Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Sam Levine Associate Politics Editor, The Huffington Post

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/donald-trump-north-carolina-bathroom-bill_us_571a50c5e4b0d912d5fe6dc1

04/22/2016 01:08 pm ET

"Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump backtracked a bit on his criticism of North Carolina's anti-LGBT bathroom bill, just hours after saying transgender people  should be able to use whichever bathroom "they feel is appropriate." . . . But later on Thursday, Trump told Fox News host Sean Hannity that while he thinks the law is wrong, he believes North Carolina had a right to enact it.

"I think that local communities and states should make the decision," he said. "And I feel very strongly about that. The federal government should not be involved."  Asked by Hannity whether he was saying states should be able to decide whether to implement the law, Trump said "absolutely.""
---------------------------------------
This is not surprising as he does need to win the christian vote.  But it should put to rest any notion that Trump is in any way our friend.  At best you might say he is the lesser evil when compared to Cruz.

Just like his comments on gay marriage. How am I not surprised?

Not defending the guy.
But he, like I, believe in state's rights. We are the "United 'states"  not the United colonies of Washington after all.
A state, aside from inalienable rights, decides for itself what laws to enact. We as citizens, have the right to work to change or add a law in the state we reside in...or not to live in North Carolina.

And this is suprising why?

The right of states to enact immoral laws against the people that live there was vacated in 1861. 

Unless people are willing to totally roll back civil rights and reinstitute slavery, that dog won't hunt.


Sapere Aude

Hmm...not sure states making up their own rules and not playing nice in the sandbox is what the U.S. is all about.

U.S. Constitution -The Preamble
'We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.'

We can pretty much bet bathroom laws are headed to the Supreme Court.

EOM

Didn't I just say that this is exactly what's going to happen when this guy is involved?
Remind me again, why does anyone think he's a valid candidate in the first place?

Quote from: FreyasRedemption on April 23, 2016, 09:50:10 AM
Didn't I just say that this is exactly what's going to happen when this guy is involved?
Remind me again, why does anyone think he's a valid candidate in the first place?

Two words:  Ted Cruz. 

As bad as Trump is, i fear him less than Cruz.   I don't think Trump wants to go on anti-lgbt witch hunts  Cruz on the other hand would relish anti lgbt pogroms.   The sad thing is the media acts like they are "stopping Trump" with Cruz, who is even wackier and less willing to compromise. 

Quote from: Marlee on April 23, 2016, 09:11:58 AM
Not defending the guy.
But he, like I, believe in state's rights. We are the "United 'states"  not the United colonies of Washington after all.
A state, aside from inalienable rights, decides for itself what laws to enact. We as citizens, have the right to work to change or add a law in the state we reside in...or not to live in North Carolina.

Tell that to all the transgender North Carolinians calling the suicide hotline right now.

There's nothing "backtracking" about what he said. He stated that he disagrees with the law (he personally thinks that we should be able to use the bathroom that we choose). He then said that, while he disagrees with the law, he believes that the state should be able to do what they did.

If you find yourself against Trump, then fine, that's your choice. But this view that "UH OH!! See! He's backtracking! I knew it!" based on this example is a case of people believing what they want to believe.

Here are my thoughts on Donald Trump.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxGgnI6kCrs

Josefa

Quote from: Colleen M on April 23, 2016, 10:29:33 AM
Two words:  Ted Cruz. 

I asked why people think that he's a good candidate to become president in the first place, not "who would be an even worse option to vote for". I am well aware of Cruz, and my feelings towards him are far from warm. However, we see bigots and fanatics every single day, and some corners of the world are so massively infested with them that every single politician of theirs is twice as bad as Cruz. He's nothing exceptional.
What is there about Trump that makes him appear to be an individual you'd want running your country in the first place? And I don't accept answers that mention "likeable personality" or "financial success", in one form or the other, since neither of those describes the person we're talking about here.

The reason conservatives like Trump is because he is loud, brash, and rude and says racist, sexist, etc. things that these conservatives think but lack the personal moral courage to say themselves in public.

They call this fighting back against political correctness.  They sometimes call it just plain ol' common sense.

When they say common sense what they really mean is rejecting modern science and the moral consensus of society as a whole and establishing a social order based solely on an ancient book of mythology.


Sapere Aude

Quote from: FreyasRedemption on April 23, 2016, 01:11:33 PM
I asked why people think that he's a good candidate to become president in the first place, not "who would be an even worse option to vote for". I am well aware of Cruz, and my feelings towards him are far from warm. However, we see bigots and fanatics every single day, and some corners of the world are so massively infested with them that every single politician of theirs is twice as bad as Cruz. He's nothing exceptional.
What is there about Trump that makes him appear to be an individual you'd want running your country in the first place? And I don't accept answers that mention "likeable personality" or "financial success", in one form or the other, since neither of those describes the person we're talking about here.

We've got a nice guy (Kasich) who would probably be a competent executive, although his charisma is lacking and since he's hopelessly unacceptable to the "social conservatives" his chances of winning are roughly equal to Batman's.  We've got another nice guy (Sanders) whose budget math bothers me about as much as Kasich's delegate math--and his delegate math is starting to look a little off too.  Then we've got a candidate (Clinton) whose defense against an FBI investigation is that she's too clueless to have been criminal.  That brings us to the aforementioned Trump and Cruz.

In all candor, neither a "good candidate" nor a "good President" is really an option this year, with or without Trump.         

Quote from: OCAnne on April 23, 2016, 09:43:05 AM
Hmm...not sure states making up their own rules and not playing nice in the sandbox is what the U.S. is all about.

U.S. Constitution -The Preamble
'We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.'

We can pretty much bet bathroom laws are headed to the Supreme Court.

EOM

States don't make up rules..the people who live in them do. If you don't agree with the rules..ya gotta change people's minds about em

Quote from: Marlee on April 24, 2016, 10:44:10 AM
States don't make up rules..the people who live in them do. If you don't agree with the rules..ya gotta change people's minds about em

The problem with this is that when the majority rules absolutely, the minority absolutely suffers. There are some points where we have needed federal law to step in over state law no matter what the population of the state thought. Without that, the civil rights of many would never have happened. What's different in this case?

Civil rights in this country became a reality at the barrel of a gun when the 101st Airborne Division was sent to Arkansas to enforce desegregation in 1957. 

That's how you change the minds of bigots.


Sapere Aude

Quote from: Deborah on April 23, 2016, 08:14:46 AM
This is not surprising as he does need to win the christian vote.  But it should put to rest any notion that Trump is in any way our friend.  At best you might say he is the lesser evil when compared to Cruz.

This is classic Donald Trump.  He hadn't thought through his position.  He first answered off the top of his head - an answer that wasn't that bad.  But saying that TG folks should use whichever restroom they felt was "appropriate" touched off an immediate firestorm of hatred and bile from the Bible-thumpers and ignorant yokels who determine who the Republican nominee will be.

The result is that within 24 hours, Trump's position spins to its opposite: while TG people should have the right to use gender-appropriate restrooms, North Carolina was correct in banning that right.  Trump is a chameleon with respect to policy.  He is committed to nothing, and will say anything at all, no matter how false, how outrageous, or (as in this case) even how self-contradictory, in order to advance his own interests.

Deborah understands Trump correctly.  Trump doesn't particularly hate us.  But he will gladly throw us under the bus in a heartbeat if he sees any political or personal advantage in doing so.

Ted Cruz is another matter entirely.  He hates and despises TG folks from the very depths of his soul, and will go to any lengths to harm us.

Trump has no fixed principles about TG issues.  But hatred of TG folks is a fundamental and fixed principle of Ted Cruz.

Quote from: Eevee on April 24, 2016, 01:02:54 PM
The problem with this is that when the majority rules absolutely, the minority absolutely suffers. There are some points where we have needed federal law to step in over state law no matter what the population of the state thought. Without that, the civil rights of many would never have happened. What's different in this case?

Included in our minority status are the innocents we know as children who don't pick their parents, the state they live in, their teachers or legislators.  Empathy and compassion are tough to teach to those wearing bulletproof social blinders; victims of their own ideology.  :(

Locally our gender alliance group was part of presentations at our middle school.  We all know that bullying, discrimination and physical harm contribute to what is now called our ACE score.  Adverse Childhood Experiences are now well known to significantly impact our health and even life span.  Trauma Informed Care is part of the answer where we seek to understand and reduce the hurtful episodes of childhood that can leave us so terribly scarred.

Children are too often the casualties on this battlefield and are leading the charge for us in our schools.  Public accommodations must be free for all to use and I too expect it will take a SCOTUS decision before this is settled.

