LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

Post Reply
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by GreenGoo »

I'm just realizing that Mrs. Doubtfire would have been R rated and Eddie Izzard wouldn't have been allowed into the country.

Good luck America. You're going to need it.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43491
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Blackhawk »

(He says while we pretend not to notice the barbed wire fences going up along our shared border.)
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 42239
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by GreenGoo »

Blackhawk wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 10:44 am (He says while we pretend not to notice the barbed wire fences going up along our shared border.)
Don't forget about China infiltrating our institutions. We need our own luck.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Smoove_B »

Feels like something new just about every day:
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday signed a law prohibiting transgender people at public schools from using the restroom that matches their gender identity, the first of several states expected to enact such bans this year amid a flood of bills nationwide targeting the trans community.

The bill signed by the Republican governor makes Arkansas the fourth state to place such restrictions at public schools, and it comes as bills in Idaho and Iowa also await their governor's signature. And it might be followed by an even stricter Arkansas bill criminalizing transgender adults using public restrooms that match their gender identity.
Of note:
“The Governor has said she will sign laws that focus on protecting and educating our kids, not indoctrinating them and believes our schools are no place for the radical left’s woke agenda,” Alexa Henning, Sanders' spokesperson, said in a statement. “Arkansas isn’t going to rewrite the rules of biology just to please a handful of far-left advocates.”

Similar laws have been enacted in Alabama, Oklahoma and Tennessee, although lawsuits have been filed challenging the Oklahoma and Tennessee restrictions.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Are there laws in these states that prohibit non-trans people from going into opposite sex restrooms?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
Madmarcus
Posts: 3609
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Just outside your peripheral vision

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Madmarcus »

LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 3:46 pm Are there laws in these states that prohibit non-trans people from going into opposite sex restrooms?
I was wondering the same thing.
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Madmarcus wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 8:51 am
LawBeefaroni wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 3:46 pm Are there laws in these states that prohibit non-trans people from going into opposite sex restrooms?
I was wondering the same thing.
I mean I would guess you could be asked to leave under trespass laws but is there anything explicitly prohibiting a man from entering a woman's room and vice versa?

I know in Illinois it is illegal to deny access to a public restroom of their choice and all single use restrooms have to be gender neutral.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by malchior »

That's one way to analyze it but ultimately this isn't about existing law or norms. It is SOLELY about demonizing a class of people to generate political capital. That is why it appears like something is happening every day. Because it is. There is a raft of legislation being pushed with great speed through many states as part of a broad-based attack on our society by authoritarians. And it is progressing with almost no pushback or acknowledgement by the Democratic leadership. They are plugging their ears and humming as we sink into darkness.
User avatar
Defiant
Posts: 21045
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:09 pm
Location: Tongue in cheek

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Defiant »

Not really political (yet) but will likely become an issue down the line.
Scientists have created mice with two biologically male parents for the first time — a significant milestone in reproductive biology.

The team, led by Katsuhiko Hayashi, a professor of genome biology at Osaka University in Japan, generated eggs from the skin cells of male mice that, when implanted in female mice, went on to produce healthy pups, according to research published March 15 in the peer-reviewed journal Nature.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/world/mi ... index.html
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

malchior wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:37 am That's one way to analyze it but ultimately this isn't about existing law or norms. It is SOLELY about demonizing a class of people to generate political capital. That is why it appears like something is happening every day. Because it is. There is a raft of legislation being pushed with great speed through many states as part of a broad-based attack on our society by authoritarians. And it is progressing with almost no pushback or acknowledgement by the Democratic leadership. They are plugging their ears and humming as we sink into darkness.
I wasn't trying to put it to existing laws it's clearly targeting a specific class. The fact that there are few, if any, existing laws that prohibit the very thing they're using as an excuse for the new laws illustrates this fact. It's not a problem worthy of such government intervention until it offends their intolerant, authoritarian worldview. At which point its time to start the mental gymnastics to single out a specific group for the attack.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Smoove_B »

Temporary restraining order issued last night in TN:
A federal judge in Tennessee on Friday temporarily halted the state’s new law that criminalizes some drag performances, hours before it was set to take effect.

