- Messages
- 20,894
- Reaction score
- 8,126
Political Correctness thread
- Thread starter connor_in
- Start date
TheOneWhoKnocks
New member
- Messages
- 691
- Reaction score
- 46
Thx Obama
gkIrish
Greek God
- Messages
- 13,184
- Reaction score
- 1,004
Vermont high schoolers clash over transgender bathroom rules
Going to see a lot more stories like this in the future.
Going to see a lot more stories like this in the future.
NorthDakota
Grandson of Loomis
- Messages
- 15,693
- Reaction score
- 5,994
The man also appreciates Joel. I'll have my lawyer start drawing up the papers to give my sister away.
TheOneWhoKnocks
New member
- Messages
- 691
- Reaction score
- 46
Surely there's atleast 1 single serve restroom in just about every school. Just say go use that 1.
- Messages
- 20,894
- Reaction score
- 8,126
It ain't about accommodation. Here's The Week's Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry with an article titled "The symbolism and stupidity of America's transgender bathroom debate":
no.1IrishFan
Well-known member
- Messages
- 6,279
- Reaction score
- 421
Political Correctness thread
I'm a humanist, and this social justice warrior shit is going off the rails. I was called racist today for opposing this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm a humanist, and this social justice warrior shit is going off the rails. I was called racist today for opposing this.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gkIrish
Greek God
- Messages
- 13,184
- Reaction score
- 1,004
- Messages
- 37,544
- Reaction score
- 28,990
You know PC has jumped the shark when even Obama is speaking out against it: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/obama...559.html?soc_src=mediacontentstory&soc_trk=fb
NorthDakota
Grandson of Loomis
- Messages
- 15,693
- Reaction score
- 5,994
Brother in Law is at Georgetown for that very thing. This in working out rather nicely.
zelezo vlk
Well-known member
- Messages
- 18,009
- Reaction score
- 5,047
I hate that my nickname is such a hated term across America
wizards8507
Well-known member
- Messages
- 20,660
- Reaction score
- 2,661
The Racist Trees of Our National Parks | Frontpage Mag
TL;DR... National Parks are racist because black people are uncomfortable in nature because lynching.
TL;DR... National Parks are racist because black people are uncomfortable in nature because lynching.
Shouldn't those who advocate less federal government interference support transgender use of bathrooms of their choice as has been the case historically in local communities?
Perhaps local communities should outlaw pornograhy? In a state like Utah, the vast religious majority could choose to eliminate all alcohol. With more local control and in accordance with the interests of the majority, the access to country and western music could be legislated and a hot button issue that needs to be taken to the Supreme Court.
Having local laws determining the majority's wishes would free us from a federal politically correct mindset to a state/local politically correct level of thinking. How would Texans decide who should use what bathrooms? What if Dallas/ Fort Worth and Houston who voted Democratic in the last Presidential race decide who should use what bathroom? That might set up a confrontation between state and local governments that would end up in the courts.
Perhaps local communities should outlaw pornograhy? In a state like Utah, the vast religious majority could choose to eliminate all alcohol. With more local control and in accordance with the interests of the majority, the access to country and western music could be legislated and a hot button issue that needs to be taken to the Supreme Court.
Having local laws determining the majority's wishes would free us from a federal politically correct mindset to a state/local politically correct level of thinking. How would Texans decide who should use what bathrooms? What if Dallas/ Fort Worth and Houston who voted Democratic in the last Presidential race decide who should use what bathroom? That might set up a confrontation between state and local governments that would end up in the courts.
Last edited:
wizards8507
Well-known member
- Messages
- 20,660
- Reaction score
- 2,661
"Less government rules" is not the same as "no rules from anybody." Whoever owns the bathroom should be the one deciding who's allowed in and out. McDonald's can make one rule, Target can make another.
connor_in
Oh Yeeaah!!!
- Messages
- 11,433
- Reaction score
- 1,006
"Moondoggie"?
GoldenDome
New member
- Messages
- 808
- Reaction score
- 61
May 19, 2016, 11:24 am
House votes to restrict Confederate flag in national cemeteries
The House approved a Democratic proposal on Thursday to limit the display of the Confederate flag in national cemeteries.
A majority of Republicans rejected Rep. Jared Huffman’s (D-Calif.) amendment to a spending bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and military construction projects in the 265-159 vote. A total of 158 Republicans opposed it, while 84 Republicans joined all but one Democrat in support.
Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), a centrist who is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, was the only Democrat to vote against the amendment. Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) voted "present."
Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) expressed support for allowing the vote despite opposition from a majority of his conference.
"Last year it stopped the appropriations process in its tracks," he told reporters at a Capitol news conference after the vote.
"What changed is we have to get through these things, and if we're going to have open rules and appropriations, which we have, which is regular order, people are going to have to take tough votes. And I think people are acknowledging this — this is the kind of conversation we've had all along with our members, which is tough votes happen in open rules.
"People have to get used to that fact. That's the way regular order works," he added. "People realize the last thing we should do is derail our own appropriations process."
Shortly after midnight on Thursday, Huffman offered his amendment to prohibit the large-scale display of the Confederate flag in cemeteries run by the VA, such as flying the banner over mass graves. It would, however, still allow families to place small Confederate flags on individual graves on Memorial Day and Confederate Memorial Day.
"Over 150 years ago, slavery was abolished. Why in the year 2016 are we still condoning displays of this hateful symbol on our sacred national cemeteries?" Huffman asked while unveiling his amendment.
No one spoke in opposition to Huffman’s amendment during floor debate.
Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) initially tried to offer an amendment to modify Huffman’s proposal. But after nearly five minutes of hurried discussion among Republicans that temporarily halted proceedings, Mulvaney ended up withdrawing his amendment.
Behind the scenes, some Republicans vehemently pushed against Huffman’s amendment. A top staffer for Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) compared the effort to ban the Confederate flag to Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terrorists engaging in cultural cleansing.
“You know who else supports destroying history so that they can advance their own agenda? ISIL. Don’t be like ISIL. I urge you to vote NO,” Westmoreland’s legislative director, Pete Sanborn, wrote in a missive provided to The Hill, using an alternate acronym for ISIS.
He signed the email as “Yours in freedom from the PC police.”
A spokeswoman for Westmoreland later distanced the lawmaker from his staffer's comments.
"Representative Westmoreland does not condone this type of language from his staffers. While this email was intended to be between colleagues and not for public distribution, that type of unprofessional language should not have been used and appropriate disciplinary measures against the staffer have been taken to ensure this does not happen again," spokeswoman Leigh Claffey said.
Thursday’s vote comes nearly a year after the racially motivated shooting at a historically black church in Charleston, S.C. It stands in contrast to how the party approached the issue in the days after the shooting.
Huffman offered a similar amendment last year to an Interior Department spending bill that would limit the display of the Confederate flag in certain national cemeteries. It encountered no opposition during late-night floor debate and passed without fanfare by voice vote.
But some GOP lawmakers, primarily from Southern states, learned about the amendment the next day after it had it already passed. The vote count for the underlying Interior Department spending bill subsequently became shaky as those Republicans demanded the amendment be stripped from the legislation.
House GOP leaders ultimately decided to scrap the bill altogether rather than stage a vote to protect flying the Confederate flag on the same day that the South Carolina House voted to remove the banner from its state Capitol grounds. They further decided to stop bringing appropriations bills to the floor entirely since Democrats threatened to continue offering amendments regarding the Confederate flag.
Democrats have the ability to force votes on the Confederate flag because House GOP leaders choose to consider individual appropriations bills under an unusually freewheeling process that allows members to offer unlimited numbers of amendments.
Republicans touted the use of the process as a return to regular order upon taking the majority in 2011. But it also makes it easier for the minority party to force politically risky votes that leadership may otherwise try to prevent.
This year, Republicans were more prepared to handle Democrats’ measures to limit the display of the Confederate flag. While Mulvaney ended up not offering a counter-amendment early Thursday morning, he and other Republicans ensured that Huffman’s proposal didn’t pass by voice vote and result in a situation like last summer.
House Democrats may continue offering more amendments to upcoming spending bills regarding the Confederate flag. But if the vote on Thursday is any indication, such efforts won’t necessarily stall the GOP’s plans to move appropriations bills over the next two months.
Democrats have now forced two votes on the Confederate flag in less than 24 hours.
The first came shortly before final passage of the defense authorization late Wednesday night. Assistant House Minority Leader Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) offered a procedural motion that would have added in his proposal to take down the Confederate flag at the Citadel, a military college incidentally only about two miles from the church where the Charleston shooting took place.
That motion failed along party lines, which typically occurs with procedural votes regardless of their content.
Thursday's vote came a month after the House Administration Committee unveiled a compromise to remove the Confederate image from an underground subway connecting the Capitol and the Rayburn House Office Building.
Democrats led by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the sole African-American member of his state's delegation, forced multiple procedural votes on taking down the Mississippi flag, which remains the only state to have the Confederate image in its flag.
Under the new compromise, the subway will soon display commemorative state coins instead of the flags of the 50 U.S. states.
—This report was updated at 12:40 p.m.
House votes to restrict Confederate flag in national cemeteries | TheHill
House votes to restrict Confederate flag in national cemeteries
The House approved a Democratic proposal on Thursday to limit the display of the Confederate flag in national cemeteries.
A majority of Republicans rejected Rep. Jared Huffman’s (D-Calif.) amendment to a spending bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and military construction projects in the 265-159 vote. A total of 158 Republicans opposed it, while 84 Republicans joined all but one Democrat in support.
Rep. Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), a centrist who is a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, was the only Democrat to vote against the amendment. Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.) voted "present."
Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) expressed support for allowing the vote despite opposition from a majority of his conference.
"Last year it stopped the appropriations process in its tracks," he told reporters at a Capitol news conference after the vote.
"What changed is we have to get through these things, and if we're going to have open rules and appropriations, which we have, which is regular order, people are going to have to take tough votes. And I think people are acknowledging this — this is the kind of conversation we've had all along with our members, which is tough votes happen in open rules.
"People have to get used to that fact. That's the way regular order works," he added. "People realize the last thing we should do is derail our own appropriations process."
Shortly after midnight on Thursday, Huffman offered his amendment to prohibit the large-scale display of the Confederate flag in cemeteries run by the VA, such as flying the banner over mass graves. It would, however, still allow families to place small Confederate flags on individual graves on Memorial Day and Confederate Memorial Day.
"Over 150 years ago, slavery was abolished. Why in the year 2016 are we still condoning displays of this hateful symbol on our sacred national cemeteries?" Huffman asked while unveiling his amendment.
No one spoke in opposition to Huffman’s amendment during floor debate.
Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) initially tried to offer an amendment to modify Huffman’s proposal. But after nearly five minutes of hurried discussion among Republicans that temporarily halted proceedings, Mulvaney ended up withdrawing his amendment.
Behind the scenes, some Republicans vehemently pushed against Huffman’s amendment. A top staffer for Rep. Lynn Westmoreland (R-Ga.) compared the effort to ban the Confederate flag to Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) terrorists engaging in cultural cleansing.
“You know who else supports destroying history so that they can advance their own agenda? ISIL. Don’t be like ISIL. I urge you to vote NO,” Westmoreland’s legislative director, Pete Sanborn, wrote in a missive provided to The Hill, using an alternate acronym for ISIS.
He signed the email as “Yours in freedom from the PC police.”
A spokeswoman for Westmoreland later distanced the lawmaker from his staffer's comments.
"Representative Westmoreland does not condone this type of language from his staffers. While this email was intended to be between colleagues and not for public distribution, that type of unprofessional language should not have been used and appropriate disciplinary measures against the staffer have been taken to ensure this does not happen again," spokeswoman Leigh Claffey said.
Thursday’s vote comes nearly a year after the racially motivated shooting at a historically black church in Charleston, S.C. It stands in contrast to how the party approached the issue in the days after the shooting.
Huffman offered a similar amendment last year to an Interior Department spending bill that would limit the display of the Confederate flag in certain national cemeteries. It encountered no opposition during late-night floor debate and passed without fanfare by voice vote.
But some GOP lawmakers, primarily from Southern states, learned about the amendment the next day after it had it already passed. The vote count for the underlying Interior Department spending bill subsequently became shaky as those Republicans demanded the amendment be stripped from the legislation.
House GOP leaders ultimately decided to scrap the bill altogether rather than stage a vote to protect flying the Confederate flag on the same day that the South Carolina House voted to remove the banner from its state Capitol grounds. They further decided to stop bringing appropriations bills to the floor entirely since Democrats threatened to continue offering amendments regarding the Confederate flag.
Democrats have the ability to force votes on the Confederate flag because House GOP leaders choose to consider individual appropriations bills under an unusually freewheeling process that allows members to offer unlimited numbers of amendments.
