100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Mississippi vs LGBT Agenda | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/434158/watch-college-kids-cant-explain-why-short-white-man-isnt-tall-asian-woman Watch: College Kids Can’t Explain Why a Short White Man Isn’t a Tall Asian Woman by David French April 16, 2016 11:22 AM @DavidAFrench From the Family Policy Institute of Washington comes this amusing video, where a conversation about gender-neutral bathrooms turns into something a bit more interesting: Watch as the students struggle to explain why an adult male shouldn’t enroll in a first-grade class, why he’s not a woman, why he’s not substantially taller, or why he’s not Asian. This isn’t moral relativism, it’s a completely fact-free new moral code, one based entirely on consent and harm. Or, I should say, immediate harm. Essentially the new morality is “you do you — so long as it doesn’t hurt me or someone else in a way that I immediately recognize.” The new immorality is any act of “intolerance” that purports to interfere with this radical autonomy. The fascinating and disturbing thing is that a generation that so prizes its alleged love of “science” continues to hold to this primitive harm-based morality in spite of oceans of evidence that years of far more basic departures from traditional morality have caused (and are causing) enormous social problems and human suffering. Years ago no-fault divorce was a no-brainer, a recognition of individual free will. Fast forward two generations and broken families are a prime factor in virtually every negative economic, emotional, and cultural development in the United States. More recently, cohabitation is a new norm, and couples who wait until marriage to live together are seen as odd. Yet cohabitation often causes young children to experience extreme family instability, exposes children to greater risk of physical and sexual abuse from non-parent boyfriends, and often leaves single mothers facing serial abandonment. And we’ve barely dipped our toe in the water of the brave new world, where it’s totally cool if men believe they’re female dragons. But there’s no trace of regret or humility in the cultural revolutionaries — the people who’ve so profoundly influenced the young people on the video above. Just keep doing what you want. If you get hurt, it’s probably some Christian’s fault. Only intolerance can stop utopia now. Thank you for posting this article. I guess I needed to know.... 
things are MUCH worst that I thought. A brainwashed , b@lless, generation of believing & accepting what you are told. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the so called bathroom laws being enacted in certain states
say a persons sexual identity is determined by their gender listed on their birth certificate and persons shall use the corresponding restrooms in accordance with those facts... so i have this question ??? how are women going to feel about a women (by birth), for example: Chastity/Chaz Bono, complying with the new laws and entering the womens restroom dressed in a mens suit and tie and also sporting a beard, to urinate along with all the other females of various ages ??? will this be acceptable to them ? or will they scream for the police to arrest a man that is in the ladies room..??? and also, suppose she has had reassignment surgery and now possesses a penis and a birth certificate stating she was born a natural female...what do we do now..? #careful what you ask for, you might get it... #it's all about the penis... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Sun 04/17/16 02:25 PM
|
|
it should be about the anatomy,, screw a document
what are people going to do , show documents before they enter a bathroom to prove their 'gender' plain and simple,, someone in the womans bathroom with a penis is breaking the law someone in the mens bathroom with a vagina is breaking the law pretty simple and straight forward chastity, if she has a vagina , should go where the vagina goes but if she has a penis,, she needs to go where the penis goes,,lol no guess work involved there,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so what are they gonna do ? station someone at the door
to check who has what before you enter the bathroom ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so what are they gonna do ? station someone at the door to check who has what before you enter the bathroom ? no,,but if someone complains about someone who shouldn't be there,, they have the legal reason to proceed with legal charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
amended adage for the year 2016...
if it looks like a duck..if it walks like a duck... if quacks like a duck....it just might be possible it's not a duck....lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Sun 04/17/16 02:56 PM
|
|
or the universal rule
if it is equipped with receiving the seed, it is the female of the species if it is equipped with delivering the seed, it is the male humans use pronouns he and she, man and woman, to coincide with the male and the female but with all the gender hoopla, maybe we should just add two more bathrooms males and females,,,not much left to argue then and those stuck on the 'gender' can then use their 'gender appropriate',, women/men bathroom |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i'm only trying to show both sides of the coin...
by requiring the female (living as a man) or the male (living as a woman) to comply with the law puts both at risk of peril.... the female-to-male, of being subjected to, as you said, of complaints and possible legal action... and the male-to-female of the same, and more than likely physical violence for obeying the law... taking it to the nth degree with reassignment surgery in both cases...the man w/o a penis no longer delivers the seed and the woman w/penis no longer is able to receive the seed... i think the law hasn't been thought out to all logical conclusions and gender at birth is not a true indicator of gender in reality... |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
joethebricky
on
Sun 04/17/16 03:51 PM
|
|
A guy is lying in bed cuddling after making love to a woman he had just met.
