• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alabama city passes anti-LGBT bathroom ordinance punishable by $500/6 months jail

Grant said:
In fact it might well be a cloak for the real issues that genuinely need discussing. Not a bad ploy in an election cycle..
Click to expand...

These laws apply to 700,000 people in the US. 0.3 percent of the population. It blows my mind.
 
Blue_State said:
Was this a real problem? This is out of control. We have real issues besides bathroom use.
Click to expand...

Was white, Christian bakeries refusing to service as gay wedding a real problem?
 
Ikari said:
They can't really ignore that. There's all sorts of intrusions the government can mandate before jail. Ultimately the government does have the guns, so yes they can throw someone in jail of they refuse everything else. But for non-violent crimes that should be an absolute last resort. I would support garnishing wages before jail time for most non-violent crimes.

But to be clear, this specific law that is the topic of this thread is absolutely retarded.
Click to expand...
[I'd be willing to bet that people who end up in jail for such offenses tend to be people who are repeat offenders who are unable to pay the fines rather than people with steady incomes that can be garnished.]

I was responding to an earlier comment that any jail time for such an offense would be "absurd" - yes, of course jail time should be a last resort, but I think you agree it's always going to be an option whether or not it's written into the sentencing guidelines. Replacing jail time with community service does seem to be a reasonable way of achieving that goal for all but the most stubborn offenders because judges would then only be ordering jail time for contempt.
 
apdst said:
Was white, Christian bakeries refusing to service as gay wedding a real problem?
Click to expand...
It didn't affect my marriage at all, so it must not have been an issue ;)
 
Blue_State said:
I didn't think so. But then again, silly me.
Click to expand...

A buncha folks in the Left acted like it was the end of the world. They employed the, "bake my cake, or else", strategy. The bathroom laws are a response to that.
 
Make them register as sex offenders too for good measure..
 
Cryptic said:
The city has sovereign immunity and sympathetic courts. I doubt they are wooried about paying anything in suits.
Click to expand...

um no, several counties/states have had to pay millions due to gay marriage lawsuits and then there is the federal funding which department of ed and transportation have threatened to pull
 
Grant said:
In fact it might well be a cloak for the real issues that genuinely need discussing. Not a bad ploy in an election cycle..
Click to expand...

it's a ploy for those who have no capability or interest in solving real problems. In other words they shouldn't even be in government. Fortunately a lot of people recognize it this time around and i expect it will backfire for some
 
Blue_State said:
Was this a real problem? This is out of control. We have real issues besides bathroom use.
Click to expand...

well according to wiki it's a town of 21,000 with probably almost 0 public restrooms (maybe at the bar or grocery store) that would need to be used by about 70 transgender...and probably less since if i were lgbt in rural alabama, i'd get the hell out

so yeah clearly an emergency situation and it's like they learned nothing from the fallout in north carolina
 
Ntharotep said:
Since it doesn't seem anyone said it thus far (if I missed it then my apologies).
The most frustrating thing about this is that the more cities that engage in this waste of time, the larger it will become until everybody's tax money (instead of a few select townsfolk's) is being wasted on a seriously stupid non-issue legislature that even those who "support" it say can't be enforced in any logical way.

More and more, I am thinking Idiocracy was a documentary not a comedy.
Click to expand...

well that's the irrational nature of bigotry
 
chromium said:
well that's the irrational nature of bigotry
Click to expand...

This is the irrational nature of PC libtards wanting the most sexually deviant men among us in womens bathrooms with little girls..
 
Taylor said:
[I'd be willing to bet that people who end up in jail for such offenses tend to be people who are repeat offenders who are unable to pay the fines rather than people with steady incomes that can be garnished.]

I was responding to an earlier comment that any jail time for such an offense would be "absurd" - yes, of course jail time should be a last resort, but I think you agree it's always going to be an option whether or not it's written into the sentencing guidelines. Replacing jail time with community service does seem to be a reasonable way of achieving that goal for all but the most stubborn offenders because judges would then only be ordering jail time for contempt.
Click to expand...
It is absurd, for this level of offense. And you brought up repeat offenders. At that point the jail time is more for the repeat offending than it is for the offense itself (the way I laid it out). It is absurd to have even as an option for a first offense. It's just not that egregious of a crime.
 
radcen said:
It is absurd, for this level of offense. And you brought up repeat offenders. At that point the jail time is more for the repeat offending than it is for the offense itself (the way I laid it out). It is absurd to have even as an option for a first offense. It's just not that egregious of a crime.
Click to expand...

the crime is not taking a plea deal and inconveniencing the jury, or the crime is actually just for being transgender. Yes they have made it illegal to be trans and use the restroom

= american justice
 
chromium said:
um no, several counties/states have had to pay millions due to gay marriage lawsuits and then there is the federal funding which department of ed and transportation have threatened to pull
Click to expand...

No, several sovereign entitites may have been ordered by various courts to pay millions to people for reason "X". A sovereign entity being ordered to pay millions and a sovereign entity actually following the order and paying anything are two entirely different matters.

For example, a one point, the City of Los Angeles was ordered to pay Rodney King tens of millions of dollars. The city then chose to pass an internal expenditure authorizing a one time payment of just several dollars to King (pennies on the dollar). The city was in no way bound by the court order.

Though court orders dictating that governmental (sovereign) entitites pay tens of millions may make sexy headlines, actually collecting on such orders is can be very difficult. They basically comply only when they want to- and then only to the extent that they want to. Needless to say, most such orders are just ignored.
 
Last edited:
Cryptic said:
No, several sovereign entitites may have been ordered by various courts to pay millions to people for reason "X". A sovereign entity being ordered to pay millions and a sovereign entity actually following the order and paying anything are two entirely different matters.

For example, a one point, the City of Los Angeles was ordered to pay Rodney King tens of millions of dollars. The city then chose to pass an internal expenditure authorizing a one time payment of several dollars to King. The city was in no way bound by the court order.

Though court orders dictating that governmental (sovereign) entitites pay tens of millions may make sexy headlines, collecting on such orders is avery different matter.
Click to expand...

even your example is totally wrong and it makes sense, since the issue of immunity is decided *before* the lawsuit proceeds. Collection is no more of an obstacle than for a private individual who has lost in court. King only fought his own lawyers over collection of the attorney fees awarded by the court: Rodney King's Legal Wars Continue - ABC News

"King’s lawyers have received approximately $2.3 million in total while King has received only $1.9 million. "

And here is what he did with the settlement $, all of which he received

"Gone is the settlement money he got after suing the city for violating his civil rights. All $3.8 million of it. Huge chunks went to the lawyers, he says, some to family members, some he simply wasted."

So he *clearly* received millions from the city of LA

In addition there is NO immunity for federal civil rights suits. Seriously, there is none, specifically to deter this kind of heinous action

in states around the country, there have been millions in legal fees and damages PAID to the victims of discrimination:

Gay marriage lawsuit will cost Ohio $1.3 million in attorney's fees | cleveland.com
Michigan pays $1.9 million in legal fees for historic gay marriage case

"The state of Michigan has paid the nearly $2 million legal tab for the Michigan couple whose lawsuit helped clear the way for same-sex couples to legally marry."

Tulsa alone paid out $2 million

now frankly i believe this is not nearly enough and reparations are owed to gay couples around the country, and some prison sentences and impeachments of those responsible as well. However, this alabama shanty town and north carolina are playing with fire due to federal funding and hundreds of millions in boycotts
 
chromium said:
"The state of Michigan has paid the nearly $2 million legal tab for the Michigan couple whose lawsuit helped clear the way for same-sex couples to legally marry."

Tulsa alone paid out $2 million
Click to expand...

That is because they chose to comply with the order. They are not bound by the order. Likewise, nothing prevents somebody from suing an sovereign entity ala King. The trick is making a sovereign pay when he (or she ;)) does not want to.

