Is it fair for Transgenders to compete in sports as who they think they are? No

[BIG APPLE CAT]

great news for the state of Texas, hero/patriot Greg Abbot has signed into law senate bill 15, expanding the ban on trans athletes participating on any team other than what they were assigned at birth, from K-12 to now include college sports. Finally cleansing the State of this scourge.

Honestly, I did not see this coming (who could have?), and I am very surprised.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/politics/texas-transgender-college-athletes-ban/index.html#:~:text=Texas%20Republican%20Gov.%20Greg%20Abbott,schools%20from%20doing%20the%20same.

Honestly I take less issue with college athletes. It's still wrong if the NCAA allows it, but it's less cruel than having high school kids playing sports that don't matter at all

yeah i agree, the K-12 ban is exponentially more cruel. I was just making note of another instance of "thing A happening" for the ledger.

Using real words, what are these K-12 students being banned from exactly?  Are they being banned from participating in sports?

Basically if a school-based sport says, “boys basketball” or “girls soccer,” you can’t play it unless your birth certificate matches whatever the designation is.

Girls can play “boys” sports IF there is no girls-only offering.

Unless I’m misreading, it goes way beyond even the trans issue because you hear all the time about girls in grade school competing in boys’ sports just because they want the extra level of competition. Ironically it seems like this kills that for the sake of protecting the sanctity of women’s sports.

https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/873/billtext/pdf/HB00025F.pdf#navpanes=0

That's a long way of saying that no one is being banned from participating in sports.

yes dax unfortunately some people are capable of thinking 3 steps ahead...seeing the writing on the wall as it were. Does it make ANY sense whatsoever to be passing legislation about K-12 kids participation on certain sports teams? Is this not a statistically insignificant issue anywhere in the country? I can appreciate that you want to be a good little party member and applaud these laws, finally doing something about this very real issue impacting so so many american children.

Some people can see this for what it is. It is just another rung on the "trans people are not welcome here" ladder. That's what this is about. and you know that because i know you are not a complete idiot. But hey if they don't just come right out and explicitly state "we want it to be illegal to be trans" then how can we possibly infer such a thing?

[Spracne]

dax WRT your last bullet point, in which state(s) is it legal for adults (regardless of the sex they were assigned at birth) to shower with 12 year old girls?

I posted articles on this very blog BAC.

The fact that i am able to form a cogent sentence is evidence that I don't read all of your gish gallop postings. I doubt very much anyone here does. Maybe you could help me find those links (i am very slow, always a lap down or more)

#blueanon/#blueanongE lost their mind over the story about the woman who reported the trans man in California who she said was in the women's locker room watching minor cis-gendered girls changing in out of their swimsuits.  She was just a Karen and the cis-gendered male TERFbashers (unilaterally declared TERF's BTW) made sure she knew that.  The trans man by policy is allowed to use the women's dressing room.

I posted the article about the then 17 year old cis-gendered female swimmer in Santee, CA who complained about the tran-man walking around naked in the women's dressing room, allowed by policy.  Needless to say the cis-gendered male tough guy TERF Bashers (TERF's as unilaterally declared by them) didn't take very kindly to the young woman's complaints.  How dare these cis-gendered women complain about the biological man in their most private of spaces!!

The fact that you have deluded yourself into believing that you post cognizant thoughts is  .  You are constantly 5 laps down and 95% of your posts are utterly nonsensical and your attempts to stay seated at the cool kids table are just 

Wait, so was it a trans male or a biological male in the women's locker room? I know I'm easily confused, etc. Or were you using the phrase "tran-man" as some sort of insult?

[_33]

great news for the state of Texas, hero/patriot Greg Abbot has signed into law senate bill 15, expanding the ban on trans athletes participating on any team other than what they were assigned at birth, from K-12 to now include college sports. Finally cleansing the State of this scourge.

Honestly, I did not see this coming (who could have?), and I am very surprised.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/politics/texas-transgender-college-athletes-ban/index.html#:~:text=Texas%20Republican%20Gov.%20Greg%20Abbott,schools%20from%20doing%20the%20same.

Honestly I take less issue with college athletes. It's still wrong if the NCAA allows it, but it's less cruel than having high school kids playing sports that don't matter at all

yeah i agree, the K-12 ban is exponentially more cruel. I was just making note of another instance of "thing A happening" for the ledger.

Using real words, what are these K-12 students being banned from exactly?  Are they being banned from participating in sports?

Basically if a school-based sport says, “boys basketball” or “girls soccer,” you can’t play it unless your birth certificate matches whatever the designation is.

Girls can play “boys” sports IF there is no girls-only offering.

Unless I’m misreading, it goes way beyond even the trans issue because you hear all the time about girls in grade school competing in boys’ sports just because they want the extra level of competition. Ironically it seems like this kills that for the sake of protecting the sanctity of women’s sports.

https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/873/billtext/pdf/HB00025F.pdf#navpanes=0

That's a long way of saying that no one is being banned from participating in sports.

yes dax unfortunately some people are capable of thinking 3 steps ahead...seeing the writing on the wall as it were. Does it make ANY sense whatsoever to be passing legislation about K-12 kids participation on certain sports teams? Is this not a statistically insignificant issue anywhere in the country? I can appreciate that you want to be a good little party member and applaud these laws, finally doing something about this very real issue impacting so so many american children.

