|
cis autodrag posted:can you give a safe-ish rundown for those of us who don't want to click something deemed brain-warping? The link is to an article, the video requires an additional click. 42 y.o. trans woman ridiculed, beaten and then shot to death.
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 05:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 15:56 |
|
|
Control Volume posted:Owning a concealed carry would be a good way to have them skip the beating and go directly to the shooting, thereby complying with the guidelines laid down by the Geneva Convention. Statistically, this is more likely to lead to death, but given the assumption that statistics are meaningless and false, well, it's the best case scenario. What provision of the Geneva Conventions are you referring to, and to which LGBT circumstances are you applying it? What statistics were you thinking of? If you have mental health issues that are not well and consistently controlled, please don't buy a gun. You can still get educated and practiced, though. joat mon fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Mar 9, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2017 23:41
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:I think that was supposed to be an extremely sarcastic "joke" about how they would just die instead of being tortured first. Ah, good. I was trying to get that collection of words to make sense and it wasn't working.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
Nope.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2017 01:15
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:What the hell is even the point of this? 1. HB2 is repealed in its entirety. All 11 sections/subsections. 2. In its place, the legislature enacted two preemptions of governmental action: A: State agencies are forbidden from enacting their own bathroom rules - the Legislature would do that, if at all. B: Local governments are forbidden from regulating (in any way) private employment or public accommodations - until 2020. So, state agencies can have no rules requiring the use of bathrooms to conform to biological sex. Nor can state agencies have rules expressly permitting the use of bathrooms to conform to one's gender identification. (Maybe the state universities had something like the latter before HB2?) The State legislature did not (and likely won't) address the issue. As a practical and legal matter, a return to the status quo. And local government isn't allowed to address discrimination of any kind in private hiring practices or public accommodations for three years. Since Charlotte repealed their non-discrimination ordinance in December 2016 (to aid the fight to repeal HB2) it's kinda status quo if you squint at it, and definitely status quo to before Charlotte enacted their ordinance in February of 2016. Charlotte can try it again in 2020. Given the nationwide moves of red legislatures to restrict the authority of their blue urban areas, this result is actually a good thing/. (Thought the legislature could always preempt later, probably in a way that doesn't broadcast animus so brazenly)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 30, 2017 20:13
|
|
There's no substantive change at all, I don't see how this is even a "compromise," every single bad aspect of HB2 is still there but now they can claim that it's repealed.
|
The Shortest Path posted:Yeah, it's just really kind of disgusting and a bit terrifying. I'm sure that some people are going to feel empowered by that, especially if more people keep giving them a platform to talk about it. A guy named Joseph Grabowski from NOM usually speaks for the bus. The only Lucy Diavolo I could find is a trans woman writer/blogger from Chicago. I wonder of "Lucy Diavolo" (Devil) posed as a Free Speech Bus spokesperson and pranked the radio station to speak their implicit end game for them. That would be awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 16:21
|
|
|
Quorum posted:This doesn't seem at all unlikely. The way she phrased things ("epidemic of murder against the trans community") in particular has more of the coding of progressive circles than NOM and their ilk, who would rather die than acknowledge any of us as a community. Good point, and I also expect NOM would take the opposite extreme position regarding trans people who are victims of crime, and argue that their being trans is never a factor.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:I don't see the interview. Is it tucked away in one of the other two interviews? Potentially memory holed? This link is currently working: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2017/03/30/nightside-talking-with-the-free-speech-bus/ Listening now, red flags should have been going up about the caller. e: good on Dan Rea for calling her out and cutting her off. (and then commended the Major for his actions, and told NOM to GTFO) And checking, Yep, pranked. http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/03/31/radio-station-got-majorly-trolled-during-interview-about-anti-trans-free-speech-bus/ joat mon fucked around with this message at 22:06 on Mar 31, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:Big news, I didn't even know they were hearing this en banc. Here's [url=http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2017/D04-04/C:15-1720  Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1942256:S:0] The opinion.[/url] At least in the employment discrimination realm, a solid and interesting analysis.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 02:43
|
|
|
Bethamphetamine posted:All the way back to the supreme court, but this time with Gorsuch. It's not going to make it into law, and even if it did, the 4th Circuit would say it's unconstitutional and the Supremes wouldn't grant cert.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Thankfully, the cases of the vapours were unnecessary and the 'religious freedom' EO turned out pretty weak and narrow: http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/04/politics/text-executive-order-promoting-free-speech-and-religious-liberty/ 1. Treasury should "to the extent permitted by law" not enforce the Johnson Amendment. 2. HHS "shall consider" granting religious exceptions to preventative medicine under the affordable care act.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
Three posts up
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:17
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:What the poo poo is "Chemistry with Teen Life Principles"? "Teen life principles" are unrelated value  -added asides that come as part of the Chemistry courses.quote:Each PACE includes a "Teen Life Principles" reading that focuses on character qualities. Although there is little to no connection with chemistry in these readings, questions from them are included in some of the tests. (They deal with issues like dating principles, the value of Bible meditation, and wise decision-making. You might choose to skip these, especially if you disagree with any of the content.)
