Supreme Court rules against LGBTQ

[TN Ribs]

Perhaps some time in a Russian prison would give her some perspective.

You can be her cellmate, all you do is rant and whine about the state of this country.

 

[85SugarVol]

Be interesting how a law like this would do under today's decision. Compelling the use of a pronoun may not fly.

It’s illegal speech. Lock those people up.

 

[C-south]

You can be her cellmate, all you do is rant and whine about the state of this country.

️

 

[Orangeburst]

You can be her cellmate, all you do is rant and whine about the state of this country.

Lmao hippo

 

[volfanhill]

Be interesting how a law like this would do under today's decision. Compelling the use of a pronoun may not fly.

I don't see how anyone can support that law for any reason. It's laughable.

 

[85SugarVol]

I don't see how anyone can support that law for any reason. It's laughable.

I may mock Lia Thomas for swimming with girls. But I always try to use her chosen name, and her chosen pronouns.

Because I choose to.

I should not be compelled to do so by the State. That’s absurd.

 

[volfanhill]

I may mock Lia Thomas for swimming with girls. But I always try to use her chosen name, and her chosen pronouns.

Because I choose to.

I should not be compelled to do so by the State. That’s absurd.

I as well. There is no reason to be intentionally disrespectful to someone.

 

[Orangeburst]

Go ask a Dem to bake a MAGA cake and see where they stand

 

[theFallGuy]

Go ask a Dem to bake a MAGA cake and see where they stand

They'd probably poison it

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

 

[W.TN.Orange Blood]

You can be her cellmate, all you do is rant and whine about the state of this country.

Irony at it's best. Thanks for posting while whining about someone else post.

 

[allvol123]

I may mock

I may mock Lia Thomas for swimming with girls. But I always try to use her chosen name, and her chosen pronouns.

Because I choose to.

I should not be compelled to do so by the State. That’s absurd.

not being a smartass, but why?

You aren’t engaging in conversation with Lia on this board. Lia is a man. Why use the incorrrect pronoun when discussing him?

 

[85SugarVol]

@allvol123

Well you’re right. She is not on this board.

And she is a biological male, and always will be. She still has the penis she was born with, which is her decision.

I do not agree with her belief. But I don’t agree with lots of people’s beliefs.

 

[allvol123]

@allvol123

Well you’re right. She is not on this board.

And she is a biological male, and always will be. She still has the penis she was born with, which is her decision.

I do not agree with her belief. But I don’t agree with lots of people’s beliefs.

And you make it a habit of going along with factually incorrect beliefs?

This is actually something people practice with Alzheimer’s patients.

 

[turbovol]

That there were 3 dissenters on this shows we have some real morons on the court. Or maybe they are just evil.

The only "evil" here is people who want to discriminate against others because of their supposed and crazy religious views.

If a business owner does this in a city or suburban area, word will get round and he or she will likely lose business. There will be less
risk of losing business in a rural area, but it won't matter: rural businesses tend to be very small to begin with, and there tend not to be a lot of gay
people in rural America, for obvious reasons. Gay people could start a religion--it's not hard, there are thousands of religions---enumerate some principles, one of which would be to refuse service to bigots. It can work both ways.

 

[85SugarVol]

And you make it a habit of going along with factually incorrect beliefs?

This is actually something people practice with Alzheimer’s patients.

If Lia Thomas were face to face with me and asked me if I believed she is a woman - I would say “no”.

 

[allvol123]

The only "evil" here is people who want to discriminate against others because of their supposed and crazy religious views.

If a business owner does this in a city or suburban area, word will get round and he or she will likely lose business. There will be less
risk of losing business in a rural area, but it won't matter: rural businesses tend to be very small to begin with, and there tend not to be a lot of gay
people in rural America, for obvious reasons. Gay people could start a religion--it's not hard, there are thousands of religions---enumerate some principles, one of which would be to refuse service to bigots. It can work both ways.

And your point is what? I have no desire for government to step in and prohibit discrimination among private businesses and the public.