Judge Thomas Parker cited constitutional protections of freedom of speech in issuing a temporary restraining order.

“If Tennessee wishes to exercise its police power in restricting speech it considers obscene, it must do so within the constraints and framework of the United States Constitution,” Parker wrote.

“The Court finds that, as it stands, the record here suggests that when the legislature passed this Statute, it missed the mark,” he wrote.
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
$iljanus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 13676
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:46 pm
Location: New England...or under your bed

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by $iljanus »

Smoove_B wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 9:32 pm Temporary restraining order issued last night in TN:
A federal judge in Tennessee on Friday temporarily halted the state’s new law that criminalizes some drag performances, hours before it was set to take effect.

Judge Thomas Parker cited constitutional protections of freedom of speech in issuing a temporary restraining order.

“If Tennessee wishes to exercise its police power in restricting speech it considers obscene, it must do so within the constraints and framework of the United States Constitution,” Parker wrote.

“The Court finds that, as it stands, the record here suggests that when the legislature passed this Statute, it missed the mark,” he wrote.
The guardrails of democracy are dented and battered but still hold. (well until it gets to the Supreme Court then the possibility of some crazed trucker wiping out those rails comes into play)
Black lives matter!

Wise words of warning from Smoove B: Oh, how you all laughed when I warned you about the semen. Well, who's laughing now?
User avatar
Daehawk
Posts: 63524
Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 1:11 am

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Daehawk »

Also .....

Judge orders books removed from Texas public libraries due to LGBTQ and racial content must be returned within 24 hours
A federal judge in Texas ruled that at least 12 books removed from public libraries by Llano County officials, many because of their LGBTQ and racial content, must be placed back onto shelves within 24 hours, according to an order filed Thursday.

Seven residents sued county officials in April 2022, claiming their First and 14th Amendment rights were violated when books deemed inappropriate by some people in the community and Republican lawmakers were removed from public libraries or access was restricted.

The lawsuit filed in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas in San Antonio claimed county officials removed books from the shelves of the three-branch public library system “because they disagree with the ideas within them” and terminated access to thousands of digital books because they could not ban two specific titles.

Books ordered to return to shelves include “Caste: The Origins of Our Discontents” by Isabel Wilkerson, “They Called Themselves the K.K.K.: The Birth of an American Terrorist Group” by Susan Campbell Bartoletti and “Being Jazz: My Life as a (Transgender) Teen” by Jazz Jennings.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake.
http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by malchior »

Biden is doing everything he can to shatter his own coalition.

malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by malchior »

By the way, if you haven't been listening people are PISSED about what they announced yesterday on trans sports issues. I can't help but feel that Biden has shot himself in the foot. It would have been better to do nothing.
User avatar
geezer
Posts: 7551
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 1:52 pm
Location: Yeeha!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by geezer »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 07, 2023 10:43 am By the way, if you haven't been listening people are PISSED about what they announced yesterday on trans sports issues. I can't help but feel that Biden has shot himself in the foot. It would have been better to do nothing.
Yeah, but I sort of feel that this is a "no-win" for liberals and liberal-ish folks.

As a former HS and college athlete, while I understand that transgender women have different testosterone and hormonal levels than they did when they were previously bio males, I find myself sympathetic to women's sports advocates that feel it's unfair (on a performance level) to allow transitioned women to compete, and I think I have a fairly thorough understanding of the transition process and effects (for a layperson). Now imagine someone who *hasn't" taken the time to try and understand the biology of all of it, and I just don't think there's enough of an argument to be convincing. Or imagine an athlete that hasn't undergone hormonal or related therapy but still legitimately identifies, competing against other women, especially at the college level.

To be clear, I think bathroom bills, restrictions of gender-affirming care, and pretty much anything else along those lines to be abhorrent, but declaring that women's sports *must* be open to any individual that identifies as female is a step too far, even for me, and I'm pretty far out left these days.

