Jump to content

NC Civil Rights


southslider

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ah59396 said:

Other = the disabled, minority races, the LGBT community, ect.

Again, there is nothing about jobs in the Charlotte Ordinance.  You can't just infer, because the ordinance creates specific language to protect against discrimination, that you are forced to hire someone due to sexual orientation or race or religion, ect.  That's not using common sense.

You change around what I say to form your own interpretation. I simply inferred that when special discrimination laws are in place, it makes it likely that employers will open themselves up for discrimination suits. I know, I have been there. In regards to the government, you don't have to hire someone that is  disabled or a minority, but you likely will have to justify not doing so.  In regards to employment/discrimination issues, why change things in regards to the hiring issues? Discrimination has not been much of an issue in the past decade or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 hours ago, CLT704 said:

How can anybody defend this law? It makes us look backwards and uneducated. That woman has just made herself look very stupid to most of Charlotte through her Charlotte Agenda article. 

 

 By us, do you mean people that have their own opinions?  I disagree with you and I am probably at least if not more educated and worldly than you. What would make us look "backwards and uneducated" would be if a person chose not permit others to have an opinion  and refused to see two sides. That is also known as oppression and intolerance.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

You change around what I say to form your own interpretation. I simply inferred that when special discrimination laws are in place, it makes it likely that employers will open themselves up for discrimination suits. I know, I have been there. In regards to the government, you don't have to hire someone that is  disabled or a minority, but you likely will have to justify not doing so.  In regards to employment/discrimination issues, why change things in regards to the hiring issues? Discrimination has not been much of an issue in the past decade or so.

I'm not changing anything you're saying.  It's all right there for you, or anyone else to read.  No need to play coy and pretend otherwise.  I'm not going to change your mind, which is fine.  Just don't misinterpret your opinions as fact, because it's not the case.  And for what it's worth, discrimination has been a continued issue, it has just been ignored.  The difference now is that we are facing it head on as opposed to "don't ask don't tell".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

 By us, do you mean people that have their own opinions?  I disagree with you and I am probably at least if not more educated and worldly than you. What would make us look "backwards and uneducated" would be if a person chose not permit others to have an opinion  and refused to see two sides. That is also known as oppression and intolerance.  

By all means sir, tell me, how it is not "backwards and uneducated" to be discriminatory against a certain group of people, based off previous experience, where you linked sexual orientation to how someone acted towards you. 

If you are "more educated" than me, you may wish to show your superior education, through correct grammar and word choice: your post contains multiple clauses, that should be separated with a comma; you have missed a word out, when you are explaining that you are more educated than me, but also, the word would need to be separated by a comma; and finally, your final sentence, should be linked to the previous sentence by a semi-colon, because they are two independent clauses, that are closely related by the subject, but are not already linked by a coordinating conjunction. 

You may believe that having a different opinion is your right, however your opinion, regarding House Bill 2, is in direct contradiction of Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

If you are going to claim that we can all have any opinion, which is a human right, then you must also understand that all rights, as set out by the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has a responsibility that typically comes in the form of another human right. In this case, the right to have an opinion (Article 19), which is that LGBT people in the State of North Carolina should not have protection from discrimination, through local or state law, is contradicting Article 7. 

So to sum up my point, you cannot pick and choose which rights you have. What you have said that we all have different opinions, does not allow you to be discriminatory or hold prejudice against a certain group of people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ah59396 said:

I'm not changing anything you're saying.  It's all right there for you, or anyone else to read.  No need to play coy and pretend otherwise.  I'm not going to change your mind, which is fine.  Just don't misinterpret your opinions as fact, because it's not the case.  And for what it's worth, discrimination has been a continued issue, it has just been ignored.  The difference now is that we are facing it head on as opposed to "don't ask don't tell".

Perhaps it would have been best left as "don't ask don't tell." If a trans-gendered person looked like the gender they identified with, they could use the bathroom of the same without trouble as long as they didn't make a big deal about it and who's saying they can't continue doing that now? There won't be bathroom checkers requiring you to show your genitals to ensure you're the right sex. But because Charlotte wanted to be progressive and address it head on, the GOP felt threatened and it angered the far right 10% who have taken the party hostage in recent years. Charlotte should have probably waited until the GOP didn't have a full death grip on NC legislature. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, ah59396 said:

I'm not changing anything you're saying.  It's all right there for you, or anyone else to read.  No need to play coy and pretend otherwise.  I'm not going to change your mind, which is fine.  Just don't misinterpret your opinions as fact, because it's not the case.  And for what it's worth, discrimination has been a continued issue, it has just been ignored.  The difference now is that we are facing it head on as opposed to "don't ask don't tell".