Republicans touted the use of the process as a return to regular order upon taking the majority in 2011. But it also makes it easier for the minority party to force politically risky votes that leadership may otherwise try to prevent.
This year, Republicans were more prepared to handle Democrats’ measures to limit the display of the Confederate flag. While Mulvaney ended up not offering a counter-amendment early Thursday morning, he and other Republicans ensured that Huffman’s proposal didn’t pass by voice vote and result in a situation like last summer.
House Democrats may continue offering more amendments to upcoming spending bills regarding the Confederate flag. But if the vote on Thursday is any indication, such efforts won’t necessarily stall the GOP’s plans to move appropriations bills over the next two months.
Democrats have now forced two votes on the Confederate flag in less than 24 hours.
The first came shortly before final passage of the defense authorization late Wednesday night. Assistant House Minority Leader Jim Clyburn (D-S.C.) offered a procedural motion that would have added in his proposal to take down the Confederate flag at the Citadel, a military college incidentally only about two miles from the church where the Charleston shooting took place.
That motion failed along party lines, which typically occurs with procedural votes regardless of their content.
Thursday's vote came a month after the House Administration Committee unveiled a compromise to remove the Confederate image from an underground subway connecting the Capitol and the Rayburn House Office Building.
Democrats led by Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), the sole African-American member of his state's delegation, forced multiple procedural votes on taking down the Mississippi flag, which remains the only state to have the Confederate image in its flag.
Under the new compromise, the subway will soon display commemorative state coins instead of the flags of the 50 U.S. states.
—This report was updated at 12:40 p.m.
House votes to restrict Confederate flag in national cemeteries | TheHill
ulukinatme
Carr for QB 2025!
- Messages
- 31,513
- Reaction score
- 17,370
lulz to the PC crowd fighting the Redskins battle:
New poll finds 9 in 10 Native Americans aren’t offended by Redskins name
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html?tid=sm_fb
New poll finds 9 in 10 Native Americans aren’t offended by Redskins name
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a-11e6-924d-838753295f9a_story.html?tid=sm_fb
Last edited:
- Messages
- 44,577
- Reaction score
- 20,029
Native Americans aren't offended? The PC police will probably try to tell them how they should feel.
NDgradstudent
Banned
- Messages
- 2,414
- Reaction score
- 165
Most local communities have been making decisions about this, except in the dozen or so left-wing states that already have a rule like this. The new federal rule attempts to take that authority away from local communities.
Last fall Houston voters specifically rejected this sort of rule by a large majority- a majority unattainable in Houston without the support of lots of Democrats. It is of no matter; the Obama administration is zealous and doesn't give a damn about popular support of its edicts.
A year old but it's important to be politically correct in Alabama or....
Alabama Attempts Ban On Skittles “Taste The Rainbow” Commercials To Prevent Same-Sex Acceptance
Possibly unrelated, but giving one pause....The Rainbow variety?
Former Alabama DL Jarran Reed receives care package from Skittles after eating candy at NFL Draft
Then, Alabama has infamously had "The Skittles Four"
UPDATED: The Skittles Four Indefinitely Suspended (The four used the stolen credit cards to buy snacks from a candy machine.)
All were dismissed from the Alabama football team by Saban.
Alabama Attempts Ban On Skittles “Taste The Rainbow” Commercials To Prevent Same-Sex Acceptance
Possibly unrelated, but giving one pause....The Rainbow variety?
Former Alabama DL Jarran Reed receives care package from Skittles after eating candy at NFL Draft
Then, Alabama has infamously had "The Skittles Four"
UPDATED: The Skittles Four Indefinitely Suspended (The four used the stolen credit cards to buy snacks from a candy machine.)
All were dismissed from the Alabama football team by Saban.
Last edited:
In other local referendums,
Vote Lands Albuquerque at Center of Abortion Battle (from Time) (Catholic, Swing state)
Albuquerque Voters Defeat Anti-Abortion Measure
Last edited:
GoldenDome
New member
- Messages
- 808
- Reaction score
- 61
Free pizza always gets the message across on college campuses. Works like a charm.
