One million Americans vow to boycott Target over transgender bathrooms

[Eviscero]

except they are men.

How about an intersex person who was born with both male and female genitals who had a surgery performed on them when they were an infant by the doctor who just decided that they'd make them a into a boy only to grow up to realize, WOOPS, shoulda gone with the vag.

You know nothing about biology, you know nothing about identity. You know how I know? Cause no one really understands wtf is going on with these folks.

[Underverse]

1. How does making something easier to change equate to it's being immutable?
2. If that's not an issue, then why complain about being forced to use a certain bathroom?

1. I said it acknowledges the idea of transgenderism as immutable, which is the common argument. As in, this move is premised on the acceptance of the common argument of transgenderism.

2. I never argued that trans individuals shouldn't be forced to use a certain bathroom from the discrimination angle you're alluding to. I'm simply arguing against the idea of bathroom segregation in general - and from this argument, it follows that it shouldn't matter what bathrooms trans individuals use.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

You know what I hate? Neckbeards who think they know shit about dick. Easy way to spot one: wait for them to say "strawman." Also, you mean "whether or not." Lastly, freedoms are and must be limited when conscience turns to hate. Which is why hate speech isn't a protected form of speech, which is why your analogy is a terrible one, which is why you're going to get a C at best in your University of Phoenix philosophy 101 class.

If pointing out a strawman offends you then I suppose pointing out ad hominem fallacies and non-sequiturs will send you into fits am I right? Logic is frustrating, I get it. By the way, good catch on the spelling error. It definitely invalidates everything I've said. Oh shit, no it doesn't.

Sure would.

If that is the case you and I have no common understanding of the word freedom from which to argue.

P.S. I also hate neckbeards. I wish Andrew Luck would shave his.

[Wells]

I'm sorry they're stressed. They can advocate for relaxed requirements regarding the laws in their state on getting the gender on their ID changed.

Here's the harm. http://www.insidenova.com/headlines/...12cd8f99a.html

There's more if you'd like.

I've already addressed the issue with "just change your ID". It indicates a poor understanding of what transitioning is. As for your example, the man was arrested. The laws in place could already handle the issue. An unenforceable law discriminating against trans people wouldn't stop it.

In fact his arrest only serves to weaken your argument as its clear the law is already where it should be.

[Underverse]

except they are men.

I'm in your sig! I'm flattered.

[Wyrt]

You either believe in freedom of conscience or you don't. Let's take a less extreme example if it is more palatable to you. Would you support a muslim bakery being forced to make a wedding cake for a Catholic wedding complete with Crucifix, a rosary, and a banner with "Christ has Risen!" written on it despite their religious objections to doing so?

No, because again, you're comparing something a person is(race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.) to something a person believes in.

Also, the concept of a religious bakery is dumb to begin with. It's a bakery, they're not a religion. If they were then they should be subject to the same laws that religious institutions such as churches and mosques are.

[Azadina]

How about an intersex person who was born with both male and female genitals who had a surgery performed on them when they were an infant by the doctor who just decided that they'd make them a into a boy only to grow up to realize, WOOPS, shoulda gone with the vag.

The ignorant are unaware of anything existing out of the "norm". Same with the usual XX and XY arguments. More than that exists.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

Considering the history between the Islamic religion and Catholicism that would be just as unacceptable as forcing a Jewish baker to bake a Nazi cake.

Again big difference considering their history.

You are working with highly subjective criteria here, which is exactly why you should only be allowed to use your voice and your wallet to punish those with whom you personally disagree.

- - - Updated - - -

The ignorant are unaware of anything existing out of the "norm". Same with the usual XX and XY arguments. More than that exists.

This may come as a surprise to you, but it is actually possible for someone to disagree with you and not have that disagreement come from a place of ignorance. It is impossible to have a fruitful discussion if one side does not give the other a modicum of credit for being sincere and aware of the reasons for their beliefs.

[Azadina]

This may come as a surprise to you, but it is actually possible for someone to disagree with you and not have that disagreement come from a place of ignorance. It is impossible to have a fruitful discussion if one side does not give the other a modicum of credit for being sincere and aware of the reasons for their beliefs.

It may come as a surprise to you, but when one side renounces reality in favor of their beliefs, it's impossible to have a reasonable discussion.

[Merkava]

1. I said it acknowledges the idea of transgenderism as immutable, which is the common argument. As in, this move is premised on the acceptance of the common argument of transgenderism.

2. I never argued that trans individuals shouldn't be forced to use a certain bathroom from the discrimination angle you're alluding to. I'm simply arguing against the idea of bathroom segregation in general - and from this argument, it follows that it shouldn't matter what bathrooms trans individuals use.

1. I'm sorry but I still don't understand. You're saying that making it easier for people to legally change their gender ( I actually think it says "sex" on a birth certificate or ID) is acknowledging the idea of transgenderism as immutable? Immutable means :unable to be changed" (as Im sure you know). How does making something easier to change perpetuate the idea that it's unchangeable.