You don't understand. I never make a definitive statement. When I introduce a statement with "it is likely" or  "often,"  or "sometimes," it means that it is not definite, but possible. Additionally, I said that discrimination hasn't been much of an issue. I didn't say it didn't exist. I have been a victim. I just meant that it isn't a large enough issue to go to the legislature to change legislation. Cool down and try to comprehend. I'm not really that concerned about the law. I think that it is a good idea concerning bathrooms that you go to the gender toilet that matches you birth certificate. You can say you won the debate as I feel no need to continue. Have a nice evening and I will see you on the other postings. :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

You don't understand. I never make a definitive statement. When I introduce a statement with "it is likely" or  "often,"  or "sometimes," it means that it is not definite, but possible. Additionally, I said that discrimination hasn't been much of an issue. I didn't say it didn't exist. I have been a victim. I just meant that it isn't a large enough issue to go to the legislature to change legislation. Cool down and try to comprehend. I'm not really that concerned about the law. I think that it is a good idea concerning bathrooms that you go to the gender toilet that matches you birth certificate. You can say you won the debate as I feel no need to continue. Have a nice evening and I will see you on the other postings. :) 

Luckily I'm at a loss for words.  Have a good evening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, CLT704 said:

By all means sir, tell me, how it is not "backwards and uneducated" to be discriminatory against a certain group of people, based off previous experience, where you linked sexual orientation to how someone acted towards you. 

If you are "more educated" than me, you may wish to show your superior education, through correct grammar and word choice: your post contains multiple clauses, that should be separated with a comma; you have missed a word out, when you are explaining that you are more educated than me, but also, the word would need to be separated by a comma; and finally, your final sentence, should be linked to the previous sentence by a semi-colon, because they are two independent clauses, that are closely related by the subject, but are not already linked by a coordinating conjunction. 

You may believe that having a different opinion is your right, however your opinion, regarding House Bill 2, is in direct contradiction of Article 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

If you are going to claim that we can all have any opinion, which is a human right, then you must also understand that all rights, as set out by the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has a responsibility that typically comes in the form of another human right. In this case, the right to have an opinion (Article 19), which is that LGBT people in the State of North Carolina should not have protection from discrimination, through local or state law, is contradicting Article 7. 

So to sum up my point, you cannot pick and choose which rights you have. What you have said that we all have different opinions, does not allow you to be discriminatory or hold prejudice against a certain group of people. 

Yep, I'm not going back to play your silly game. I wasn't a bagboy, I had a secretary. But while you are concerned with grammar, I will do you a favor and inform you of some errors in your poorly written response:

- line one- should be  no comma between "people" and "based."   Line three- should be no comma between "education" and "through."   Line four (written at fourth grade level). There should be no comma between "clauses" and "that."  Also, you wrote, "you have missed a word out..." What the hell are you talking about?  You should have said, "You left out a word when......"  Also, there should be no comma between "out" and "when." 

I will stop here as you have serious writing problems. I admit that I didn't proof what I wrote, but I wasn't the one stupid enough to criticize someone else when an inept writer myself. Additionally, you obviously are not very good at comprehension either.

Lesson to learn, don't criticize others with superior skills. I will try to find the errors you mentioned tomorrow. In the meanwhile, be proud that you have made someone happy with your critique. My biggest laugh today. Got to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

You don't understand. I never make a definitive statement. When I introduce a statement with "it is likely" or  "often,"  or "sometimes," it means that it is not definite, but possible. Additionally, I said that discrimination hasn't been much of an issue. I didn't say it didn't exist. I have been a victim. I just meant that it isn't a large enough issue to go to the legislature to change legislation. Cool down and try to comprehend. I'm not really that concerned about the law. I think that it is a good idea concerning bathrooms that you go to the gender toilet that matches you birth certificate. You can say you won the debate as I feel no need to continue. Have a nice evening and I will see you on the other postings. :) 

What. The. Hell. Did i just read? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

Yep, I'm not going back to play your silly game. I wasn't a bagboy, I had a secretary. But while you are concerned with grammar, I will do you a favor and inform you of some errors in your poorly written response:

- line one- should be  no comma between "people" and "based."   Line three- should be no comma between "education" and "through."   Line four (written at fourth grade level). There should be no comma between "clauses" and "that."  Also, you wrote, "you have missed a word out..." What the hell are you talking about?  You should have said, "You left out a word when......"  Also, there should be no comma between "out" and "when." 

I will stop here as you have serious writing problems. I admit that I didn't proof what I wrote, but I wasn't the one stupid enough to criticize someone else when an inept writer myself. Additionally, you obviously are not very good at comprehension either.

Lesson to learn, don't criticize others with superior skills. I will try to find the errors you mentioned tomorrow. In the meanwhile, be proud that you have made someone happy with your critique. My biggest laugh today. Got to go.

Oh, you make me laugh. I suggest that you quit, like I am going to after this post, before we spiral further into argument. 

I was not educated in the United States, I graduated in the United Kingdom, with an A* in GCSE English Language & Literature and an A in A Level English Language. Now, surely, I should have failed both my Secondary (High) School exams, because of my poor comprehension, but that wasn't case.

So, I'm going to be the bigger person here, and instead of further attacking you, I am going to suggest that why you think my comprehension is so poor, is that I learnt British English, rather than American English.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, mpretori said:

What. The. Hell. Did i just read? 

The news tonight said that Raleigh had decided that, as far as restrooms are concerned, users will be used by the gender that matches the sex on

 

14 minutes ago, CLT704 said:

Oh, you make me laugh. I suggest that you quit, like I am going to after this post, before we spiral further into argument. 

I was not educated in the United States, I graduated in the United Kingdom, with an A* in GCSE English Language & Literature and an A in A Level English Language. Now, surely, I should have failed both my Secondary (High) School exams, because of my poor comprehension, but that wasn't case.

So, I'm going to be the bigger person here, and instead of further attacking you, I am going to suggest that why you think my comprehension is so poor, is that I learnt British English, rather than American English.

 

 Bottom line, you can't write and you have the balls to judge others. Besides do you ever listen to BBC news. Even the newscasters there speak horrible English.  My might have "learnt" English using British English, but you had a pretty poor teacher obviously. Go back and correct your work.  I might point out that in your second sentence, you should have used a period after the United States and not a comma. Finally, your last sentence isn't correctly written. LOL!!  Good luck Mr. English grammar boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and this is why we can't have nice things. I disallow political ads on this site because of the rampant whatever that follows it. Stuff like this (while it needs discussion) is just asking for it from all sides. We're all adults here so hopefully we can handle ourselves. For those that can't, we have a nice feature called ignore so you can get rid of comments from those who you feel are just being a bit too fresh with their opinions: https://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/ignore/

I don't think any hand holding is necessary at this time because just like politics, our personal views are strong and when someone else goes against our grain it upsets our apple cart. So long as we don't start acting like a Trump campaign manager I think we'll all be okay. Just ignore the craziness and move along...nothing to see here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the Connecticut Post:  --  [email protected]; Twitter: @KenDixonCT

By Ken Dixon Updated 11:34 pm, Thursday, March 31, 2016

HARTFORD - Gov. Dannel P. Malloy on Thursday ordered a ban on state employee travel to North Carolina, citing that southern state’s recent attempt to overturn rights to public accommodations for gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transsexuals.

“When we see discrimination and injustice, we have to act. This law is not just wrong, it poses a public safety risk to Connecticut residents traveling through North Carolina. That’s why I have signed an executive order banning state-funded travel to the state. This law endangers the welfare not just of North Carolina’s citizens, but of all people visiting that state,” Malloy said in a statement. “Nearly two decades ago, Connecticut was among the first states to pass a comprehensive anti-discrimination law concerning sexual orientation, and three years ago I proudly signed a law adding gender identity and expression to those statutes. We need to do what we can to stand up and act against laws that encourage - as a matter of public policy - discrimination and endangerment of our citizenry. It’s unacceptable, and Connecticut is acting.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

States banning official travel to North Carolina because of HB2:  Connecticut, New York, Vermont, Washington.

Cities banning official travel to North Carolina because of HB2:  Boston, New York, San Francisco, Seattle.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CLT704 said:

@NeoI think some posts, regarding Caterpillar2's and my grammar, should be removed. This isn't what the thread is about. 

Yes, you want it removed since you started the discussion about grammar, and I showed you that it was you that can't write, not me. Jokes on your. Have nice day. Oh yea, you were taught British English and not "American English."  Now, I will give you credit, that's a hoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, caterpillar2 said:

Yes, you want it removed since you started the discussion about grammar, and I showed you that it was you that can't write, not me. Jokes on your. Have nice day. Oh yea, you were taught British English and not "American English."  Now, I will give you credit, that's a hoot.

What is your problem? Just leave it now. You have insulted me about my grammar and my education, when that isn't the point of the thread. Yes, I started it and I'm ending it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

COLLEGE BASKETBALL

N.C.A.A. May Act More Forcefully Against Laws Seen as Discriminatory

By MARC TRACY MARCH 31, 2016

From the New York Times:  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/01/sports/ncaabasketball/ncaa-may-act-more-forcefully-against-laws-seen-as-discriminatory.html?_r=0

*****************************************************************

BUSINESS DAY

Corporations No Longer Sit Idly By on Discrimination

Common Sense

By JAMES B. STEWART MARCH 31, 2016

  •  

From the New York Times:  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/01/business/corporate-north-carolina-perks-up-against-discrimination.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, caterpillar2 said:

Yes, you want it removed since you started the discussion about grammar, and I showed you that it was you that can't write, not me. Jokes on your. Have nice day. Oh yea, you were taught British English and not "American English."  Now, I will give you credit, that's a hoot.

51 minutes ago, CLT704 said:

What is your problem? Just leave it now. You have insulted me about my grammar and my education, when that isn't the point of the thread. Yes, I started it and I'm ending it. 

I'll give the advice that I give to my 2 and 4 year olds...if the other person is bothering you then just ignore them, walk away, don't engage....don't feed the troll. Keep in mind that I'm not calling anyone a troll as I understand that we all get worked up when we're involved, but yes...leave it alone else I'll need to intervene a bit more. I would rather not take this up a notch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎3‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 7:20 PM, mpretori said:

Let me get this straight. If a gay person feels discriminated they cant even take it to court anymore? 

http://www.wbtv.com/story/31561457/new-nc-law-affects-more-than-bathrooms-and-lgbt-rights

"Under the existing law or the law that used to exist, you had three years to file your wrongful termination lawsuit. Under federal law you have 180 days only," Van Kempen said.

"Cutting off state court access for workplace discrimination is bad for workers and NC brand," 

 

I will agree with all of you if you can provide proof of his. I have not seen it yet. I have read it here, heard it on the news...etc...

 

aside from that...I will NEVER agree that a man with man parts should use the girls bathroom...obviously ya'll don't have kids!

If the GOP did slip in some other laws...prove it.

 

All I see right now is the same political correctness police causing more trouble.

But lets travel to Cuba!!! What a role model for human rights!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RaleighHeelsfan said:

 

I will agree with all of you if you can provide proof of his. I have not seen it yet. I have read it here, heard it on the news...etc...

 

aside from that...I will NEVER agree that a man with man parts should use the girls bathroom...obviously ya'll don't have kids!

If the GOP did slip in some other laws...prove it.

 

All I see right now is the same political correctness police causing more trouble.

But lets travel to Cuba!!! What a role model for human rights!!!

Here's a good summary:

"

In the 1970s, North Carolina passed a law protecting its citizens from workplace discrimination. Due to the way it was written, that law had very little actual effect because it did not provide for a means to take discrimination issues to court. It was largely symbolic. In the 1980s, that law gained teeth and wrongfully terminated employees could turn to North Carolina courts to be made whole for termination decisions made on the basis of race, sex, national origin, religion, disability, and age. In other words, discriminatory employers could be held accountable. The State made clear that its public policy was to protect against workplace discrimination. Indeed, countless North Carolinians have used this as a means to protect themselves from these specific forms of discrimination.

That all went out the door on Wednesday. Buried deep in the much-discussed and debated HB2 is this seemingly innocuous language:

“This Article does not create, and shall not be construed to create or support, a statutory or common law private right of action, and no person may bring any civil action based upon the public policy expressed herein.

Eliminating “civil actions” simply means “cannot sue” and not being able to sue, or go to court, puts workers right back where they were in the 1970s. That is, for the first time in decades, North Carolina courts closed their doors to those fired because of their race, sex, age, disability, national origin, or religion. Those wrongfully terminated are left with only federal discrimination laws, which are largely inferior to the now defunct state discrimination claims. North Carolina joins Mississippi as the only two states that do not offer their citizens state law protection against the most basic forms of discrimination. 

"

(From: https://www.charlotteagenda.com/44497/a-lawyers-perspective-on-why-hb2-is-a-plague-infested-rat/)

I have kids.  Girls, in fact.  And I have no problem with Charlotte's ordinance.  In fact I strongly support it, and strongly oppose HB2.

And further, per the paranoia supporting this bill, the guy below (who has lady "parts") will be forced to use the same accommodations as my wife, my girls, McCrory's wife, etc.

michaelopen-6ce7f93f442d94a2f7e0f827caf4

Similarly, transgenders who identify as females, and look to you like any ordinary female but might have "male parts" and might not have changed her birth certificate, will be forced to use the men's room, where she would be subject to god knows what kind of treatment.

If you're somehow "afraid" of a perv dude dressing up like a lady and going into the women's room, ANY AND ALL PERVS CAN ALREADY DO THAT TODAY, with whatever ordinances and laws are or aren't in effect.  There's NOTHING stopping them either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, kermit said:

^ this is an April Fools joke, right? (I do have kids and I am much more comfortable with people using the bathroom that matches their identity, not their birth certificate)

can you not read the bill? 

 

I think it's also important to highlight section 2.1 that prevents municipalities from raising the minimum wage.  What does that have to do with bathrooms?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.