IrishSteelhead
All Flair, No Substance
- Messages
- 11,114
- Reaction score
- 4,686
Pizza? Pffffft. I stupidly ended up with like 14 credit cards in college because of a free 2 liter or t-shirt upon filling out the application.
phgreek
New member
- Messages
- 6,956
- Reaction score
- 433
nice choice of comparisons...pornography, booze ... both have an age restriction...WHY? If you think about that for a moment, you might actually get some constructive insight into at least one facet of the Transgender bathroom issue.
This issue is so simple to me...Want those kind of changes, come with money in hand to make them, or STFU. When forced to responsibly deal with THAT ONE ISSUE, the discourse changes pretty quickly, because what you find is, proponents of the Transgender bathroom pick 'em can't articulate where the money would come from...nor the guidelines to do this correctly...just more hand waving, ignoring the reciprocal impacts to the majority of people, but demanding they "deal with it", and "make it so" Executive Branch garbage, combined with shaming practical people who may have, at one time, understood the plight of the truly gender dysphoric, but are now forced to make them feel alienated to stop embarrassingly juvenile and obviously poor governance.
Didn't my post come across as sarcastic with examples of possible government overreach at many levels?
The transgender bathroom issue is a matter of protecting transgenders from excessive bullying (physical, mental, and emotional). Adding a few private bathrooms would not be a major expense. I've witnessed schools spend multiple thousands of dollars remodeling the principal's office or the superintendent's office every time someone new is hired for the position. They also spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on new technology annually. Technology that is outdated in 3-5 years. Our district recently spent a million dollars upgrading the football field and a couple hundred thousand dollars upgrading the soccer field. The football field is used 4-5 times per year. The soccer field is used 8-10 times per year. Our district also provides buses for every child in school. About 1/3 of the students live within one-half mile of school. Another 1/3 lives within a mile of school. All of those students could walk to school on paved sidewalks. We also pay aides to supervise the playground, positions that could be filled by volunteer parents. So the money to construct private restroom facilities is already available. School administrators just have higher priorities than the safety of a few transgenders or other groups that may be singled out for bullying.
School officials like to pretend they don't have a problem with bullying. They tend to ignore the issue until confronted with a suicide, a videotaped and publicized beat down, or a lawsuit.
The solution is simple. Several private bathrooms available to students who are uncomfortable or feel unsafe using a public bathroom. In the long run, it's less expensive than paying the lawyers and the settlement awarded by a jury when the school has failed to provide a safe environment for the students. It's also cheaper than putting a security guard in every restroom.
kmoose
Banned
- Messages
- 10,298
- Reaction score
- 1,181
I'm NOT making a case to do nothing about bullying. Nor am I putting my head in the sand and pretending it doesn't exist, but..........
Bullying exists not because kids are different, but because kids are immature and cruel. Obviously not all of them are, but in general...... You could send every transgendered kid to their own special school, and the kids at the local High School who participate in bullying will just find someone else to bully. So let's say that you "save" the transgendered kids from bullying? What's next? Are you going to have special gym classes for weak kids, to protect them? Are you going to have special sports programs for awkward kids? If you want to change bullying, you have to change the attitudes of kids. You have to provide the "regular" kids with an outlet for their angst and insecurity, that doesn't involve belittling others. You simply CANNOT legislate bullying out of existence. Maybe a better answer is to not lump schools in with grocery stores, in regards to issues like this?
Isn't the real solution guns in the classroom?
When you protect our students' 2nd Amendment rights, everyone is safer - from bullying, lone gunmen who may be bullied transgendered. When kids see their teachers armed and carrying openly, you also get more discipline. An armed bathroom monitor will do wonders.
No gun-free zones, especially in schools!! After school gun safety classes for Seniors. Not politically correct in a few socialist states.
When you protect our students' 2nd Amendment rights, everyone is safer - from bullying, lone gunmen who may be bullied transgendered. When kids see their teachers armed and carrying openly, you also get more discipline. An armed bathroom monitor will do wonders.
No gun-free zones, especially in schools!! After school gun safety classes for Seniors. Not politically correct in a few socialist states.
GoldenDome
New member
- Messages
- 808
- Reaction score
- 61
Obviously more gun presence = less gun violences. duh!
We should lower the age to own guns to 16, we are denying our youth of their constitutional rights.
GoIrish41
Paterfamilius
- Messages
- 9,929
- Reaction score
- 2,119
Why stop at 16? Don't toddlers have constitutional rights?