• 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!

Obama's Transgender Decree

And just exactly why would heterosexual people like myself and President Obama want to do that? How would that benefit us exactly?

The LGBT community makes up maybe like 2% of the total population. In order to impose their agenda on America they would need at least 51% of heterosexual people all of a sudden decide that they're perfectly fine with sexual deviancy and mental disorders. How exactly does 2% of the population con so many Americans into being okay with that without making an incredibly sound argument?

How the gay movement lobbies your state legislators
 
It outs the gay agenda and it shows us the power of the LGBT lobby. Obama used to be outspoken against gay marriage. Now he is the LGBT's bitch.

The Gay Agenda is real, and this bathroom thing is just another step towards their ultimate goal: putting sexual deviancy and mental disorders on he same plane as hetero-normative behavior.

What is the "Gay Agenda"?
 
Federal education funds come from the federal government to insure that students are getting a well rounded education rather than being proselytized at by extremists who control wacky states. If states refuse to give a proper education to their children and ensure each child has a positive environment in which to learn then federal dollars should not be used for it. If North Carolina or Mississippi or Texas would like to brainwash their children they can pay for that garbage themselves.

What does education have to do with what bathroom you are allowed to use?
 
What is the "Gay Agenda"?

Ramming things initially not wanted by a majority of the country through by using media and political pressure to sway not only public opinion but also politicians and businesses. Putting men in the women's restroom over the objection of women would be a good example of it.

"What good is it to tell women to avoid rape by watching their surroundings while the system allows sex offenders to watch them shower." --some twitter tweeter.
 
Ramming things initially not wanted by a majority of the country through by using media and political pressure to sway not only public opinion but also politicians and businesses. Putting men in the women's restroom over the objection of women would be a good example of it.

"What good is it to tell women to avoid rape by watching their surroundings while the system allows sex offenders to watch them shower." --some twitter tweeter.

Other than the transgenders being allowed in bathrooms I can't see any difference between the equality that gays want and the equality that blacks wanted back in the day... and got.
 
Other than the transgenders being allowed in bathrooms I can't see any difference between the equality that gays want and the equality that blacks wanted back in the day... and got.

Most gay rights initiatives were justified. Stopping police raids on gay bars, overturning sodomy laws, allowing gays in the military and, finally, same sex marriage. All those old policies were wrong. And, for all I know, the trans issues being fought over may someday be proven to be justified too. Maybe someday we will learn that a brain's "gender" truly is sometimes mismatched with someone's biological birth sex.

But, agree with them or not, the above are indeed all part of the gay agenda.
 
Most gay rights initiatives were justified. Stopping police raids on gay bars, overturning sodomy laws, allowing gays in the military and, finally, same sex marriage. All those old policies were wrong. And, for all I know, the trans issues being fought over may someday be proven to be justified too. Maybe someday we will learn that a brain's "gender" truly is sometimes mismatched with someone's biological birth sex.

But, agree with them or not, the above are indeed all part of the gay agenda.

/Fair enough.
 
Most gay rights initiatives were justified. Stopping police raids on gay bars, overturning sodomy laws, allowing gays in the military and, finally, same sex marriage. All those old policies were wrong. And, for all I know, the trans issues being fought over may someday be proven to be justified too. Maybe someday we will learn that a brain's "gender" truly is sometimes mismatched with someone's biological birth sex.

But, agree with them or not, the above are indeed all part of the gay agenda.

Making it a crime to address someone with unpreferred pronouns in the workplace is not justified.
 
Making it a crime to address someone with unpreferred pronouns in the workplace is not justified.

Especially if you always knew them as a "he."
 
Especially if you always knew them as a "he."

That's not even the whole thing though. You have to know the proper terms and if you get them wrong then you're open to being sued if you're a business and fired if you're an employee.
 
That's not even the whole thing though. You have to know the proper terms and if you get them wrong then you're open to being sued if you're a business and fired if you're an employee.

We have a few employees who I am unsure of. They look a bit off. But, I call them by what they identify as simply because I do not know their biological sex. So, I go with what I do have: their names and the way they dress. I call them "she" even though I would not bet that they are women.

Now, if a guy I worked with for 10 years suddenly showed up in a dress and said his name was Christie instead of Chris, I'd probably stick with calling him Chris and use the term "he."
 
The same? What was the vote count in Congress for the bill Obama signed?

Irrelevant. The department of education which is overseen by the executive branch already has discretion on how it hands out federal education funds.
 
Irrelevant. The department of education which is overseen by the executive branch already has discretion on how it hands out federal education funds.
Okay, so you don't know the difference between a law passed by Congress and a Presidential decree. Thanks.
 
I think if Obama wants his last act as President to be leading the fight for old creepy dudes to sneak peaks at little girls in public bathroom to be his legacy, just sit back and let this go. 20 years from now kids will be asking their parents when they read about Obama in history books:

"Why did he fight to have men in the little girls room?"
 
Okay, so you don't know the difference between a law passed by Congress and a Presidential decree.

No it's simply irrelevant in terms of it's constitutionality in this case. Congress already created the department of education and the executive branch overseas it. So Congress did give the President the authority to do this already, it does not take a new authorization for any reason. The purpose of the Department of Education is to have a body capable of making rapid decisions regarding education policy at the federal level without Congress needed to vote on each and every one. Essentially this gives the President pre-clearance to influence education policy.
 
That's not even the whole thing though. You have to know the proper terms and if you get them wrong then you're open to being sued if you're a business and fired if you're an employee.

Welcome to the world of Politically Correct bull****.
 
Every single solitary time throughout history where we've had controversy's like this that pit traditional people stuck in the past vs younger more open minded people, youth always wins. No matter what stupid bull**** laws North Carolina or Mississippi tries to pass within 10 years it will be overturned, the controversy will be over, and what younger more liberal minds originally thought will become the norm. All you're doing is delaying the inevitable and making yourselves look like Dinosaurs in the process.

So, what you're saying is we should just accept the PC stupidity of whatever some ****-for-brains young person (or a group of them) comes up with?
With today's youth, that's a recipe for a social mess. Look what it's doing to colleges all over America.
 
Every single solitary time throughout history where we've had controversy's like this that pit traditional people stuck in the past vs younger more open minded people, youth always wins. No matter what stupid bull**** laws North Carolina or Mississippi tries to pass within 10 years it will be overturned, the controversy will be over, and what younger more liberal minds originally thought will become the norm. All you're doing is delaying the inevitable and making yourselves look like Dinosaurs in the process.

If you think liberals endorse original thought then you have really no understanding of history at all. You also don't appear to realize that in order to enable original thought you have to be open to the idea people have the right to disagree with you, which liberals have proven they don't believe in.

Btw, you're 33 now, so you're no longer part of that young group. Just sayin'.
 
If you think liberals endorse original thought then you have really no understanding of history at all. You also don't appear to realize that in order to enable original thought you have to be open to the idea people have the right to disagree with you, which liberals have proven they don't believe in.

Btw, you're 33 now, so you're no longer part of that young group. Just sayin'.

When a group, liberals, endorse things like campus speech codes and protest the presence of views counter their own, they cannot possibly be endorsing original thought. What they endorse is herd mentality and the circle jerk.
 
Already sourced it if you were bothering to pay attention. Why should I waste my time doing research for you that you won't listen to anyway?

Your rant is pretty inconsistent. First, you claim that a source has already been provided (A). Then, you state your unwillingness to waste time doing research for somebody who wont listen (B).

'A' states a source has already been given. 'B' strongly implies that one has not. Which is it?
 
Back
Top Bottom