At the end of the day, court orders to sovereign entities are purely advisory. Sometimes they comply, sometimes they partially comply, and sometimes, they just ignore it.
 
Last edited:
Cryptic said:
That is because they chose to comply with the order. They are not bound by the order. Likewise, nothing prevents somebody from suing an sovereign entity ala King. The trick is making them pay when they dont want to.
Click to expand...

Yeah right. As if the state of michigan would EVER simply choose to pay $2 million to a gay couple for ANYTHING. This is a state that once (quickly thrown out) passed a law to block benefits to the same sex spouses of state employees, arguing they needed to save $. At 45,000 workers that's maybe saving $100,000. Of course, never mind it would've saved MUCH more to ban the benefits to hetero couples. But that's how hateful and cheap the state is
 
chromium said:
Yeah right. As if the state of michigan would EVER simply choose to pay $2 million to a gay couple for ANYTHING.
Click to expand...

Actually, they did not choose to pay the gay couple, they choose to effectively pay it to their attorneys in the form of legal fees. Any chance that a changing political climate regarding gay marriage in Michigan toward a position that the law was inherently flawed contributed to that decision?

Also, have you ever wondered why you have never read any headlines detailling how victims of state based racial discrimination laws have collected "X" in damages from the sovereign entitites that created and enforced those laws?

The answer is: "Sovereign Immunity". The state treasurer of Mississippi slept well after Brown vs Board of Education, and he is sleeping well today-even after Mississippi passed its religous freedom law.
 
Last edited:
radcen said:
It is absurd, for this level of offense. And you brought up repeat offenders. At that point the jail time is more for the repeat offending than it is for the offense itself (the way I laid it out). It is absurd to have even as an option for a first offense. It's just not that egregious of a crime.
Click to expand...
Yes, the sentencing guidelines are pretty broad in most states. It certainly puts a lot of responsibility on judges to make good decisions.
 
AGENT J said:
Title shortened to fit


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...nti-lgbt-bathroom-ordinance-article-1.2616995

Extra links:
Alabama City Passes Transgender Bathroom Ordinance - ABC News
City criminalizes use of bathrooms in anti-transgender ordinance


LMAO . . .WOW

Thats it . . I hope these nutters keep pushing it and making these laws and ordinances because its only going to help make true what they fear. LGBT having equal rights and or being protected from discrimination. Its awesome and their fear is hilarious.
Click to expand...
Only the loony left would think telling guys they can't use the lady's restroom to be a bad thing.
 
Last edited:
Cryptic said:
Actually, they did not choose to pay the gay couple, they choose to effectively pay it to their attorneys in the form of legal fees. Any chance that a changing political climate regarding gay marriage in Michigan toward a position that the law was inherently flawed contributed to that decision?

Also, have you ever wondered why you have never read any headlines detailling how victims of state based racial discrimination laws have collected "X" in damages from the sovereign entitites that created and enforced those laws?

The answer is: "Sovereign Immunity". The state treasurer of Mississippi slept well after Brown vs Board of Education, and he is sleeping well today-even after Mississippi passed its religous freedom law.
Click to expand...

did you ever wonder why mississippi and this alabama town are such ****holes? As in MS is the poorest state in the country? The answer is because it's regressive as **** and leading companies have spent the past month sending a clear message to north carolina and other southern states that they will never have a place at the dinner table so long as they're stuck in the 19th century

the state treasurer of MS doesn't concern me. It's the entire state that should suffer for its vile treatment of minorities, and they have

and no, the michigan government did not choose to pay anything to the lawyers of the gay couple, get real. It paid $100,000 to some lawyer to defend the case to the end and michigan is STILL attempting to pass RFRAs and ****. You clearly don't live here if you think it was voluntary. They were forced by a federal court ruling just like oklahoma and a dozen other states

And 'sovereign immunity' won't spare ferguson when the justice department nails them either
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom