The 2024 GOP front runner wants to terminate The Constitution…

Ha ha. Clearly you’ve never run a church. Those salaries are just for the church pastors, administration and worship team. They aren’t paying for food shelters. Shelters have their own structure and if you are a church you establish a separate entity for anything like that. About 10% goes to charity which is the standard giving expectation. I’m not saying anything is nefarious, I go to church and have run them. Just saying the primary charitable dollar aspect is preaching and ministering.

 

Good lord man, what does that have to do with democracy? Do you not understand the question?

 

Is it the hair that makes it different? Or is it about creating physical revulsion for you? Are you worried about non-hairy trans-men as well?

Do you assume that a trans person is likely to be "advertising" as well? BTW, most trans women are going to try to take steps to appear more feminine (i.e., not advertising their "maleness"), which likely includes shaving body hair (or taking hormones that lower its production). Does that help?

 

I get the practical distinction about how people would know someone's sexual orientation unless they were told, the person is working out with their partner, someone is obviously staring with lust, etc (which may be its own issue). But I'm not sure that says anything about a purported constitutional right to privacy for people to choose which sex or gender they want to share facilities with. Would such a constitutional right of privacy apply to boys and men or just girls and women, and how would that be analyzed from a legal standpoint? As a minor, I remember being in a private gym where old men would walk around nude longer than I thought was necessary. Might that have violated my right to not have to see that? We've probably all been in at bars where women would come into the mens' room because their lines were longer than ours. Of course, almost no one cares when it goes in that direction. I understand it, but not sure how that constitutional analysis would work.

Moreover, there are trans people who've had surgery and trans people who have not. Some trans folks are "passable" and some are not. If we were to have a strict birth certificate standard, as some support (not saying that you do), that would actually force hairy dudes (passable transgender men like Chaz Bono) to use womens' locker rooms and bathrooms. Some will even be packing heat. Will it matter to anyone if the heat packing is the result of surgery? Interestingly, I recently watched a Fox News segment showing transgender women protestors, and they blurred out their chests, which I thought was ironic - an implicit acknowledgment that they are women and the public needed to be sheltered from seeing them without shirts on.

Such a strict birth certificate standard wouldn't eliminate the discomfort about them being in there. It would also put them at risk of getting beaten up or worse. I imagine most people might prefer Chaz Bono using the mens' room but that they don't want a transgender woman in the womens' room. I'm just not sure that would all play out in courts under a privacy analysis.

 

My dad pastors a church with a food Pantry. I am well aware of how it works.
He's been there for 30 years.

 

Good lord man, do you not see how I have answered this already... Multiple times.

 

The hairy part was a joke .

 

All I saw was you were asked a question about democracy and you answered with something about men being in women's locker rooms.

 

Thats all you saw?
Then read the whole thread ...

See post #95
See post #98.
See post #100

 

Meanwhile @Sohogator still wondering if I am milquetoast about the Orange Dude?

Why the crickets?

 

Or you could just answer a post with something that was actually relevant to the question at hand.

 

I answered it... Multiple times.

I gave multiple reasons in post #87 as well.

 

So back to post 95.

No, that's not an attack on democracy. If 'letting a dude shower in a women's locker room' is something people voted for, it's actually a result of democracy.

No, that's not an attack on democracy because no one is actually doing that. I make art all the time and no one is telling me what content to put on it. Now if I opened a business and provided services for the general public, there would be certain rules I'd have to adhere to because that is what we decided as a democracy. We decided that it was wrong to discriminate against people based on race or gender or sexual preference.

No, that's not a shot at democracy. You certainly don't need an Electoral College to have a democracy, as evidenced by the fact that we are one of the only democracies (if not they only one) in the world to do it that way. There is a very good argument to be made that the EC is actually undemocratic in that it assigns more weight to one voter's vote than it does another. People in Wyoming have something like 3.5 times more voting power for president than people in California do. That is actually undemocratic. It would be like if we said that Black people's votes only counted as one third of a vote. That's not democratic, though I'm sure there are plenty of right-wingers who would love to do it that way.

 

I can comment on what I’ve seen in the last six months I would characterize your criticism of Trump as tepid and infrequent.

I think the most that can be said is you hoped another Pub was president but he would certainly be preferable to a DemoncRAT.

Which is truly pathetic

 

I just gave you posts from the last 3 months. You are being completely dishonest and everyone knows it.

In the quotes I linked:
I called him a "vile human".
I called him a "racist".
I said he is a "predator".
I said i "detest" him.
I accused him of "hoping for violence".
I said he "broke laws"
I called for his "impeachment".
I called him a "homewrecker"
I called him a "cheat"
I called him " profane".
I called him a man of "low character".
I called him a "cult" leader

Good Lord man. I'm harder on the guy than some of the liberals here. The stones from your partisan glass house are doing a lot of damage.

I have voted for Democrats. Did it for years right here in NC. Thats also widely known here.

To call my criticism "tepid and infrequent" is idiotic at best.

Heres a challenge. The search feature works well here. Show me the last good word I said about him.

Not only is my criticism frequent. Criticism is all I do in regards to him.

 

And you voted for him

 

I do think tilly is wrongfully conflating policy debates and debates about legal line-drawing with a former president and candidate actually wanting to suspend or terminate the Constitution. But tilly has been critical of Trump since I've been around at least. Seems only fair to give him that.

 

Lol. Tell me you lost the without telling me you lost.

Nice deflection. You claimed something and cant even apologize for being proven so wrong that now you have to dip back 6 years to start a new argument.

Let me make it easier for you. Those same links contain two quotes of me owning my mistake and saying that I should have done better.

It might do you good to do the same.

 

Tilly has been outspoken in his criticism of trump for several years now. Especially for a conservative.

 

Didn't read much of the thread, just skipped to the last page. Really derailed it looks like.