(Politically, yes, the smart thing for Biden would have been to do nothing.)
Last edited by geezer on Fri Apr 07, 2023 2:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by malchior »

I agree with all that. I deal with a lot of trans athletes and there are challenges to be sure. You have a lot of debate of advantage vs. inclusiveness that don't have easy answers and aren't necessarily applicable across different activities. It is devilishly tricky. I am mostly a disinterested party who will let those most impacted work that out amongst themselves neutrally.

That's why this feels like a cynical action that only muddied the complexity of it. He has essentially set on a path that risks his coalition with some notion that it is unbreakable or the left will have no other choice. That's premised on some reality that they in fact don't have another choice but that doesn't always work out the way you hope it will. Especially at his popularity levels.

The other interesting dynamic is the "is this ZIents pulling the string on BIden" discussion. Which just underlines how terrible the situation is with him. Considering the terrible political situation I still am very unsettled by Biden. I think he's been frankly poor as a President *for this moment*. If things were calm he'd be a great caretaker President. For now? He might very well be remembered for presiding over or being responsible for a massive disaster.
User avatar
Zarathud
Posts: 16434
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Zarathud »

Biden’s priorities were never to be the GLBT President. He’ll be judged by his handling of Ukraine, COVID and the economy, not bathrooms and trans athletes.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts." - Albert Einstein
"I don't stand by anything." - Trump
“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.” - John Stuart Mill, Inaugural Address Delivered to the University of St Andrews, 2/1/1867
“It is the impractical things in this tumultuous hell-scape of a world that matter most. A book, a name, chicken soup. They help us remember that, even in our darkest hour, life is still to be savored.” - Poe, Altered Carbon
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by malchior »

Zarathud wrote: Fri Apr 07, 2023 11:41 am Biden’s priorities were never to be the GLBT President. He’ll be judged by his handling of Ukraine, COVID and the economy, not bathrooms and trans athletes.
I agree to an extent but Day 1 he signed an order protecting trans kids access to sports. That isn't a figurative Day 1 either. It was on the first day in office. WSJ's headline was 'Joe Biden's First Day Began the End of Girls' Sports'

This is a hard reversal that damages his standing with his coalition. It looks like a retreat in the face of hard right transphobia and it isn't clear what he gets out of it politically. It's at least notably strange political calculus.
User avatar
Smoove_B
Posts: 54567
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 am
Location: Kaer Morhen

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Smoove_B »

Yeah, it's one thing to not advance a cause but it's another to actively push thing backwards. Similar to the oil drilling in Alaska, I cannot figure out what group the administration is trying to appeal to here with this decision?
Maybe next year, maybe no go
User avatar
El Guapo
Posts: 41245
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 4:01 pm
Location: Boston

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by El Guapo »

malchior wrote: Fri Apr 07, 2023 11:21 am I agree with all that. I deal with a lot of trans athletes and there are challenges to be sure. You have a lot of debate of advantage vs. inclusiveness that don't have easy answers and aren't necessarily applicable across different activities. It is devilishly tricky. I am mostly a disinterested party who will let those most impacted work that out amongst themselves neutrally.

That's why this feels like a cynical action that only muddied the complexity of it. He has essentially set on a path that risks his coalition with some notion that it is unbreakable or the left will have no other choice. That's premised on some reality that they in fact don't have another choice but that doesn't always work out the way you hope it will. Especially at his popularity levels.
I think I'm in a similar spot at geezer. I don't know enough about what exactly the new policy says to comment in depth on it, but based on what I do know my sense is that the correct approach as a policy matter is that schools can limit transgender athletes participation in their new gender sports as long as it reflects legitimate performance / fair play concerns and not sheer bigotry (hence, no flat bans). Obviously that's a difficult thing to manage / police in practice (schools acting out of bigotry are 99% of the time going to pretend that they're not), but seems like you nonetheless want to put the right policy in place and then figure out the best ways to manage and police that over time.