2. I don't know that I'm arguing anything from an angle of discrimination. If you're saying that it shouldn't matter what bathrooms they use, then why aren't they fine with just using the bathroom assigned to the gender that's listed on their birth certificate.

No offense intended, but I don't really have any interest in a discussion about gender segregation as a social issue. Thanks.

[Wells]

2. I don't know that I'm arguing anything from an angle of discrimination. If you're saying that it shouldn't matter what bathrooms they use, then why aren't they fine with just using the bathroom assigned to the gender that's listed on their birth certificate.

What should matter to the general public in so far as laws are passed and what should matter to the individual in question are very different. Surely you can understand why being able to self-conform to one's gender is very important to a trans person while them doing so shouldn't be a bother to the rest of society?

[Merkava]

I've already addressed the issue with "just change your ID". It indicates a poor understanding of what transitioning is. As for your example, the man was arrested. The laws in place could already handle the issue. An unenforceable law discriminating against trans people wouldn't stop it.

In fact his arrest only serves to weaken your argument as its clear the law is already where it should be.

In reverse order, no the arrest doesn't weaken my argument. It, and other examples, show how people with ill intent will take advantage of a bad policy.

The law doesn't discriminate against trans people. It is enforceable.

I see nothing in your posts addressing the "issue" with "just changing their ID." Unless you were referring me to your post mentioning the suicide rates, but I don't think that's what you were referring to.

[judgementofantonidas]

No, it doesn't. Americans need to pull their heads out of their asses.

they certainly do. before we enact a politically correct law that cannot be recovered from. if we have not already.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

No, because again, you're comparing something a person is(race, sexual orientation, gender, etc.) to something a person believes in.

What if the baker believes fully that homosexuality is a lifestyle and worldview and not a state of being? What if the same baker would refuse services to a polygamous marriage, or refuse to make an adultery cake, or a housewarming cake for an unmarried couple? What if that baker has nothing against Gay people themselves and would happily make them a birthday cake, but just does not want to be a party to celebrating that aspect of their life? Things like this are not black and white, which is why the legal system should be kept out of it. The punishment for not providing a service, is not getting the money.

Also, the concept of a religious bakery is dumb to begin with. It's a bakery, they're not a religion. If they were then they should be subject to the same laws that religious institutions such as churches and mosques are.

You are correct, it is a bakery, owned by religious people. We say "jewish bakery" for ease of conversation, not to imply the bakery is a religious institution. I'm so glad we spent time clearing this up.

[Merkava]

What should matter to the general public in so far as laws are passed and what should matter to the individual in question are very different. Surely you can understand why being able to self-conform to one's gender is very important to a trans person while them doing so shouldn't be a bother to the rest of society?

Self conform all you want, but until the sex is changed on your birth certificate, you have to follow the law. Surely you can understand that?

[RickJamesLich]

What should matter to the general public in so far as laws are passed and what should matter to the individual in question are very different. Surely you can understand why being able to self-conform to one's gender is very important to a trans person while them doing so shouldn't be a bother to the rest of society?

How about this, instead of referring to them as "men's room" and women's room" there's just a sign that says "if you have a penis, go into this room" and on the flip side "if you have a vagina, go into this room". This way, a former man, that is now transgendered and believes they are a woman, but hasn't gotten the sex change done, can go to the men's room to use the bathroom, without fear of being referred to as a man. Would this appease you folks?

[Eviscero]

I assume you don't take your kids to church then?

Accurate church burn. 10th, despite your diligent regurgitation of the Wikipedia page on logical fallacies, you don't seem to have internalized any of them. You're basing your argument on some fabricated hypothetical world in which your female subservients are under some new threat. Again, trans people have been in the bathroom with your wife. Trans men have been in the bathroom with your daughter. Trans people have been in the bathroom with you. It is literally a non issue.

[ArguesWithStrangers]

I assume you don't take your kids to church then?

I do, but guess what, I wouldn't let Father into the girl's bathroom there either. Now go take your selective hatred elsewhere.

[Prokne]

No. That's not what the law says. It's a lot more restrictive than that. A lot of states require a letter from a doctor saying that they've actually performed sexual reassignment surgery. http://www.lambdalegal.org/know-your...x-designations

I wasn't talking about birth certificates. What I proposed is basically a permit issued by a doctor that allows someone to use the bathroom that aligns with their gender identity that would be pretty easy to get for someone who is actually transgender but not for pretenders. Of course some people will be questioned when they go to the bathroom (a lot are now), but then they could just show they have a right to be there and no one who thinks there is some law preventing transpeople from using the bathroom can legally bar them from the bathroom or call the cops.

[Darsithis]

Newp, I've spent the entire thread pointing out that it is not bigoted to boycott a business that places my wife and daughters in an uncomfortable and potentially dangerous situation for a politically correct publicity stunt. You must be thinking of someone else.

There has never been a case where someone has pretended to be transgender and attacked someone in a bathroom. Ever.