Some people can see this for what it is. It is just another rung on the "trans people are not welcome here" ladder. That's what this is about. and you know that because i know you are not a complete idiot. But hey if they don't just come right out and explicitly state "we want it to be illegal to be trans" then how can we possibly infer such a thing?

Just playing devils advocate here but perhaps the people making the laws are seeing the ‘writing on the wall’… as it were.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

great news for the state of Texas, hero/patriot Greg Abbot has signed into law senate bill 15, expanding the ban on trans athletes participating on any team other than what they were assigned at birth, from K-12 to now include college sports. Finally cleansing the State of this scourge.

Honestly, I did not see this coming (who could have?), and I am very surprised.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/politics/texas-transgender-college-athletes-ban/index.html#:~:text=Texas%20Republican%20Gov.%20Greg%20Abbott,schools%20from%20doing%20the%20same.

Honestly I take less issue with college athletes. It's still wrong if the NCAA allows it, but it's less cruel than having high school kids playing sports that don't matter at all

yeah i agree, the K-12 ban is exponentially more cruel. I was just making note of another instance of "thing A happening" for the ledger.

Using real words, what are these K-12 students being banned from exactly?  Are they being banned from participating in sports?

Basically if a school-based sport says, “boys basketball” or “girls soccer,” you can’t play it unless your birth certificate matches whatever the designation is.

Girls can play “boys” sports IF there is no girls-only offering.

Unless I’m misreading, it goes way beyond even the trans issue because you hear all the time about girls in grade school competing in boys’ sports just because they want the extra level of competition. Ironically it seems like this kills that for the sake of protecting the sanctity of women’s sports.

https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/873/billtext/pdf/HB00025F.pdf#navpanes=0

That's a long way of saying that no one is being banned from participating in sports.

yes dax unfortunately some people are capable of thinking 3 steps ahead...seeing the writing on the wall as it were. Does it make ANY sense whatsoever to be passing legislation about K-12 kids participation on certain sports teams? Is this not a statistically insignificant issue anywhere in the country? I can appreciate that you want to be a good little party member and applaud these laws, finally doing something about this very real issue impacting so so many american children.

Some people can see this for what it is. It is just another rung on the "trans people are not welcome here" ladder. That's what this is about. and you know that because i know you are not a complete idiot. But hey if they don't just come right out and explicitly state "we want it to be illegal to be trans" then how can we possibly infer such a thing?

Just playing devils advocate here but perhaps the people making the laws are seeing the ‘writing on the wall’… as it were.

Go on

[steve dave]

jesus christ

https://news.gallup.com/poll/507230/fewer-say-sex-relations-morally-acceptable.aspx?fbclid=IwAR22c5oaYaoLIyqc_c0MrM91uzuojya0hN5cF1SuxqSLKOpYgUzDPeTpxfE

[steve dave]

probably some good "both sides" opportunities in that for those that celebrate

[BIG APPLE CAT]

2022 USA was a chill hang

[Spracne]

jesus christ

https://news.gallup.com/poll/507230/fewer-say-sex-relations-morally-acceptable.aspx?fbclid=IwAR22c5oaYaoLIyqc_c0MrM91uzuojya0hN5cF1SuxqSLKOpYgUzDPeTpxfE

I'd be quite surprised if this were true.

[catastrophe]

jesus christ

https://news.gallup.com/poll/507230/fewer-say-sex-relations-morally-acceptable.aspx?fbclid=IwAR22c5oaYaoLIyqc_c0MrM91uzuojya0hN5cF1SuxqSLKOpYgUzDPeTpxfE

I'd be quite surprised if this were true.

I will say this: it’s insane for anyone to assume the country MUST end up 100% on the “morally acceptable” side of an issue like gay marriage, which has been the topic of scrutiny for thousands of years.

Practically speaking, we all know this latest trend is the result of identity politics, but we need to be talking in terms of rights and respectful conversations rather than morals which are always going to be subjective.

[Pete]

Do these Gallup people even know what they are doing?

[nicname]

What a pickle

https://twitter.com/sav_says_/status/1669864763348881409

Also, Hegelian dialectic rocking and a rolling

[Spracne]

jesus christ

https://news.gallup.com/poll/507230/fewer-say-sex-relations-morally-acceptable.aspx?fbclid=IwAR22c5oaYaoLIyqc_c0MrM91uzuojya0hN5cF1SuxqSLKOpYgUzDPeTpxfE

I'd be quite surprised if this were true.

I will say this: it’s insane for anyone to assume the country MUST end up 100% on the “morally acceptable” side of an issue like gay marriage, which has been the topic of scrutiny for thousands of years.

Practically speaking, we all know this latest trend is the result of identity politics, but we need to be talking in terms of rights and respectful conversations rather than morals which are always going to be subjective.

I'm concerned that gay marriage is not "deeply rooted in American history and tradition" enough to remain as a fundamental right, in light of this Court's dismantling of Roe, Casey, et al. All the Court needs to do is quote some old gay-bashing texts and bigoted statutes, and poof! There are at least 3 or 4 solid votes on the Court that believe the entire fundamental rights line of cases based on the 14th Amendment should never have been decided.

[catastrophe]

It’s a realistic possibility at this point. But I don’t think questions in terms of “morally acceptable” are a good barometer.

[Spracne]

It’s a realistic possibility at this point. But I don’t think questions in terms of “morally acceptable” are a good barometer.

Judges exist in society. One way or another, public sentiment on issues (including the morality thereof) trickles into their rulings. The rest is window-dressing. But on a philosophical level, I agree with your point.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I used to adhere to the maxim “you can’t legislate morality” but ultimately that’s how we make all laws…bc it is unacceptable for that behavior to be tolerated, as spracs articulated far more eloquently than I can. I think the nuance is when a thing is only illegal for some. Like with murder it doesn’t matter who you are, you are not allowed to murder anyone. But like, marriage, or sexual congress…oh well that’s fine because you’re a man and a woman, but 2 dudes? Absolutely not, illegal.
But echoing what chongs posted a couple pages back, the cause for concern is laws that allow for selective discrimination, which is kind of like, the gop’s whole thing, the last few years.

[Tobias]

I'd be quite surprised if this were true.

[MakeItRain]

Feel like your guys social media/news outlets/smart phones have their algorithm for you pretty dialed in.

Are you really so stupid that you're trying to use ignorance of current events as a flex? Are you 13 years old?

[michigancat]

Feel like your guys social media/news outlets/smart phones have their algorithm for you pretty dialed in.

Are you really so stupid that you're trying to use ignorance of current events as a flex? Are you 13 years old?

He's also proud of not caring

[Pete]

If there is a god, I suspect that it will care if I cared.

[yoga-like_abana]

Feel like your guys social media/news outlets/smart phones have their algorithm for you pretty dialed in.

Are you really so stupid that you're trying to use ignorance of current events as a flex? Are you 13 years old?

He's also proud of not caring

Too busy livin.. sorry they’ve got you all riled all up. Maybe take it to the signs of getting old thread.

[Justwin]

I used to adhere to the maxim “you can’t legislate morality” but ultimately that’s how we make all laws…bc it is unacceptable for that behavior to be tolerated, as spracs articulated far more eloquently than I can. I think the nuance is when a thing is only illegal for some. Like with murder it doesn’t matter who you are, you are not allowed to murder anyone. But like, marriage, or sexual congress…oh well that’s fine because you’re a man and a woman, but 2 dudes? Absolutely not, illegal.
But echoing what chongs posted a couple pages back, the cause for concern is laws that allow for selective discrimination, which is kind of like, the gop’s whole thing, the last few years.

In your mind, if same-sex marriage was made illegal, what groups of people would be allowed to participate in same-sex marriages since you seem to think this would be only be illegal for some?

[catastrophe]

I used to adhere to the maxim “you can’t legislate morality” but ultimately that’s how we make all laws…bc it is unacceptable for that behavior to be tolerated, as spracs articulated far more eloquently than I can. I think the nuance is when a thing is only illegal for some. Like with murder it doesn’t matter who you are, you are not allowed to murder anyone. But like, marriage, or sexual congress…oh well that’s fine because you’re a man and a woman, but 2 dudes? Absolutely not, illegal.
But echoing what chongs posted a couple pages back, the cause for concern is laws that allow for selective discrimination, which is kind of like, the gop’s whole thing, the last few years.

In your mind, if same-sex marriage was made illegal, what groups of people would be allowed to participate in same-sex marriages since you seem to think this would be only be illegal for some?

Holy crap I thought you were smarter than that, haha.

[BIG APPLE CAT]

I used to adhere to the maxim “you can’t legislate morality” but ultimately that’s how we make all laws…bc it is unacceptable for that behavior to be tolerated, as spracs articulated far more eloquently than I can. I think the nuance is when a thing is only illegal for some. Like with murder it doesn’t matter who you are, you are not allowed to murder anyone. But like, marriage, or sexual congress…oh well that’s fine because you’re a man and a woman, but 2 dudes? Absolutely not, illegal.
But echoing what chongs posted a couple pages back, the cause for concern is laws that allow for selective discrimination, which is kind of like, the gop’s whole thing, the last few years.

In your mind, if same-sex marriage was made illegal, what groups of people would be allowed to participate in same-sex marriages since you seem to think this would be only be illegal for some?

Holy crap I thought you were smarter than that, haha.

I didn’t

[star seed 7]

Justwin, would you think a law banning same sex business partnerships is discrimatory?

[Justwin]

I do not think a law banning same-sex business partnerships is discriminatory.