Apple, other tech companies decry North Carolina anti-LGBT law

123468

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 148
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    Tat1992 said:
    jkichline said:
    Their opinion matters in that they can choose to leave and take jobs with them. Apple is concerned about the future. Evidently North Carolina would rather go back to 1956.
    The transgender law passed actually isn't anti-LGBT... All the law did was prevent cities like our very own Charlottesville from passing unconstitutional laws REQUIRING public and private business to make all bathroom transgender (as they were trying to do)... The law, in turn, gives the power back to the public and private business owner to make the decision on whether to have transgender bathrooms or not...

    I hope people and the mainstream media would actually READ. Because if Charlotte would have passed its legislation it would have FORCED every business to change their bathrooms... The state defined this as unconstitutional and made a law that gives the power back to the individual business' to make that decision themselves.
    No that's not what the fracking law said, learn to read.
  • Reply 102 of 148
    xbitxbit Posts: 310member
    A law passed to combat a problem that doesn't exist. It's only pervert conservative politicians who think that transgendered people want to watch other people going to the toilet.
    stourque
  • Reply 103 of 148
    diegogdiegog Posts: 134member
    designr said:
    Corporations are people my friend. And Citizens United makes it perfectly legal and acceptable for corporations to engage in the very thing you are now decrying.
    I think the poster's point (in the last question anyway) was that the left has often been opposed to business and big money in politics. Except, of course, when those business and that big money happens to be supporting what they agree with. There's a hypocrisy in that.
    How is a company making a statement about disagreeing with the actions of some politicians "business and big money in politics"?  Now, if Apple were funneling money into a bill or supporting specific politicians or lobbying heavily ($$)...THAT would mean they were involved in politics.  

    A person makes a public statement agreeing or disagreeing with something =/= involved in politics. 

  • Reply 104 of 148
    diegogdiegog Posts: 134member
    Just curious 99secondkox2 said:
    The preservation of privacy and morals are paramount here. 

    Mono woman or young girl should ever have to see a mans penis in a ladies restroom. EVER. 

    and no man should have to deal with the flip side. 

    Let's get real here. 

    No matter what you "identify" as, male and female are as physically descriptive as can be. Heck we even have male and female connectors in engineering. 

    So identify to hear hearts content. But go to the male restroom if you are male. 

    Simple. 

    Mono father should have to worry about some dude who thinks he's a girl taking a leak next to his daughter or wife. 

    Enough is snough. And shame on Apple and others for getting involved. 

    Tim wants to be with other dudes. Ok. That's his prerogative. But I bet he uses the right bathroom for crying out loud. 
    Just out of curiosity...why are you staring at dudes penis in the bathroom?  The reason I ask is that I've been using the mens room all my life and I've never seen a man's penis in the restroom.  An women restrooms have stalls.  There isn't much chance of any female running into a random penis if a MTF transgender person uses the women's restroom.  


    dasanman69
  • Reply 105 of 148
    trumptmantrumptman Posts: 16,464member
    First I have no real problem with someone going to the bathroom with whichever gender they identify.

    I can't for the life of me however imagine anyone having attention called them, being arrested and charged for being in the wrong bathroom.

    If most people are as claimed in this thread, transitioning and while perhaps not perfectly passable as the opposite gender from which they were born, certain are making efforts in the area in which they identify, how often do you think they are seriously questioned when using the restroom?

    I'm 45 years old and never once thought to myself, gee there's a 5'4 man with a slight build but facial hair with some narrow cheekbones, he probably was a woman and wants to touch my junk.

    I'm suspecting these have to do with some sort of secondary charges because as others have noted, who goes around patrolling restrooms for gender identity. I mean could it be that someone is raping women but trying to claim they can't rape since they don't identify as male or something of that nature? I mean I have never even read of someone being charged for being in the wrong restroom? Has anyone else?
  • Reply 106 of 148
    sleakajsleakaj Posts: 32member
    sheep stuff.
    If you choose to believe the lies told by the organisation that has systematically hidden the sexual abuse of children and continues to protect the abusers for thousands of years, then by all means, be a good little sheep and continue to ignore the truth.

    designr said:

    Don't be ridiculous. You've just shown that you don't know what you're talking about. The other possibility is that you're just an anti-religious bigot.

    Some of us actually have our eyes open. We know what religion is: Control of the easily duped.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 107 of 148
    designrdesignr Posts: 618member
    sleakaj said:

    Some of us actually have our eyes open. We know what religion is: Control of the easily duped.
    Obviously you don't.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 109 of 148
    designrdesignr Posts: 618member
    foggyhill said:
    designr said:
    What makes you assume "the white falcon" is a "a race-supremecist type handle"?

    Because of his constant fracking racist views over years, hmm.
    His words kinda give context to the whole thing.
    So it has been his previous comments, not the handle. Got it.
  • Reply 110 of 148
    mytdavemytdave Posts: 447member
    It's not an "anti-LGBT" law, it's a pro-liberty and pro-religious liberty law.  The NC legislature and governor did good.

    As for the elephant in the room: If you have a Y chromosome you're a man, damnit, and you have no business using the same restroom that my wife and daughter use!
    designrlinkmantallest skil
  • Reply 111 of 148
    I'm a biological male who doesn't want biological females in the Men's Restroom when I'm using it.  Don't my feelings count for something, too?  

