U.S. Gives Sweeping Guidance to Schools on Transgender Students

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: awareness10

I got a better idea. We should have a bathroom separate from the rest with a sign "Bigots only"... for the bigot crowd. NOW the problem is solved for everyone.

Yea, but then were singling out Bigots.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Oooh, I don't think that's the answer xuenchen wants to hear.

a reply to: amicktd

Transgender people have been using the bathrooms of gender they idenify as so you can be sure.

a reply to: amicktd

But bigots are the only ones who only want to pee with people exactly like them. The rest of us don't care so much if people we are peeing next to are different than us. So, the bigots get what they want, and the rest of us are happy. Win/win.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: butcherguy

Good Christ man, reach harder lol.

Yep you're right. We should blame their parents too, while we're at it. After all, they spawned the idiots that came up with the idea. That's literally the same as if they had come up with it themselves.

Totally.

Reach?

Did you read the article that I linked?

Who did the parents of the girl sue?

Here is your answer (from that article)

The Department of Justice and U.S. Department of Education filed an amicus brief Wednesday supporting her family's federal lawsuit against the Madison County School Board in Alabama.

According to the rare amicus brief, written in part by an attorney with the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, the school, in its capacity as a recipient of federal funds is "liable for [its] deliberate indifference to known acts of peer sexual harassment."

a reply to: kaylaluv
Umm Kayla I think the problem here with this is that PCs like yourself trying to force squares to fit into circles ain't working now is it? Kapisch? Try to focus on who made this an issue forcing the majority into the minoritys sexual agenda privelege to begin with can you do that?

a reply to: kaylaluv

I don't actually care where you Pee Kayla or choose to undress in front of people. Just don't do it in front of peoples Children OK?

a reply to: butcherguy

Reach? Reach!

Did you bother to do any research in to the current status of the suit? Federal appeals court isn't holding the school board accountable for the decision of the teacher's aide. The appeals court holds the school board accountable for the deliberate indifference in regard to ignoring the continued and failing to act on allegations against the male student, and for allowing him to return to school, which caused the female to withdraw from the school entirely. But the ruling does NOT hold the school board accountable for the jackassed decision to have this girl agree to have sex with a boy so he could be caught in the act. It holds the teacher's aide and school administrators, specifically, accountable for that.

Pro-tip: an amicus brief can say any damn thing it wants to. It's not a legal ruling. It's a brief.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Sorry, can't hear past your feminist indoctrination.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: amicktd

But bigots are the only ones who only want to pee with people exactly like them. The rest of us don't care so much if people we are peeing next to are different than us. So, the bigots get what they want, and the rest of us are happy. Win/win.

Careful with that giant paintbrush your weilding.
What I read you saying is anyone who wants privacy in a restroom is a bigot.

If the the states want "states rights" then they shouldn't be so dependent on the federal government for that sweet, sweet cheddar.

You don't collect an allowance from your parents and then refuse to do your chores.

What's ironic is that the states that are the most dependent on the federal government are the ones that advocate doing their own thing and reject federal mandates:

Interestingly enough, red states, which tend to advocate for a lesser influence by the federal government, are much more dependent on the federal government than blue states. Blue states combined to form an average ranking of 18.3 (with 1 being most dependent and 50 being least dependent), while red states combined to rank 33.2 overall.

Business Insider

a reply to: Shamrock6
I didn't say that it was a ruling, did I ?

The appeals court holds the school board accountable for the deliberate indifference in regard to ignoring the continued and failing to act on allegations against the male student, and for allowing him to return to school, which caused the female to withdraw from the school entirely.

You didn't have to back me up, but thanks!

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
If the the states want "states rights" then they shouldn't be so dependent on the federal government for that sweet, sweet cheddar.

You don't collect an allowance from your parents and then refuse to do your chores.

What's ironic is that the states that are the most dependent on the federal government are the ones that advocate doing their own thing and reject federal mandates:

Interestingly enough, red states, which tend to advocate for a lesser influence by the federal government, are much more dependent on the federal government than blue states. Blue states combined to form an average ranking of 18.3 (with 1 being most dependent and 50 being least dependent), while red states combined to rank 33.2 overall.

Business Insider

Last I knew congress had the power of the purse not the doj or the executive branch.

a reply to: awareness10

Why don't we focus on the facts?

1. Transgender people exist. It is not against any law to be a transgender person. Transgender people identify as a specific gender.

2. As citizens of this country, transgender people have the same kind of rights as other citizens. One of those rights is to not be discriminated against simply because of who they are.

Are you with me so far?

3. Transgender people simply want to go to the restrooms of their identified gender just like everyone else wants to go to the restroom of their own identified gender. To allow non-transgender people to go to the restroom of their identified gender, while at the same time prohibiting transgender people from using the restroom of their identified gender is discrimination.

Those are facts. Not snowflake comments. Just facts. And I believe that is what the courts will rule.

Laws against peeping toms will still exist. Laws against sexual assault will still exist. Laws against indecent exposure will still exist. Those crimes will all still be against the law.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: amicktd

But bigots are the only ones who only want to pee with people exactly like them. The rest of us don't care so much if people we are peeing next to are different than us. So, the bigots get what they want, and the rest of us are happy. Win/win.

Careful with that giant paintbrush your weilding.
What I read you saying is anyone who wants privacy in a restroom is a bigot.

Is that what I said? I don't think so. Did I say we should have one big communal toilet bowl where we all hang out with our drawers down waiting to use it? I don't think so. Privacy is a relative term in a public restroom. I mean, you can have stalls, so there's that sense of privacy. But if you don't want to even be aware that there is anyone in the stall next to you, then maybe a public restroom isn't the place for you.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
If the the states want "states rights" then they shouldn't be so dependent on the federal government for that sweet, sweet cheddar.

You don't collect an allowance from your parents and then refuse to do your chores.

What's ironic is that the states that are the most dependent on the federal government are the ones that advocate doing their own thing and reject federal mandates:

Interestingly enough, red states, which tend to advocate for a lesser influence by the federal government, are much more dependent on the federal government than blue states. Blue states combined to form an average ranking of 18.3 (with 1 being most dependent and 50 being least dependent), while red states combined to rank 33.2 overall.

Business Insider

Last I knew congress had the power of the purse not the doj or the executive branch.

Then the elected representatives from states who want to go against the federal mandates shouldn't vote to bring home the bacon. It's called responsibility. If you don't want someone else telling you what to do, don't accept their money.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
If the the states want "states rights" then they shouldn't be so dependent on the federal government for that sweet, sweet cheddar.

You don't collect an allowance from your parents and then refuse to do your chores.

What's ironic is that the states that are the most dependent on the federal government are the ones that advocate doing their own thing and reject federal mandates:

Interestingly enough, red states, which tend to advocate for a lesser influence by the federal government, are much more dependent on the federal government than blue states. Blue states combined to form an average ranking of 18.3 (with 1 being most dependent and 50 being least dependent), while red states combined to rank 33.2 overall.

Business Insider

Last I knew congress had the power of the purse not the doj or the executive branch.

Then the elected representatives from states who want to go against the federal mandates shouldn't vote to bring home the bacon. It's called responsibility. If you don't want someone else telling you what to do, don't accept their money.

No I really think only congress gets to threaten with funding.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: xuenchen

In 2014 the US DoE issued a statement clarifying that DoE interpreted Title IX protections on gender to include trans students. And multiple complaints have been resolved in a manner that exhibits that interpretation, and have not had a successful challenge to them.

So no, it's not in the language of Title IX as it was written four or five decades ago. But that is how it is interpreted by those who enforce it.

I know you can link to that.

Thanks in advance.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm not disputing that.

What I'm saying is that the congressmen from these states who might face funding cuts shouldn't be asking or accepting that funding in the first place.

If the other members of congress vote to cut funding to a state, that's their deal.

It used to be called Unisex Restroom. Now they call it Gender Neutral and the only reason they call it that is for shock value. They want to offend. They want people to affirm their mental disease as normal and if you dont you are labeled a bigot.

The smell test for me is if Obama lets some pedophile pervert in the bathroom with his daughter so they can be raped at will. If he doesn't let his daughters get raped then why should the rest of us be expected to let it happen to our family?