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:7th Circuit court panel unanimously rules to uphold injunction against Wisconsin school's Anti-Trans bathroom policy. Here's the [url=http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2017/D05-30/C:16-3522 Williams:aut:T:fnOp:N:1971382:S:0]opinion[/url].It looks like they're expanding their [url=http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2017/D04-04/C:15-1720 Wood:aut:T:fnOp:N:1942256:S:0]Hively[/url] analysis beyond the employment discrimination realm. I hope it sticks.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2017 00:52
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:*sigh* Turns out you can't post a memorial pic on Pulse to Facebook or twitter without rear end in a top hat telling me I need to be angry about Muslims. Because I'm sure some Muslim somewhere, sometime, had a lovely opinion about LGBT folks, I don't know how much sympathy you'll get, based on the last couple pages.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:REally? I have to put up with this here too? gently caress You. No, I agree with you that having to be angry about Muslims is stupid. But the same pages where "gently caress corporation floats in pride parades, gently caress allowing cops to attend in uniform, gently caress allowing politicians to campaign there unless their record on gay rights is SPOTLESS, and gently caress any straight tourist that isn't respectful" is cheered and religion gets (albeit more gently) tossed in too, your sentiment of compassion and toleration felt unfortunately out of place at the moment.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:There's nothing wrong with individuals going as individuals who support Pride, if they are not in uniform and thus representing an organization. They must keep that aspect of their lives that we consider shameful hidden away, as if in a small, dark windowless storage space.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 23:33
|
|
|
Saraiguma posted:You're right being a pig is just like being closeted, I guess us queers were the real bigots all along. No, LGBT people are (on average, there clearly are exceptions) much more sensitive to bigotry, and certainly more so than police (on average) because LGBT people have been more on the receiving end of bigotry. I think the vast majority would agree that being there is pretty lovely. Is the desire of the remainder to exchange bigotry roles understandable? Absolutely. Is it right? No.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 23:54
|
|
|
Agnosticnixie posted:I'm not seeing how it's bigoted to be uncomfortable with people who willingly join oppressive entities that cloak themselves into the idea that they're "just enforcing the law" against minorities.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:These are pretty unhinged statements to make. In the first part I was agreeing with you, and in the second part saying that expanding the thread to include the philosophical quandaries and emotional baggage of the idea of social order was a bit big to bite off on.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
/\ /\ /\ /\ With the law not given an early death by three Texans - one Reagan appointee, two by GWB. CommieGIR posted:Federal Appeals court ruled against the plaintiffs over Mississippi's new Religious Freedom law: Here's the opinion. They're not saying Mississippi's law is legal, they're saying that "That's messed up and no-poo poo unconstitutional" isn't enough harm to grant standing to sue. In essence, they're saying that if there's no harm, they're not going to call a foul.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
BigRed0427 posted:Welp, this won't end well. I don't think that word means what they think it means. Also, the Supreme Court tells Arkansas to stop dicking around with the birth certificates of kids with lesbian moms. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/16-992_868c.pdf
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
Gorsuch implicitly accepted Obergefell as state decisis in his dissent to the Arkansas smackdown earlier this week. And to second Quorum, as a judge appointed for life who has and will continue to make is own history, Kennedy doesn't give a rat's rear end about what some congressman in 2017 could say (but who couldn't actually do diddly-squat to Kennedy)
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Glazier posted:Ah, so a national superseding law to hit that states they don't control. No. This proposed law effects only federal civil rights laws, like Title IX (Education) the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Public Accommodations), Fair Housing Act, etc. It does not (and constitutionally cannot) do anything to states that have legislatively or judicially broadened their civil rights protections. This bill is meant to permanently undo the changes the Obama Administration made in defining the word 'sex' as used in those statutes, particularly Title IX. The changes were temporarily undone when the administrations changed and Trump's DoJ disavowed the expanded definitions, so the actual impact of this bill is moot, at least for the next 3 1/2 years. This ensures that future executive departments can't just declare new definitions, and that any future changes in the definition will have to come from congress. This bill essentially says, "We, congress, made this law. We, congress, get to decide what definitions get used. We, congress, understand the executive branch has broadened our definitions. We, congress, declare that those broadened definitions were not what we, congress meant when we made those definitions. Here is a new, more extensive definition that clears up any ambiguity in that area." This is basic high school civics, so there's nothing hinky about it legally or procedurally, it's just a lovely thing to do. I'm not sure how this will effect the 7th Circuit's work on the gender sterotyping/gender nonconformity angle it's been developing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Admiral Zukunft, Commandant of the Coast Guard posted:I reached out personally to Lt. Taylor Miller, who was featured on the cover of The Washington Post last week. If you read that story, Taylor's family has disowned her. Her family is the United States Coast Guard. And I told Taylor, 'I will not turn my back. We have made an investment in you, and you have made an investment in the Coast Guard, and I will not break faith.   http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/08/01/commandant-i-will-not-break-faith-transgender-coast-guardsmen.html?variant=mobile.amp
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 19:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 15:56 |
|
|
Hopefully some more federal circuit courts get on board with the 7th before something gets to the Supremes, and the states that can, legislate their own protections.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2017 13:53
|
|