Quote from: Eevee on April 24, 2016, 01:02:54 PM
The problem with this is that when the majority rules absolutely, the minority absolutely suffers. There are some points where we have needed federal law to step in over state law no matter what the population of the state thought. Without that, the civil rights of many would never have happened. What's different in this case?

well I respectfully disagree. Civil rights happened because people made it happen. The government is there to give us security and enforce rules that the people want. Unfortunately, that purpose has been lost over the last seven years, and too many who are in the minority are looking to have government come in and 'create" the rules regardless of who it harms. The solution is to encourage businesses to designate single-occupant gender-neutral restrooms. Not to expect the government to simply tell businesses that they have to do this...or that..regardless of consequences. The result would be some very negative backlash directed at transpeople..we've seen some of that already in places.

Quote from: Marlee on April 24, 2016, 05:11:30 PM
well I respectfully disagree. Civil rights happened because people made it happen.

If by people you mean the United States Army armed with rifles and bayonets then that is true.  If by people you mean the citizens of the state then it's unequivocally false.

Furthermore, that action was ordered by a Republican President.  Once upon a time Republicans could do the right thing.

QuoteThe following morning, troops from the 327th surrounded Little Rock Central High School while a small detachment went to pick up nine neatly dressed black teenagers. After a short drive, the Soldiers and their charges reached the school. Staring straight ahead, the youngsters formed a single file and, surrounded by some of America's best Soldiers carrying rifles with bayonets fixed, they marched through a jeering crowd into the school to begin the fall term after two previous failed attempts. As the nation and much of the world watched, Central High School became desegregated. The 14th amendment to the United States Constitution, which mandates that no American will be deprived of the equal protection of the laws, had been upheld.

http://www.army.mil/arkansas/




Sapere Aude

Quote from: Marlee on April 24, 2016, 05:11:30 PM
well I respectfully disagree. Civil rights happened because people made it happen.

As stated above, that's not how it happened. The federal government had to step in and make it happen. Otherwise many states never would have progressed with civil rights at all. It was amended into the constitution first on several occasions, for both racial and sexual differences. States had to comply whether their population and local governments agreed or not.

It's the same kind of condition that we're facing now. We need to treat it the same way as before.

I think we're touching on the same point from different angles here.
The government is not a physical thing..representatives of the people make it up. Sure..in some cases, the National Guard was needed to enforce the rules on school integration. But only in a few places. The "rule" arose from the majority of people who let their wishes be known to their representatives. Will the National Guard be needed for a rule about restroom use? Perhaps. But it won't be the case everywhere. And the rule may never come up if it isn't worked on correctly. It is up to us to work towards making it so..not by "petitioning" the government...but by getting more of the people to desire the rule.

I thought it was simple.. the majority rules....But the minority has rights...
that's what i was taught way back..
that the majority cant take away our rights...
I am so confused now...
Steph

Quote from: Marlee on April 24, 2016, 05:11:30 PM
well I respectfully disagree. Civil rights happened because people made it happen. The government is there to give us security and enforce rules that the people want. Unfortunately, that purpose has been lost over the last seven years, and too many who are in the minority are looking to have government come in and 'create" the rules regardless of who it harms. The solution is to encourage businesses to designate single-occupant gender-neutral restrooms. Not to expect the government to simply tell businesses that they have to do this...or that..regardless of consequences. The result would be some very negative backlash directed at transpeople..we've seen some of that already in places.

We, you and I are the government and I am literally an elected rep who occasionally calls on the state police to enforce the law.  Its is not just encouraging businesses, this battlefield is pointedly taking place in our schools and public accommodations.  We refer to legal precedent, statutes and the EEOC, dept of Justice, and Education etc and the school policies we craft at the local level.  Some rights are "inalienable" and the right to relieve oneself in safe public accommodations need not be some libertarian or conservative battlefield for political points.  Solutions are readily available for those ready to work together rather than staging a performance show for conservatives looking for red meat and a dog whistle like Sen. Ted Cuz this morning on cable news.

Quote from: Marlee on April 23, 2016, 09:11:58 AM
Not defending the guy.
But he, like I, believe in state's rights. We are the "United 'states"  not the United colonies of Washington after all.
A state, aside from inalienable rights, decides for itself what laws to enact. We as citizens, have the right to work to change or add a law in the state we reside in...or not to live in North Carolina.

But states do not have the right to make a law that can go against the constitution in are right to privacy. While not define in the constitution the supreme court has pass numerous amendments that protect personal privacy of what one can and does with there body. Not to mention the ability to refuse a unwarranted search and seizure from official without a warrant.