Politically it's more difficult, but: (1) I don't want to knock Biden too hard for doing the right policy even if the politics are difficult; and (2) I'm skeptical that this will make a material difference in voting outcomes come Nov. 2024.
Black Lives Matter.
malchior
Posts: 24794
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:58 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by malchior »

I agree again but this isn't happening in a void. Whether it is the right policy or not is hard to know and in some regards isn't the most important factor. The timing of this amidst a concerted legislative attacks on trans healthcare and other issues just kicks the legs out from these folks.

Especially when we also have concerted efforts in social media to misinform and demonize trans people in athletics. For example, the below where someone electronically changed a trans athletes voice and exaggerated the injuries to the opponent. It's flat out lying (and well done Elon for showing us he is *garbage* yet again). Biden just validated some of these efforts to some extent. It simply wasn't the time to make the move.

User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Kurth »

As discussed in the Harry Potter thread, while I have no time for bigots and hate-mongers, I'm not in for demonizing every person who struggles to comprehend the wide spectrum of transgender-related issues.

That said, there's a special place for the rabidly anti-trans people who try to hide their bigotry behind a shield of platitudes about caring about women.

The comments about the MMA fight posted-above are such a joke. Those asshats are not motivated by their care for women.

And yeah, I'm sure that when you're shooting automatic weapons at cases of Bud Light and calling for boycotting of Nike for doing an influencer deal with Dylan Mulvaney (btw, not actually a thing wrt Nike), your chief concern really is for all the women who didn't get the chance to do those deals. Yeah. Sure. :roll:
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
waitingtoconnect
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 5:56 am

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by waitingtoconnect »

I know a well known female runner.

At most levels of competition outside professional she is going to crush anyone who races her. Even against men.

So many transgender women simply won’t have the capability to ever march her or her peers.

At the elite level there are also women who unknowingly have higher levels of testosterone naturally. These women who without the tests present in elite athletics would NEVER know they were different.

https://www.reuters.com/article/olympic ... SL8N2OW50W

In sport we just need common sense. But that’s not the issue. It’sa sideshow for “advocates” to winge under the guise of “protecting women”.

In real life we just need common sense as well. How many transgender people are there really? How are they any threat?

I’ve known several people in my work career who I never even knew were transgender. It just didn’t matter. It’s a non issue and treating them like dog droppings is unjust and disgusting.
User avatar
Kurth
Posts: 5882
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 1:19 am
Location: Portland

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Kurth »

waitingtoconnect wrote: Sat Apr 08, 2023 3:04 am I know a well known female runner.

At most levels of competition outside professional she is going to crush anyone who races her. Even against men.

So many transgender women simply won’t have the capability to ever march her or her peers.

At the elite level there are also women who unknowingly have higher levels of testosterone naturally. These women who without the tests present in elite athletics would NEVER know they were different.

https://www.reuters.com/article/olympic ... SL8N2OW50W

In sport we just need common sense. But that’s not the issue. It’sa sideshow for “advocates” to winge under the guise of “protecting women”.

In real life we just need common sense as well. How many transgender people are there really? How are they any threat?

I’ve known several people in my work career who I never even knew were transgender. It just didn’t matter. It’s a non issue and treating them like dog droppings is unjust and disgusting.
Well said.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
User avatar
YellowKing
Posts: 30125
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 2:02 pm

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by YellowKing »

As I said to my dad when he started railing against trans kids in sports: "Since when did you give a crap about high school sports?" For the amount of teams it actually impacts, it's a problem not worthy of the national stage. We've got kids going hungry, kids getting shot, I honestly don't give a tinker's damn whether a team sport is unfair or not.
User avatar
Blackhawk
Posts: 43491
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:48 pm
Location: Southwest Indiana

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Blackhawk »

Here's an idea:

Separate sports from schools. It solves this issue from a political perspective (as the sports are now private), and schools can go back to education rather than spending more on uniforms for 100 kids than they do on learning resources for the other 500.
(˙pǝsɹǝʌǝɹ uǝǝq sɐɥ ʎʇıʌɐɹƃ ʃɐuosɹǝd ʎW)
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Unagi »

In sort of an 'autistic' thought on this... (so give me a little room for being too focused on the technical)...

