CRUZ CALLS TRUMP THE "PC POLICE"

[Mallow]

Trump is right on this.  When has this been a problem?  We already have laws against perverts and child molesters.  If a man wants to go into a women's restroom to molest little girls, some law about which bathroom he's allowed to use isn't going to stop him.  The argument Cruz seems to be making is that this law prevents him from using "I was feeling like a woman that day" as a legal defense.  I don't think that's a legal defense as is.  But more to the point, this is something that has never happened to my knowledge, and most trans people just want to use the bathroom where they won't be treated differently.

Yeah, but here's the thing: If a transgender person looks like a woman, and goes into a stall in the women's bathroom to do his/her business, is there any problem? From what I see, the only people making an issue out of this is in fact the transgender folks. And if anyone were to ask me which bathroom they should use, my answer would be this: if you have a penis, use the men's room, otherwise, use the women's room. Where's the problem?

Umm... have you not been paying attention to the recent laws that have been passed in NC, MS, etc? They SPECIFICALLY TARGET transgender people, even ones who "look like" their chosen gender. That's the freaking point. To suggest that the transgender people are the only ones making an issue of this is to show a complete lack of understanding of what's actually happening.

[SillyAmerican]

1. You are factually incorrect. I understand that you can't fathom someone looking like that unless they have a penis, but he doesn't. And there are thousands of examples of men like him without penises (and women with penises who "look like" women). Not to mention the countless examples of people who have chromosomes that don't "match" their genitalia, and other such exceptions, that completely neuter your argument.
2. Not everyone can afford gender reassignment surgery, and many choose not to for reasons you have no business discounting.
3. There is exactly zero risk to others from a transgender person using their chosen restroom. If anything, the only real risk is TO the trans person FROM bigots getting physically violent over it (as has been demonstrated countless times in the past). Get over yourself and your social hangups and treat people like the humans they are.

Excellent points, to which I would say the following:

1. Yes, there are men who look like women, and women who look like men. That has always been the case. So why all the recent hubbub? And are these exceptions enough to invalidate the rule? I don't think so, but I recognize that many people do...

2. Yes, reassignment surgery is pricey. But why should this fact invalidate the use of "Men's Room" and "Women's Room" signs on bathrooms, and what those signs have historically designated in terms of who uses which of these bathroom facilities?

3. Aside from "risk", there is the question of "comfort". Being a guy, I have no problem sharing a bathroom with a woman, but I know a great many women who don't feel the same way. Are their feelings somehow invalid? Are we to discount their needs in the name of some misplaced idea of social justice? No, you get over yourself, stop with spouting all the social outrage, and try to think in terms of all the parties involved, not just the political group/cause du jour.

Umm... have you not been paying attention to the recent laws that have been passed in NC, MS, etc? They SPECIFICALLY TARGET transgender people, even ones who "look like" their chosen gender. That's the freaking point. To suggest that the transgender people are the only ones making an issue of this is to show a complete lack of understanding of what's actually happening.

Yes, I assure you, I'm well aware of the recent laws, and I understand exactly what's happening.

[Intell]

Jesus Christ, Lyin' Ted Supporters, this is why Cruz represents what is most vile in the republican party.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Jesus Christ, Lyin' Ted Supporters, this is why Cruz represents what is most vile in the republican party.

Exactly. And that's why he is the best person to represent a vile party like the GOP.

[Lyin' Steve]

Trump is right on this.  When has this been a problem?  We already have laws against perverts and child molesters.  If a man wants to go into a women's restroom to molest little girls, some law about which bathroom he's allowed to use isn't going to stop him.  The argument Cruz seems to be making is that this law prevents him from using "I was feeling like a woman that day" as a legal defense.  I don't think that's a legal defense as is.  But more to the point, this is something that has never happened to my knowledge, and most trans people just want to use the bathroom where they won't be treated differently.

Yeah, but here's the thing: If a transgender person looks like a woman, and goes into a stall in the women's bathroom to do his/her business, is there any problem? From what I see, the only people making an issue out of this is in fact the transgender folks. And if anyone were to ask me which bathroom they should use, my answer would be this: if you have a penis, use the men's room, otherwise, use the women's room. Where's the problem?

It's Cruz et al who made it an issue.  If you go back to 2014 the only people who cared about trans bathrooms were silly teenagers on tumblr posting about how not having gender-neutral bathrooms is a hate crime.  Everyone got along just fine and nobody serious was making an issue out of this until NC and friends decided they needed these stupid laws to prevent an imaginary scenario.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it's an imaginary scenario why are you trying to cram it down North Carolina's throats?

[This account no longer in use.]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it's an imaginary scenario why are you trying to cram it down North Carolina's throats?

All I ask is that you try to direct me to one example of a single person who faked being transgender to commit sexual harassment. Because, as of now, most of the people actually concerned about this are all bark and no bite.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Justifying your hate with the Cross
It's sickening the souls your crusades cost
I'm no further along in my search for truth
I just want you to know that there is no King behind you

Tolerance isn't hate
Haven't you ever heard of a thing called Grace?
I'll say it loud you're such a bigot
I'll say it loud you'll never forget

[Lyin' Steve]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If it's an imaginary scenario why are you trying to cram it down North Carolina's throats?

