Page 6 of 156
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Mon April 11, 2016 12:40 pm
by stip
There's not a coordinated gay council somewhere coordinating opposition, though. It's entirely possible some of the things you've described will happen. None of these are mutually exclusive. One advantage of this strategy is that it sends a message that the backlash against these actions is not limited to a few liberal lawyers. Funneling money into an election is quite possibly more likely to just mobilize supporters in opposition to the opposition, since I presume for most NCers without any pain this issue is just not going to percolate to the top of someone's agenda, motivate them to vote, pressure politicians to change votes, etc.
We shall see.
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Mon April 11, 2016 7:07 pm
by Simple Torture
Turns out this story was fake. Oops!
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 2:02 am
by B
Wow. They reported that shit on NPR.
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 2:05 am
by Simple Torture
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 3:07 am
by Norah
Say it with me now, call and confirm.
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 3:07 am
by knee tunes
cutuphalfdead wrote:Say it with me now, call and confirm.
meow
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 10:06 am
by b_i_revisited
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 10:49 am
by stip
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 12:31 pm
by B
Pfffft! That's like my 8th favorite porn site. No biggie.
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Tue April 12, 2016 10:34 pm
by b_i_revisited
stip wrote:There's not a coordinated gay council somewhere coordinating opposition, though. It's entirely possible some of the things you've described will happen. None of these are mutually exclusive. One advantage of this strategy is that it sends a message that the backlash against these actions is not limited to a few liberal lawyers. Funneling money into an election is quite possibly more likely to just mobilize supporters in opposition to the opposition, since I presume for most NCers without any pain this issue is just not going to percolate to the top of someone's agenda, motivate them to vote, pressure politicians to change votes, etc.
We shall see.
This statement from GLAAD is more in line with my thinking on the subject:
GLAAD Calls On Music Industry For Support
Bruce Springsteen may be the latest performer to boycott North Carolina over its law seen as discriminatory against the LGBT community, but now one group is urging performers not to follow The Boss' lead.
The organization North Carolina Needs You started a new initiative over the weekend aimed at encouraging performers to keep their shows in the state in order to generate money locally and speak out against the controversial legislation.
The group began their push after Springsteen canceled his date in Greensboro last Friday in response to the so-called "religious freedom" law viewed as an attempt to roll back protections for gay and transgender people.
"We need you here, in North Carolina, helping to raise money and awareness in order to defeat such policies and the politicians who enacted and defend them," a statement from the group said.
Opponents of the law are asking performers to keep their shows and use the stage as a platform to make a statement or to donate their profits to advocacy groups fighting for the LGBT community. "
BUT, if this is true, the boycott may have been at least partially effective:
http://governor.nc.gov/press-release/go ... d-equality
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Wed April 13, 2016 12:22 am
by B
Alright, so I'm looking at Romer v. Evans, which struck down a law in Colorado that prevented protections for homosexuals by any states, counties, or municipalities. Given that precedent, how can HB2 which seems to do the exact same thing be Constitutional?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Wed April 13, 2016 6:17 pm
by B
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Fri April 15, 2016 11:32 pm
by B
B wrote:Alright, so I'm looking at Romer v. Evans, which struck down a law in Colorado that prevented protections for homosexuals by any states, counties, or municipalities. Given that precedent, how can HB2 which seems to do the exact same thing be Constitutional?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans
Where the fuck is Nick?
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Sat April 16, 2016 4:35 pm
by Green Habit
B wrote:B wrote:Alright, so I'm looking at Romer v. Evans, which struck down a law in Colorado that prevented protections for homosexuals by any states, counties, or municipalities. Given that precedent, how can HB2 which seems to do the exact same thing be Constitutional?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans
Where the fuck is Nick?
Here I am. I'm sure that's what the ACLU and others that are suing NC are relying on.
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Sat April 16, 2016 4:42 pm
by McParadigm
b_i_revisited wrote:stip wrote:There's not a coordinated gay council somewhere coordinating opposition, though. It's entirely possible some of the things you've described will happen. None of these are mutually exclusive. One advantage of this strategy is that it sends a message that the backlash against these actions is not limited to a few liberal lawyers. Funneling money into an election is quite possibly more likely to just mobilize supporters in opposition to the opposition, since I presume for most NCers without any pain this issue is just not going to percolate to the top of someone's agenda, motivate them to vote, pressure politicians to change votes, etc.
We shall see.
This statement from GLAAD is more in line with my thinking on the subject:
GLAAD Calls On Music Industry For Support
Bruce Springsteen may be the latest performer to boycott North Carolina over its law seen as discriminatory against the LGBT community, but now one group is urging performers not to follow The Boss' lead.
The organization North Carolina Needs You started a new initiative over the weekend aimed at encouraging performers to keep their shows in the state in order to generate money locally and speak out against the controversial legislation.
The group began their push after Springsteen canceled his date in Greensboro last Friday in response to the so-called "religious freedom" law viewed as an attempt to roll back protections for gay and transgender people.
"We need you here, in North Carolina, helping to raise money and awareness in order to defeat such policies and the politicians who enacted and defend them," a statement from the group said.
Opponents of the law are asking performers to keep their shows and use the stage as a platform to make a statement or to donate their profits to advocacy groups fighting for the LGBT community. "
BUT, if this is true, the boycott may have been at least partially effective:
http://governor.nc.gov/press-release/go ... d-equality
"You know, I was in an ethical quandary, but after the Bruce Springsteen show my mind is really changed on that one issue," said nobody ever. "And I've also learned to count to four."
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Sun April 17, 2016 12:31 am
by B
North Carolina is not a “home rule” state. Local governments are the creation of and under the control of the state. The legislature has the constitutional authority to overturn any ordinance established by any local government. Agree or disagree with their actions but legislators were well within their authority to overturn Charlotte’s bathroom ordinance. They were similarly justified in overturning local government attempts to raise minimum wage levels in their municipalities above the state proscribed level.
I suppose this is bad news for us.
http://www.ncspin.com/republicans-took-the-bait/
I love the Newspeak. "Home rule" means you're home town doesn't rule.
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Sun April 17, 2016 5:51 am
by simple schoolboy
B wrote:North Carolina is not a “home rule” state. Local governments are the creation of and under the control of the state. The legislature has the constitutional authority to overturn any ordinance established by any local government. Agree or disagree with their actions but legislators were well within their authority to overturn Charlotte’s bathroom ordinance. They were similarly justified in overturning local government attempts to raise minimum wage levels in their municipalities above the state proscribed level.
I suppose this is bad news for us.
http://www.ncspin.com/republicans-took-the-bait/
I love the Newspeak. "Home rule" means you're home town doesn't rule.
I presume this is pretty standard across the US. Cities are an extension of the state. Any alternative is in the minority. Unless your 'home rule' refers to something else...
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Sun April 17, 2016 6:16 pm
by McParadigm
stip wrote:There's not a coordinated gay council somewhere coordinating opposition, though
Then what was that thing with the ring, the cute blonde fellow, and Ian McKellan as co-chair?
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Mon April 18, 2016 12:41 am
by stip
McParadigm wrote:stip wrote:There's not a coordinated gay council somewhere coordinating opposition, though
Then what was that thing with the ring, the cute blonde fellow, and Ian McKellan as co-chair?
whatever it was, I assure you it was fabulous
Re: Transgender Rights
Posted: Mon April 18, 2016 11:15 pm
by Green Habit