Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[kiidcarter8]

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/05/15/the-media-wont-say-it-but-christians-are-the-no-1-persecuted-group-worldwide/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=tds-tw

[NeedsAdjustments]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

https://www.prri.org/research/americans-support-protections-lgbt-people/

Might want to read the legislation.

So your argument that a legislative goal that is widely popular across all geographic, demographic and political lines in this country will actually be broadly unpopular is based on a close reading of the legislation, not contained in the summary you posted?

Then maybe you should point out the portion of said legislation that will do that.

Or, if its the section on locker rooms, then you might want to read the polling I posted.

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/05/15/the-media-wont-say-it-but-christians-are-the-no-1-persecuted-group-worldwide/?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=tds-tw

LOL.

[kiidcarter8]

https://twitter.com/cs00582sc/status/1130445788637749248

[josh]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

It might interest libertarians.

And LGBT soccer moms and independents. For some reason, you think soccer moms and independents are all (a) straight and (b) bigots like you.

[REDSTATEWARD]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

https://www.prri.org/research/americans-support-protections-lgbt-people/

Might want to read the legislation.

So your argument that a legislative goal that is widely popular across all geographic, demographic and political lines in this country will actually be broadly unpopular is based on a close reading of the legislation, not contained in the summary you posted?

Why, yes. I’m sure American moms will reject their daughters facing biological boys in track and field events. See Martina Navratilova for details.

[josh]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

https://www.prri.org/research/americans-support-protections-lgbt-people/

Might want to read the legislation.

So your argument that a legislative goal that is widely popular across all geographic, demographic and political lines in this country will actually be broadly unpopular is based on a close reading of the legislation, not contained in the summary you posted?

Why, yes. I’m sure American moms will reject their daughters facing biological boys in track and field events. See Martina Navratilova for details.

Way to avoid discussing the point I made because you wanted to push only your perspective.

[REDSTATEWARD]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

It might interest libertarians.

And LGBT soccer moms and independents. For some reason, you think soccer moms and independents are all (a) straight and (b) bigots like you.

LOL

[REDSTATEWARD]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

https://www.prri.org/research/americans-support-protections-lgbt-people/

Might want to read the legislation.

So your argument that a legislative goal that is widely popular across all geographic, demographic and political lines in this country will actually be broadly unpopular is based on a close reading of the legislation, not contained in the summary you posted?

Why, yes. I’m sure American moms will reject their daughters facing biological boys in track and field events. See Martina Navratilova for details.

Way to avoid discussing the point I made because you wanted to push only your perspective.

You seem befuddled

[NeedsAdjustments]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

https://www.prri.org/research/americans-support-protections-lgbt-people/

Might want to read the legislation.

So your argument that a legislative goal that is widely popular across all geographic, demographic and political lines in this country will actually be broadly unpopular is based on a close reading of the legislation, not contained in the summary you posted?

Then maybe you should point out the portion of said legislation that will do that.

REDSTATEWARD’s response: Martina Navratilova.

Josh isn’t the one befuddled here. You had no idea that a law that has polled well for the last 7-8 years is as broadly popular as it is because you can’t see past your homophobic bubble.

That’s clear now. Thanks for allowing us to move past your idiotic and ignorant argument so quickly.

[whiskeypriest]

He was obsessed with the Trayvon-Zimmerman case and how George was being disrespected.

Gee, I guess Zimmerman should have received a ticker tape parade for killing a kid for no good damn reason.

The actions of those protesting Zimmerman were OVER THE TOP and unwise.

One more chance to plug my epic book, A White Man's Guide to How Black People Can Protest, which has 257 pages, each containing only the word "Don't."

[NeedsAdjustments]

https://twitter.com/cs00582sc/status/1130445788637749248

Both kiidcarter8 and REDSTATEWARD giving us good insight today on the type of people they are:

Trash not worth the forum replies.

[REDSTATEWARD]

News Item - May 20,2019


The House passed sweeping legislation on Friday that would prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.

The legislation, which amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibits discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in both the public and private sectors, offering civil rights protections in businesses, hospitals and welfare services. It explicitly states that individuals cannot be denied access to a locker room or dressing room on the same basis.


Of course the legislation is DOA in today’s Congress but it is hard to see why it would interest independents, Libertarians, or even Soccer moms to support democrats.

https://www.prri.org/research/americans-support-protections-lgbt-people/

Might want to read the legislation.

So your argument that a legislative goal that is widely popular across all geographic, demographic and political lines in this country will actually be broadly unpopular is based on a close reading of the legislation, not contained in the summary you posted?

Then maybe you should point out the portion of said legislation that will do that.

REDSTATEWARD’s response: Martina Navratilova.

Josh isn’t the one befuddled here. You had no idea that a law that has polled well for the last 7-8 years is as broadly popular as it is because you can’t see past your homophobic bubble.

That’s clear now. Thanks for allowing us to move past your idiotic and ignorant argument so quickly.

Martina Navratilova.

[barton]

One more chance to plug my epic book, A White Man's Guide to How Black People Can Protest, which has 257 pages, each containing only the word "Don't."

You know they reuse the printing plates for that in A White Man's Guide to How Women Can Have Date Sex, Executive Level Jobs, and Lunch with Male Coworkers to Whom They Are Not Married. 

 

[barton]

Martina has a rational argumemt against trans women competing in sports where their biological gender in childhood and youth would give them advantages in muscle mass, joint leverage, fast-twitch fibers, and bone density that remain even after their transition.
Such differences are greater than natural variation between individals in a gender (e.g. Michael Phelps and his lactic acid metabolism relative to average male swimmers).

That doesn't mean she doesn't back LGBT rights.  Her position regarding competitive sports is no different than the idea that boxing should have weight classes.  There are sports where a trans woman would present a size and muscle disparity that would result in physical injury to cis-females.  It's not transphobic, but common sense.  And what does any of this have to do with locker room usage?  Red, you're obfuscating per usual.