to state that if caught it will be illegal going forward. It would only be illegal if they were stupid enough to not know to simply state that they identify as a woman. If making this legal only affected truly transgendered people, I would tend to say that it would make sense, but because it enables ANYONE to make that claim, you are in fact giving license to perverts to indulge their perversion and as such this type of law is nonsensical.

 

Here's a famous passage from Viereck that I refer to often

What is to save freedom from freedom? A very good question.

Food for thought.

Again, liberal ideology is dangerous and destructive.

 

But I am not "expecting" laws to be "determined exclusively on the basis of my discomfort" or whatever. I am merely asking that people with a penis use the men's room. I am NOT saying trans-people cannot use washrooms.

People with a penis are MEN. NOT women, no matter how much they say they are.

 

Although I understand what you are trying to do, the problem is that reality is not as simple as you might like it to be. The fact of the matter is that you cannot demonstrate that sentience is male, female, or any other material thing. That is a fact.

 

Trans is a personal fantasy, government has no business in it.
But since government regulates gender relationship and gender difference it is obligated to provide special accommodation for each gender.
It is obvious to anyone who has healthy brain.

 

We should not change anything.
Government has zero obligation to provide comfort to anyone, but it has responsibility to accommodate difference in genders since it regulates relationship between man and woman.

 

So if they politely acknowledge your opinion but choose not to follow your request, maybe because using the male bathroom would make them or the some of the men they’d be sharing with feel uncomfortable, that’d be acceptable from your point of view? You’re seeking nothing other than recognition of your individual feelings on the matter?

Does your position also mean that you’d ask people with a vagina to use the female bathroom, even if they identify as male and their outward appearance is definitively male? You’d expect no potential for confusion and indeed discomfort on all parts as a result of that “solution”?

 

It's not about my "individual feelings". It has to do with the fact that people who have a penis are men and therefore should use the men's washroom. Even if I didn't feel comfortable, I would still say the same thing. I know that maybe it also causes discomfort for some trans-people to use the men's washroom however I believe when both sides are equally uncomfortable, we should placate the side that has more people (as in, normal women/men). The right of a tiny minority does not trump the right of the vast majority.

 

I am going to go back to Viereck again and attempt to illustrate my point.

What is to save freedom from freedom? That is a very good question.

To illustrate the point that liberal ideology is destructive, consider the following. Edward Bernays is famous because he was enlisted by the major tobacco companies to increase the number of women smokers so that their profits could be increased. To do this Bernays organized his famous "Torches of FREEDOM" march. Here's some background

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torches_of_Freedom

Damn! Torches of Freedom! Damn!!!

Again, what is going to save freedom from freedom?

https://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2012/02/27/torches-of-freedom-women-and-smoking-propaganda/

 

Well, things need to change from time to time. People's comfort level does not trump equal protection under the law.

 

Someone pointed out this video to me. I think this is excellent analysis

[video=youtube;A0h17GG3wD4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0h17GG3wD4[/video]

What is to save freedom from freedom?

 

Nobody is withholding any rights or equal protection of the law from the trans-sexuals. We are simply asking them to use the "correct" bathroom. If they have a penis, use the men's washroom. This isn't asking too much. It's not like we are telling them that they cant use washrooms anymore.

 

To borrow from you, in other words, you get to determine what is "correct" and what bathroom someone should use?

 

I am not "determining" anything. For eons, people with penises have been using the men's washroom. I didn't make up this rule.

 

That was the sole basis you gave when you started the thread so that’s the one I addressed.

That’s not a fact, it’s an opinion. There are obvious reasons why that principle could be altered in relation to transgender individuals and also not unreasonable arguments and understandable concerns against it. That’s why there is an ongoing debate on the issue. You can’t just declare your personal opinion as unquestionable “fact”, as if it’s some kind of conclusive answer.

You’ve not actually demonstrated that there would actually be less discomfort if your preference were implemented, especially in the context of a request rather than some form of regulated rule or law. It’s not just about raw number of people since 99% of the time it will have zero impact on any of us but 100% of the time it will have impact on transgendered.

You also never answered my question about female-to-male transgender people who still have a vagina. This isn’t just a “gotcha” but an honest effort to get you to see the wider and more complicated reality we’re dealing with here. No simple answer is going to work.

 

And what I am putting forward to you is that dangerous liberal ideology has resulted in the distortion of traditional norms to such an extent that it has become necessary to accommodate transsexuals in this way. Sorry. I understand your position, but times have simply changed in a very radical way.

 

Equal protection is about public issues (i.e. something that affects all society), equal protection has nothing to do with private fantasies.
You can be an elephant or dog or even rhinoceros in your mind, government is in no way should accommodate your imaginations.

 

So when someone says, "black people are equal to white people and deserve equal protection under the law" is an opinion, too.

Just because you disagree with something it doesn't make it an opinion.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. Its like I said, the right of the tiny minority does not trump the right of the majority. It's a utilitarian concept. Governments should aim to give happiness to the greatest amount of people.

Not sure. I haven't thought about it that much. Maybe they should use the women's washroom.

 

There is nothing wrong with basing policies on the "sole basis of one's feelings/emotions/discomfort"...etc. There used to be no laws in the United States for the welfare of animals. However, once a video tape was released where researchers were seen abusing and hitting some animals (chimpazees, I believe), there was an uproar and an out-pour of sympathies from Americans. Soon afterwards, the laws were amended to include animal welfare laws. These laws came about because people's hearts were breaking. This was "basing policies solely on one's feelings" and I think it's a good thing.

 

Some people seem to think I am saying that my "discomfort" is more important than the welfare of trannies. They say we should let trannies use whatever bathroom they wish to use. But in doing so, these people are essentially declaring that trannies' happiness (for a lack of better word) and welfare are more important than those of the normal people.