 

[allvol123]

If Lia Thomas were face to face with me and asked me if I believed she is a woman - I would say “no”.

So again, why use the incorrect term on here?

 

[turbovol]

I will say that while I disagree with the SCOTUS ruling about being free to discriminate based on your "religious beliefs"--as others have noted, it will
open a huge can of worms---I was adamantly opposed to Lia Thomas being able to swim in women's events. She was able to do so because
the NCAA completely failed to deal with the issue--almost tried to ignore it. I believe the only NCAA requirement at the time was that a transwoman had to have been taking a hormone suppressant for at least a year. There was no stipulation that her--or any competitors testosterone level had to be below a certain level to be eligible to complete--a rule that international body governing track and field put in place and that has prevented South African runner Caster Semenya from continuing to compete in women's races. Thomas had complied with the NCAA stipulation--but that was a lame stipulation because merely taking a hormone suppressant for a year does not transform a male into a female--not even close. And in the end, what happened is that in the name of inclusivity and trying not to discriminate against Thomas, the NCAA and the University of Pennsylvania discriminated against all the biological female swimmers.

 

[turbovol]

And your point is what? I have no desire for government to step in and prohibit discrimination among private businesses and the public.

The point is pretty obvious: Businesses exist to serve customers. You don't quiz customers on who they are or what they believe before agreeing to serve them. And you don't present customers with a list of your beliefs and tell prospective customers that some of those beliefs may prevent them from doing business with you. If you're a baker and someone wants a cake, make the freakin' cake and stop with all the religious nonsense. I'm pretty sure there's been a universal rule in business for ages: If a customer walks through the door and wants to avail himself or herself of your product or service, you provide the product or service, get paid and wait for the next customer. Leave it to wacky American religious freaks to challenge this fundamental principle of business. Businesses have a right to refuse service to people who are being disruptive or potentially breaking laws, of course--but that's not what this is about.

 

[allvol123]

The point is pretty obvious: Businesses exist to serve customers. You don't quiz customers on who they are or what they believe before agreeing to serve them. And you don't present customers with a list of your beliefs and tell prospective customers that some of those beliefs may prevent them from doing business with you. If you're a baker and someone wants a cake, make the freakin' cake and stop with all the religious nonsense. I'm pretty sure there's been a universal rule in business for ages: If a customer walks through the door and wants to avail himself or herself of your product or service, you provide the product or service, get paid and wait for the next customer. Leave it to wacky American religious freaks to challenge this fundamental principle of business. Businesses have a right to refuse service to people who are being disruptive or potentially breaking laws, of course--but that's not what this is about.

Businesses exist to serve the owner, thus the whole I OWN THIS part of the equation.

 

[OrangeBoro]

And you make it a habit of going along with factually incorrect beliefs?

This is actually something people practice with Alzheimer’s patients.

It’s a him and should be referred to as such

 

[85SugarVol]

So again, why use the incorrect term on here?

I simply choose to.

I can disagree with her beliefs, and still honor her requests (that don’t impact others).

I personally will not honor her request to use the girls locker room.
I will honor her request to go by her chosen name and pronouns.

 

[allvol123]

I simply choose to.

I can disagree with her beliefs, and still honor her requests (that don’t impact others).

I personally will not honor her request to use the girls locker room.
I will honor her request to go by her chosen name and pronouns.

I don’t understand your choice. Again, we do this with Alzheimer’s patients.

In my opinion, you are feeding this person’s sickness.

Trying to think of a healthy situation where people go along with absurdly incorrect dialogue like this.

 

[VOLS INC.]

Businesses exist to serve the owner, thus the whole I OWN THIS part of the equation.

Not to mention his insane views on how businesses should operate do not take even the most basic concepts such as safety or qualifications into account.

A themepark is a business. They tell customers all day every day they cannot serve them based on height restrictions because it’s unsafe.

A Hospital is a business. They tell customers all day every day they cannot serve them based on the qualifications of the physicians they employ.

In neither case is this considered discriminatory.