She started softly stroking his nether region 'Are you horny again', he asks No she said, I just really miss mine |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i'm only trying to show both sides of the coin... by requiring the female (living as a man) or the male (living as a woman) to comply with the law puts both at risk of peril.... the female-to-male, of being subjected to, as you said, of complaints and possible legal action... and the male-to-female of the same, and more than likely physical violence for obeying the law... taking it to the nth degree with reassignment surgery in both cases...the man w/o a penis no longer delivers the seed and the woman w/penis no longer is able to receive the seed... i think the law hasn't been thought out to all logical conclusions and gender at birth is not a true indicator of gender in reality... that's why I propose we have social 'gender' bathrooms,, of woman and male as well as anatomical bathrooms, of male and female everyone has their own place based upon either their actual anatomy or how they see themselves |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I was born with a penis but I know I am really a female. Now if I have to use the mens bathroom and all the stalls are taken so I have to use a urinal in front of men when I am really a woman and I do not want to do this. Do you think Mr. Boss man will write a song about my delima? Like " Stuck at the Mens Urinal " |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xx Beer. could that be miracle grow? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Conrad_73
on
Mon 04/18/16 05:00 AM
|
|
http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/gay-pride-event-bans-drag-queen-outfits-because-it-offends-the-transgendered/
By Blake Neff An LGBT pride march in Scotland has banned “cis” drag queens from marching out of the fear that it could offend transgender people. Free Pride Glasgow is scheduled to take place in August, and bills itself as an alternative to the city’s main Pride event, which has allegedly become too commercialized. “It was felt by the group within the Trans/Non Binary Caucus that some drag performance, particularly cis drag, hinges on the social view of gender and making it into a joke, however transgender individuals do not feel as though their gender identity is a joke,” organizers said in a statement. According to the statement announcing the policy, some transsexuals found drag performances offensive because it “hinges on the social view of gender and making it into a joke.” Initially, the policy was also going to ban transsexual drag queens, on the grounds that it would be inappropriate to ask individual queens whether they identified as transgender or not. But then that policy offended the transgender drag queens, who complained, leading to a new policy where trans drag queens are welcome but wicked cis queens are banned (“Cisgender” means a person who identifies with their actual, physical sex). Free Pride Glasgow justified its decision in a Monday Facebook post, saying they were deliberately choosing to desires of transgender women more than others. “Our event aims to represent those underrepresented in our community, including but not limited to trans and non-binary people, women, People of colour, intersex people, asexual people and people with disabilities,” the post said. “As such we have decided to prioritise the needs of trans women to feel safe and included in our event.” The decision earned a rebuke from the main Glasgow Pride event. “Pride Glasgow believes that any community group should be given their place to flourish but that success should not be built on the negativity and ignorance towards other events, groups and like minded people and we are saddened to see that this is the direction that Free Pride has chosen to take.” Opposition to drag queens is surprisingly common, at least on the British left. Earlier this year, the National Union of Students officially condemned drag and cross-dressing as forms of “fancy dress.” “Transphobic fancy dress should be met with the same disdain with which we meet other prejudiced or appropriative costumes,” the group said at the time. 
Revolution starting to eat it's own! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holy Moly! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Tue 04/19/16 11:07 AM
|
|
Holy Moly! lol |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
adj4u
on
Thu 04/21/16 04:28 PM
|
|
this should be a nonissue everyone forgets about the part of the amendment where it says .....NOR ANY LAW TO PROHIBIT THE FREE EXERCISE THERE OF if they are asked to do something that is against their established religion passing a law to make them do it is illegal thus there should be no need for a another law protecting them the problem arose when they did not fight for their religious freedom the first time as far as the gender restroom is concerned stop labeling them by gender and label them anatomically ---- penis and vagina use the room you are anatomically equipped for not rocket science |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.youngcons.com/michelle-obama-goes-after-mississippis-religious-freedom-bill/ Your Jaw Will DROP At What Michelle Obama Said During Commencement Speech... John S. Roberts April 24, 2016 3:29 pm Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant recently signed a bill into law protecting people from being sued by gays if they wish to refuse them service. It was a necessary measure in stopping the LGBT agenda in the state. A baker shouldn’t be forced to do anything if he disagrees with the situation. FLOTUS doesn’t see it that way… From WZ via ABC: In a rare entrance into a politically charged controversy, first lady Michelle Obama used a commencement speech Saturday at Jackson State University in Mississipppi to directly target the state’s recently-passed “religious freedom” bill. “We see it right here in Mississippi — just two weeks ago -– how swiftly progress can hurtle backward,” Obama said. “How easy it is to single out a small group and marginalize them because of who they are or who they love.” Obama made the comment following an impassioned revival of the state and university’s stained history with regard to civil rights. “So we’ve got to stand side by side with all our neighbors –- straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender; Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu immigrant, Native American — because the march for civil rights isn’t just about African Americans, it’s about all Americans,” she said. “It’s about making things more just, more equal, more free for all our kids and grandkids. That’s the story you all have the opportunity to write. That’s what this historic university has prepared you to do.” Just stop, Michelle. Your logic makes no sense. Are you saying civil rights are really for “all Americans,” or just a select few pushing a bogus cause? Shouldn’t you be backstage at a Beyonce concert? What Mississippi’s religious free bill does is provide security to Christians. You know, because they’re a major part of this nation – ever since her founding. Democrats continue to take rights away from some to give to others, which is simply further proof that redistribution helps nobody. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 The Great State of Mississippi can do or not do whatever it & it's citizens want. Like any other state. NO, the Great State of Mississippi absolutely CANNOT do whatever it & it's citizens want nor can any other Great state do so... have you never heard of the United States Constitution...? can states enact laws allowing slavery to become a practice within their borders if the majority of the citizenry wants it and votes for it ? the answer is a resounding NO... one of the main tenets of the Constitution is to PROTECT the minority FROM the majority ruling over them with discriminatory legislation... 
|
|
|
|
|