What if, 100 years from now when what I describe is reasonably unobtrusive and easy to do, all competitions that involved what was believed to be a testosterone-driven success were subject to a final review of results? The review would be by way of blood tests... if you beat someone with less testosterone, your victory was basically ignored and only the participants that beat those who had more testosterone than they had were given the laurels. We would call these people 'champions'. Additionally, we would have competitions for "the absolute greatest" - where the absolute best were honored for their achievement, but they were looked at with a more refined eye as spectacles where as the 'champions' would always hold a slightly higher rank in the hearts and minds of the people.

I thought this originally as tongue-in-cheek, but I actually am left wondering if this is actually where things may and should end up.

I (ultimately I think) don't like the idea that it will force women out of a lot of 'champion' titles on many things, but I think we could maybe still engage a gender-driven camp of competitions.

I do like the idea that males would be forced to forfeit a victory because "well, dude, you were obviously supposed to win it so you shouldn't really even have been in the competition."
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Unagi »

Blackhawk wrote: Sat Apr 08, 2023 7:56 pm Here's an idea:

Separate sports from schools. It solves this issue from a political perspective (as the sports are now private), and schools can go back to education rather than spending more on uniforms for 100 kids than they do on learning resources for the other 500.
Absolutely 100% agree on this.
Absolutely.
100%
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by hepcat »

I would agree with this were it not for the fact that sports are a major source of revenue for schools already struggling for resources.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 82085
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Isgrimnur »

If only there were some way to fund schools, perhaps getting funds from the communities in which they reside and benefit economically from educated students.
It's almost as if people are the problem.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by hepcat »

I agree. The monetary benefits of state sponsored human hunting events cannot be understated.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Brian
Posts: 12553
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:51 am
Location: South of Heaven
Contact:

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Brian »

Thanks Hep, now none of us will be surprised to see that as the next Republican sponsored bill.
"Don't believe everything you read on the internet." - Abraham Lincoln
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by hepcat »

I’ve had an ongoing Wahlberg hunt proposal going on 5 years now, so I think it could be bipartisan.
Covfefe!
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Unagi »

hepcat wrote: Sat Apr 08, 2023 9:16 pm I’ve had an ongoing Wahlberg hunt proposal going on 5 years now, so I think it could be bipartisan.
wait wait wait... you said 'human' hunting above.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by hepcat »

True, he’s not even a good enough actor to pull THAT off.
Covfefe!
User avatar
LawBeefaroni
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55316
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 3:08 pm
Location: Urbs in Horto, outrageous taxes on everything

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by LawBeefaroni »

Unagi wrote: Sat Apr 08, 2023 7:59 pm
Blackhawk wrote: Sat Apr 08, 2023 7:56 pm Here's an idea:

Separate sports from schools. It solves this issue from a political perspective (as the sports are now private), and schools can go back to education rather than spending more on uniforms for 100 kids than they do on learning resources for the other 500.
Absolutely 100% agree on this.
Absolutely.
100%
So sports become the exclusive realm of those that can afford it?
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General
"No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton

MYT
User avatar
Unagi
Posts: 26376
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 5:14 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by Unagi »

I’m not sure all communities can afford both and I do think education is more important than sports.
Perhaps there should be a thing like public schools but it would be public sports and it would have its own set of books.
User avatar
hepcat
Posts: 51302
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 3:02 pm
Location: Chicago, IL Home of the triple homicide!

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by hepcat »

Another thing to remember is that many families depend on athletic scholarships to pay for college. Those scholarships are offered based on their performance in high school sports primarily.
Covfefe!
User avatar
waitingtoconnect
Posts: 960
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 5:56 am

Re: LGBT issues thread (was Supreme Court to hear same-sex marriage cases)

Post by waitingtoconnect »

Brian wrote: Sat Apr 08, 2023 9:14 pm Thanks Hep, now none of us will be surprised to see that as the next Republican sponsored bill.
When your current reality is turning into the Purge movies….
Post Reply