What are you talking about?  If I make a law saying we should require mandatory monthly innoculation of all Texans because one of them might contract vaccine-resistant smallpox and kill millions of Americans, and you say "that's stupid, no Texan has smallpox and there's no reason why they would", would I be in the right to accuse you of trying to cram smallpox down my throat or saying you're in favor of smallpox (as Ted Cruz would)?

[RaphaelDLG]

Impossible. Atlas told me that Cruz is more moderate than Trump.

My impression is that the Trump supporters on here push the whole Trump is left of center bullcrap

[IceSpear]

I find it quite funny that this is now what Ted Cruz is basing his entire campaign around.

[RaphaelDLG]

I find it quite funny that this is now what Ted Cruz is basing his entire campaign around.

This is why Ted Cruz would be so screwed in a GE campaign.  He would campaign on this and fall flat on his face.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, why are you trying to cram it down North Carolina's throats. If it's an issue of no importance, then there's no reason to attack North Carolina. Instead we see just the opposite.

Obviously you believe it to be an important issue. Why?

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, I wouldn't have taken you for an anti-Vaxxer.

There are good reasons to require mandatory vaccines, such as MMR, etc. So yes, I would agree with a requirement for Texas children to be vaccinated for DPT and for MMR.

[Mr. Reactionary]

I wonder if Ted Cruz's real intention is to force Caitlyn Jenner to use the same bathroom as him, so that he can do his Larry Craig impression.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, why are you trying to cram it down North Carolina's throats. If it's an issue of no importance, then there's no reason to attack North Carolina. Instead we see just the opposite.

Obviously you believe it to be an important issue. Why?

you're misunderstanding, unsurprisingly. trans people assaulting people in bathrooms is not an important issue. trans people beïng able to use the correct bathroom is.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

I'm always amused by the argument that what you look like is more important than who you are.

i'm always amused by the argument that who you think i am is more important than who i actually am

[Lyin' Steve]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, I wouldn't have taken you for an anti-Vaxxer.

There are good reasons to require mandatory vaccines, such as MMR, etc. So yes, I would agree with a requirement for Texas children to be vaccinated for DPT and for MMR.

This is for adults, who already have the smallpox vaccine.  So everything is fine with them.  Forget the vaccines, let's change the example and say I wanted to restrict Texans from traveling to other parts of the country or something equally inconvenient or silly.
The point is that when the status quo is fine, and you create some stupid inconvenience or punishment to try to rescue us from an imagined threat to the status quo, opposition to that inconvenience/punishment by arguing that the status quo is fine is not in any way equivalent to forcing the threat on people, because the threat is imagined.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, why are you trying to cram it down North Carolina's throats. If it's an issue of no importance, then there's no reason to attack North Carolina. Instead we see just the opposite.

Obviously you believe it to be an important issue. Why?

Your side is the side trying to make the change.  Clearly it is of some importance to you because your side is trying to jam through legislation to change it at great economic and social expense.

To me, it is of no importance.  What is important to me is that it should stay unimportant -- I don't want these fools to make it an important issue by creating all these silly laws.  This is something that everyone was completely fine with, and now you're trying to pull a problem out of thin air to start another culture war.  All I'm saying is, don't start a culture war.

Anyway, this conversation is pointless because you're clearly arguing in bad faith, and I would ask the mods to move all the posts related to it to a separate thread so we can get back to making fun of Ted Cruz for his silly strategy.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Boy, I'll tell you, I'll forgive the ridiculous, obnoxious, ludicrous, annoying Bathroom Issue anything if it means that we have the distinct honor of having Ted CRUZ as our American president.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

I'm always amused by the argument that what you look like is more important than who you are.

If it looks like a.duck, quacks like a duck etc.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The silly thing about the whole bathroom issue is these stupid laws aren't even enforceable.

[Wisconsin+17]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But it doesn't quack like a duck.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

He isn't wrong, go to the bathroom that you have the genitals for.

Again, if you get penile cancer and have to have it removed, you'll start going to the ladies' room even though you're (obviously) still a man?

That wouldn't give you a vagina, so you wouldn't become a woman

You've consistently said that the presence or absence of a penis was your standard. Now you say there are exceptions...

That was ClassicConservative's criteria, not mine.  I would just say that you are whatever you were born as.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Uh, I wouldn't have taken you for an anti-Vaxxer.

There are good reasons to require mandatory vaccines, such as MMR, etc. So yes, I would agree with a requirement for Texas children to be vaccinated for DPT and for MMR.

I am very pro-vaccination, but I hope you realize that people aren't vaccinated against smallpox anymore because it was declared eradicated from the world in 1980.  Now, I kind of think it was a mistake to stop smallpox vaccination.

[Mr. Morden]

He isn't wrong, go to the bathroom that you have the genitals for.

Again, if you get penile cancer and have to have it removed, you'll start going to the ladies' room even though you're (obviously) still a man?

That wouldn't give you a vagina, so you wouldn't become a woman

You've consistently said that the presence or absence of a penis was your standard. Now you say there are exceptions...

That was ClassicConservative's criteria, not mine.  I would just say that you are whatever you were born as.

So chromosome essentialists are extreme Republicans and genital essentialists are classic conservatives?