    Restrooms are assigned by sex, not by gender.  Gender is open to cultural interpretation, but biological sex is not.  There are serious risks to creating open bathrooms, and hurt feelings isn't one of them.  

    Before the most tolerant and open minded people on these boards close their minds and start calling me hateful and bigoted, please note that I am all for equality.  But, we must find a better solution than open restrooms.  
    Too afraid to let your female coworkers hear you blast food spatter and wet farts on your breaks? I think it's more than fair that you share this with both "sexes" equally. It's the best a man can offer his fellow coworkers sharing the communal bathroom bliss.
  • Reply 112 of 148
    mytdave said:
    It's not an "anti-LGBT" law, it's a pro-liberty and pro-religious liberty law. 
    Define "liberty." What does that word mean to you? Does it include the freedom to use whatever bathroom you choose?

    As for the decision being pro-religion, in my view that's a negative outcome (if that's even really what it is). Religion is routinely used as justification for oppression, creating divisions among people instead of uniting them, and even murder. Just ask an ISIS leader. Should we allow slavery and stoning of blasphemers? The Bible says we should, right? Is that a society you want to live in, or would you prefer to impose certain limits on "religious freedom?"
  • Reply 113 of 148
    designrdesignr Posts: 618member
    mytdave said:
    It's not an "anti-LGBT" law, it's a pro-liberty and pro-religious liberty law. 
    Define "liberty." What does that word mean to you? Does it include the freedom to use whatever bathroom you choose?
    Depends on whose property we're talking about. Part of liberty means setting the rules on engagement on my property. If you do not like those rules, you are free to go somewhere else. Liberty is not the government forcing a set of these kinds of rules onto everyone.

    Now if we're talking about government/public buildings, then those should accommodate everyone doing whatever they want. That's public property.

    This also applies to other issues related to the specific one in this thread. Things like the baker being able to respond to the gay couple's request for a wedding cake: "No thank you. I'm not interested in your business for a wedding cake. You are free to go to any other baker if you like, but you do not have a right to compel me to bake one for you. Or photographer or whatever.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 114 of 148
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    Some people are just a lot more uptight than others. Personally, I don't see any problem sharing bathrooms.

    When I was in college, our building, which was engineering and computer science, had a men's room on the second floor and a women's room on the ground floor. The classrooms were mostly on the second floor. Sometimes the women would go down stairs only to find a queue, so we discussed allowing them to use the men's room upstairs since it was a lot more convenient and rarely a queue. Worked out fine and nobody seemed to mind.

    If an organization or government really wanted to accommodate transgenders, it seems the only answer is create some extra gender neutral bathrooms like they often have in international airports which are mostly intended for families with children/infants so they can change diapers, etc. Children should never be allowed to use public bathrooms without adult supervision anyway. Nobody ever complains if a dad takes his female child into the men's room or vise versa. Besides, if the bathroom is labeled unisex, when people use it, they should still expect adequate privacy since there would only be stalls.
    edited March 2016 designr
  • Reply 115 of 148
    volcanvolcan Posts: 1,799member
    tallest skil said:

    It’s an Apple website. This isn’t even tangentially related to Apple.
    Except that Apple itself chose to publicly comment on the topic.
    singularity
  • Reply 116 of 148
    designrdesignr Posts: 618member
    volcan said:
    Some people are just a lot more uptight than others. Personally, I don't see any problem sharing bathrooms.

    When I was in college, our building, which was engineering and computer science, had a men's room on the second floor and a women's room on the ground floor. The classrooms were mostly on the second floor. Sometimes the women would go down stairs only to find a queue, so we discussed allowing them to use the men's room upstairs since it was a lot more convenient and rarely a queue. Worked out fine and nobody seemed to mind.

    If an organization or government really wanted to accommodate transgenders, it seems the only answer is create some extra gender neutral bathrooms like they often have in international airports which are mostly intended for families with children/infants so they can change diapers, etc. Children should never be allowed to use public bathrooms without adult supervision anyway. Nobody ever complains if a dad takes his female child into the men's room or vise versa. Besides, if the bathroom is labeled unisex, when people use it, they should still expect adequate privacy since there would only be stalls.
    Now there you go using sense and reason. People working together to arrive at suitable solution rather than a specific solution being mandated from on high.
  • Reply 117 of 148
    The first male that pulls his rod out in the ladies restroom, in front of my 8 year old daughter is going to take a trip to the hospital.  I don't care if it is Timothy Cook.
    edited March 2016
  • Reply 118 of 148
    dipdog3 said:
    Rename bathrooms to Penis & Non-Penis. Whatever you got, that's where you go. Problem solved!
    That is what the bill does.  It says you must go the the potty based on gender indicated on your birth certificate.  Too much common sense for liberals.  
  • Reply 119 of 148
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    volcan said:
    Except that Apple itself chose to publicly comment on the topic.
    You’re right, that was too far; you know what I mean, though, right? For example, the bot shouldn’t post entirely non-Apple articles, but any that involve politics should go to PO by default.
  • Reply 120 of 148
    designrdesignr Posts: 618member
    volcan said:
    Except that Apple itself chose to publicly comment on the topic.
    You’re right, that was too far; you know what I mean, though, right? For example, the bot shouldn’t post entirely non-Apple articles, but any that involve politics should go to PO by default.
    Well, the overlap between politics and social issues and Apple is increasing quite a lot. At some point it may be that almost any article Apple related is political and vice versa.
Sign In or Register to comment.