Return to “Polls”

Pick the next president...

Poll ended at Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:52 am You may select 1 option

Hillary Clinton
Total votes: 8 (32%)
Donald J. Trump
Total votes: 14 (56%)
Gary Johnson
Total votes: 2 (8%)
Jill Stein
Total votes: 1 (4%)
Total votes: 25

Re: American Election 2016

#256
MrPerson wrote:To me its more of the fact that it opens the door for straight people that are creepers going into the other gender's bathroom to be a peeping tom. Then when they are accused of it, they use the "I Identify as ____" even if they really don't and just use the excuse to stalk/creep people.
Oh, it's this argument (and the "switching gender identities" one, also a classic!) This...just doesn't happen. It's like all the people angsting over voter fraud, even though it is, in reality, passingly rare in most cases here in the US. These arguments are often used by more unscrupulous politicians to scare the public into voting for policies they support- such as voter ID laws or discriminatory anti-LGBT laws (not saying that either of you guys are like that or support those, just pointing out a common use.)
Image

Re: American Election 2016

#257
MrPerson wrote: And by stalking/creeping I don't mean like staring straight at them and them knowing, I mean more of that they go in there to get a few quick peeks before leaving. Like if straight Highschool boys had the opportunity to use the women's locker room if they reported they Identified as female.

And they could just be hearsay or propaganda, but I could have sworn around where I live I have heard people talk about creepers using the bathrooms for what I described. And I wasn't trying to be discriminatory, all I said its opening the door for those situations to arise. Plus I don't see how you would get caught anyway, as a straight man I could walk into a business like Target and go into a women's bathroom, look around, use it, leave and if the security or cops apprehend me I could just tell them I Identify as a female and they wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

Again, not trying to be discriminatory, just talking about possibilities and things I have hard.
But... how do you know that any sort of peeking and perversion is happening if it's so subtle there is literally no evidence of it? That amount of perversion can be had on the street, legally. It would be a really ugly world if someone could be apprehended for walking into the other bathroom and using it, all the while behaving like a civilized person and nobody in there making a complaint.

"I identify as female" doesn't excuse actual harassment and inappropriate behavior either. And again, bisexual and gay people are more common than transfolk, but nobody is trying to stop a lesbian from 'perving in the bathroom'. Are they more civilized than straight men, less prone to such crimes? Or are they just much harder to screen against and pick on, and thus not made a big fuss about?
panic

Re: American Election 2016

#258
The track this conversation has taken is more evidence that only economic policy and foreign policy should be factors in politics and legislation.

The social stuff is just too squishy-emotional and "my personal experiences and feelings (but not yours) should dictate public policy affecting everyone" for it to be allowed to be enshrined as law.

That's not a knock on anyone's particular feelings-beliefs; if anything, trying to separate them from politics -- legalized force -- is the only way I can see to equally respect everyone's deeply-held beliefs about how we should treat each other.

Free markets versus central planning? Isolationism versus interventionism?

Right on. :)
Last edited by Flatfingers on Tue Nov 29, 2016 3:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: American Election 2016

#259
Though I personally don't care what bathroom people use in general, there are issues that do need to be figured out at some point.

For example, in high school change rooms, someone can claim to identify as a female, while still being attracted to females, and have a penis. I can more than see young boys taking advantage of this and in turn making an already uncomfortable experience even more so. There is no easy answer to this.

Yes, gay people already can change in rooms of the same gender and nothing usually happens. The difference is I guess is that we are usually raised to "hide" our gender bits from the opposite sex. In general it's hard just to reprogram ourselves over night. This is particularly strong in America other than say in countries where nudity on beaches are the norm and female nipples are a more common sight.

There are much bigger issues in the world of course. Generally politicians who bring it up do it for scare tactic votes.

Perhaps in the future everything will be uni-sex. It's something that will take some time for people to get used to however.
My Signature

Re: American Election 2016

#262
You know I never really realized, but We recently watched a brief documentary in one of my courses that had a little compilation about all the times politicians promised to look into replacing coal or gas powered vehicles with more energy efficient "Green" equipment. Being a 90s kid, I only noticed seeing those topics covered in 2008's election and I assumed it was due to the ridiculous gas prices. I never really knew that those same "promises" were being made since the late 60s early 70s. Wonder if anyone will ever actually do anything about it.

Re: American Election 2016

#264
MrPerson wrote:You know I never really realized, but We recently watched a brief documentary in one of my courses that had a little compilation about all the times politicians promised to look into replacing coal or gas powered vehicles with more energy efficient "Green" equipment. Being a 90s kid, I only noticed seeing those topics covered in 2008's election and I assumed it was due to the ridiculous gas prices. I never really knew that those same "promises" were being made since the late 60s early 70s. Wonder if anyone will ever actually do anything about it.
I wish someone would, unfortunately that industry has a way of becoming a lobbyist for most presidential candidates. Perhaps a man who did not give lobbyists a chance will be free enough from them to be able to push electric cars and other clean industries. I was really excited when I saw the Nissan Leaf advertised on TV years ago. I hope they become a new norm because the chemicals released by modern gas powered vehicles are toxic.
Image

Re: American Election 2016

#266
MrPerson wrote:You know I never really realized, but We recently watched a brief documentary in one of my courses that had a little compilation about all the times politicians promised to look into replacing coal or gas powered vehicles with more energy efficient "Green" equipment. Being a 90s kid, I only noticed seeing those topics covered in 2008's election and I assumed it was due to the ridiculous gas prices. I never really knew that those same "promises" were being made since the late 60s early 70s. Wonder if anyone will ever actually do anything about it.
Wait... you're saying that politicians don't always deliver on the promises they make to get elected?

:shock: ;)

On the "green" thing: there seems to be an assumption there that interfering with the energy marketplace is something a government should be doing. That assumption might not be wrong, but it ought at least to be exposed and questioned.

Your point on learning more about the history of energy prices is a good one. Dependence on OPEC oil in the early '70s led to shortages and actual (for the U.S.) high prices. I personally sat in gas lines, where even after rationing you could only buy gas on even- or odd-numbered days depending on the last number of your license plate. This is far worse than anything today's drivers encounter.

But it wasn't government intervention that solved the problem and kept energy prices low for four decades: it was private industry, whose legally-protected ingenuity in a free market improved oil deposit detection technology and invented fracking. Whatever one may think of the safety of fracking near aquifers, it's undeniable that this privately-invented technology has done far more to deliver relatively very inexpensive energy to U.S. citizens than any government-imposed price controls or Solyndra-style boondoggles to reward political campaign contributors.

I personally think there may be an appropriate role for a federal government to play in funding basic research across multiple technology domains. But that has to be transparent, and monitored, to prevent its being corrupted into short-sighted playing of favorites (at taxpayer expense) with individual businesses, whether they're Solyndra or Carrier.

And there is zero adequate substitute for reading enough history to learn to be responsibly skeptical of politicians claiming they will "fix" anything that private citizens can and should work together to fix for themselves. So a big :thumbup: on that.

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: Aiha and 4 guests

cron