Tea Ess Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 7 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 312 Content Per Day: 0.12 Reputation: 140 Days Won: 0 Joined: 12/10/2016 Status: Offline Birthday: 09/05/1998 Share Posted January 13, 2017 (edited) Gay people have the freedom to shop at establishments run by other gay people, just like you have the right to go to Christian ones. It goes both ways. And yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fighting against discrimination (perceived or real) by intentionally seeking out businesses where they knew they would be refused. Did you know that Rosa Parks refusing to give up her bus seat was also a planned event? For everyone saying there are only two genders, how would you classify intersex people? Edited January 13, 2017 by Tea Ess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coheir Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,458 Content Per Day: 0.55 Reputation: 729 Days Won: 5 Joined: 02/09/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/31/1950 Author Share Posted January 13, 2017 2 hours ago, Tea Ess said: Gay people have the freedom to shop at establishments run by other gay people, just like you have the right to go to Christian ones. It goes both ways. And yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fighting against discrimination (perceived or real) by intentionally seeking out businesses where they knew they would be refused. Did you know that Rosa Parks refusing to give up her bus seat was also a planned event? For everyone saying there are only two genders, how would you classify intersex people? Gay people do have a right to have the locator books but the fact I know they have these books and would rather go to some else and put them out of business lowers my out look on them even further than it is. Rosa parks is not part of this should be different thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonsister Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 647 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 283 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/31/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted January 13, 2017 On 8/3/2016 at 1:00 AM, coheir said: I just heard on Fox that New York protects 31 different genders,what has gone wrong there? New Yorker legislators drinking the city tap water maybe? Facebook trumped NY when they allowed for 56 different genders by registration on their site. As to being fined for calling someone the wrong gender, prove it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coheir Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,458 Content Per Day: 0.55 Reputation: 729 Days Won: 5 Joined: 02/09/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/31/1950 Author Share Posted January 13, 2017 1 hour ago, soonsister said: New Yorker legislators drinking the city tap water maybe? Facebook trumped NY when they allowed for 56 different genders by registration on their site. As to being fined for calling someone the wrong gender, prove it. it appears you did not read the article. The article stated that in the article I did not add to the article, I suggest reading the article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonsister Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 647 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 283 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/31/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted January 13, 2017 5 minutes ago, coheir said: it appears you did not read the article. The article stated that in the article I did not add to the article, I suggest reading the article. You've posted to the wrong person here. I did not say anything about your adding to the article. I suggest reading the thread to find the right person to whom you wish to address your remarks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coheir Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,458 Content Per Day: 0.55 Reputation: 729 Days Won: 5 Joined: 02/09/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/31/1950 Author Share Posted January 13, 2017 4 hours ago, soonsister said: New Yorker legislators drinking the city tap water maybe? Facebook trumped NY when they allowed for 56 different genders by registration on their site. As to being fined for calling someone the wrong gender, prove it. Failure to comply with the NYCCHR’s views on gender identity, by committing what it deems to be “gender identity” based discrimination, can be punished with a fine of up to $250,000 — on top of other damages a complainant may be awarded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coheir Posted January 13, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,458 Content Per Day: 0.55 Reputation: 729 Days Won: 5 Joined: 02/09/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/31/1950 Author Share Posted January 13, 2017 3 hours ago, soonsister said: You've posted to the wrong person here. I did not say anything about your adding to the article. I suggest reading the thread to find the right person to whom you wish to address your remarks. Failure to comply with the NYCCHR’s views on gender identity, by committing what it deems to be “gender identity” based discrimination, can be punished with a fine of up to $250,000 — on top of other damages a complainant may be awarded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonsister Posted January 14, 2017 Group: Removed from Forums for Breaking Terms of Service Followers: 0 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 647 Content Per Day: 0.24 Reputation: 283 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/31/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted January 14, 2017 (edited) 15 hours ago, coheir said: Failure to comply with the NYCCHR’s views on gender identity, by committing what it deems to be “gender identity” based discrimination, can be punished with a fine of up to $250,000 — on top of other damages a complainant may be awarded When I said prove it , I was referring to the offended party making the claim so as to have the individual prosecuted. Not that you should prove people can be fined for offending Trans. I should have worded the remark better. Leave it to NYC bureaucrats to find a way to fatten the city general fund while claiming to be all about tolerance for trans. I think we'll see this in the highest court most likely. It's simply ridiculous. Edited January 14, 2017 by soonsister Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonB Posted January 15, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 8 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,437 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 0 Joined: 11/30/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted January 15, 2017 On 13/01/2017 at 2:58 AM, Tea Ess said: And yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fighting against discrimination (perceived or real) by intentionally seeking out businesses where they knew they would be refused. So you assert that their rights come before those of others? Take the example of the cakemaker in N.I. They were not refused service, the shop were happy to make them [customers] a cake but were not prepared to emblazon it with a text that offended their [shop] religious beliefs. The irony being that there were many other shops that would have done it. Targeting that shop was in fact discrimination against the owners. Similar issue in the case in a cake shop in Seattle. In this case their lawyer made the point that the yellow pages alone listed around 400 other cake shops in the city. Go figure!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coheir Posted January 15, 2017 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 104 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 2,458 Content Per Day: 0.55 Reputation: 729 Days Won: 5 Joined: 02/09/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 01/31/1950 Author Share Posted January 15, 2017 16 minutes ago, SimonB said: So you assert that their rights come before those of others? Take the example of the cakemaker in N.I. They were not refused service, the shop were happy to make them [customers] a cake but were not prepared to emblazon it with a text that offended their [shop] religious beliefs. The irony being that there were many other shops that would have done it. Targeting that shop was in fact discrimination against the owners. Similar issue in the case in a cake shop in Seattle. In this case their lawyer made the point that the yellow pages alone listed around 400 other cake shops in the city. Go figure!? I am hoping these kind of offences will be stopped; no that obama is gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts