(05-11-2016 04:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 01:09 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  How about sourcing those numbers Tommy?

When your profile is six months old, I'll let you demand answers from me.

The aup demands it.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

Lobbyists in Raleigh are reporting that General Assembly leadership is telling them to stop speaking against HB2 or expect retribution.

"While Republican state leaders have complained about being "bullied" by the federal government over House Bill 2, lobbyists in Raleigh tell WRAL News they and the businesses they represent are being bullied by state lawmakers seeking to silence business opposition to the new law.

Lobbyists say they've been told – either directly by legislative leaders or by lawmakers' staff – that, if they or the businesses they represent speak out publicly against House Bill 2, they can expect retribution from House and Senate leaders.

Legislation they want won't move, and other bills could actually target them."


Read more at http://www.wral.com/lobbyists-lawmakers-...mYiZM6B.99

(05-11-2016 07:50 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  Lobbyists in Raleigh are reporting that General Assembly leadership is telling them to stop speaking against HB2 or expect retribution.

"While Republican state leaders have complained about being "bullied" by the federal government over House Bill 2, lobbyists in Raleigh tell WRAL News they and the businesses they represent are being bullied by state lawmakers seeking to silence business opposition to the new law.

Lobbyists say they've been told – either directly by legislative leaders or by lawmakers' staff – that, if they or the businesses they represent speak out publicly against House Bill 2, they can expect retribution from House and Senate leaders.

Legislation they want won't move, and other bills could actually target them."


Read more at http://www.wral.com/lobbyists-lawmakers-...mYiZM6B.99

**** the lobbyists.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:50 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:50 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

No. Over the top hyperbole.

(05-11-2016 10:07 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

No. Over the top hyperbole.

Oh, I"m sorry...subject to immediate firing for being Gay...but that's just because they're engaging in some arcane legal defense strategy that can only be employed for LGBT persons that are fired for being Gay.

If a Gay man or a Lesbian is fired from an Accounting firm tomorrow in Charlotte, they have no legal recourse. Had the legislature not acted, they would.

No legal recourse = no recourse.

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:50 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:40 AM)Hood-rich Wrote:  When will "Tom in Lazybrook" source his claims (# of gays and trannies in Charlotte) per the AUP?

He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

Lmfao... "Your numbers" suck.

You think 100k represents 3% of Charlottes workforce? If literally everyone human being inside the Charlotte metro (2,400,000) was of working age and actually working, 3% would only add up to 72,000.

You either suck at math or youre a bald faced Liar, maybe both.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(05-11-2016 10:17 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 08:50 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  He won't. I addressed it in an earlier post. I did find a survey from a few years ago that says there are 90,000 lgbt in Charlotte. Tom exaggerated that number to suit his cause. I have no idea where he comes up with just 12 lgbt working for the state that are covered now. Don't expect an answer from him.

My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

Lmfao... "Your numbers" suck.

You think 100k represents 3% of Charlottes workforce? If literally everyone human being inside the Charlotte metro (2,400,000) was of working age and actually working, 3% would only add up to 72,000.

You either suck at math or youre a bald faced Liar, maybe both.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

Yeah, so you dont understand math or logic.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:17 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

Lmfao... "Your numbers" suck.

You think 100k represents 3% of Charlottes workforce? If literally everyone human being inside the Charlotte metro (2,400,000) was of working age and actually working, 3% would only add up to 72,000.

You either suck at math or youre a bald faced Liar, maybe both.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

WTF kind of logic is that??? Just because more self identified gays are of working age, it doesn't necessarily mean they work at a higher rate than straight people fo. There is grasping at straws, and then there's just making **** up. I kinda want to know what your sources are regarding lgbt workforce participation numbers. Don't happen to have a source for that do you?

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:17 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 12:37 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  My point is that the number of people protected by Gov McCrory's order was extremely small in comparison to those that he and the NC GOP decided to subject to employment discrimination. On a level of 10 to 100,000. Whether that number is 90,000 or 100,000...its still a large number of LGBT persons that are now subjected to employment discrimination.

I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

Lmfao... "Your numbers" suck.

You think 100k represents 3% of Charlottes workforce? If literally everyone human being inside the Charlotte metro (2,400,000) was of working age and actually working, 3% would only add up to 72,000.

You either suck at math or youre a bald faced Liar, maybe both.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

But Self Identified Gay people are not children.

So you agree being gay is a choice.

(05-11-2016 04:39 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 01:09 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  How about sourcing those numbers Tommy?

When your profile is six months old, I'll let you demand answers from me.

come on, Tom...you can't figure out who that is? he's been here a LOT longer than 6 months...just not under that name.

(05-11-2016 11:09 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:17 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

Lmfao... "Your numbers" suck.

You think 100k represents 3% of Charlottes workforce? If literally everyone human being inside the Charlotte metro (2,400,000) was of working age and actually working, 3% would only add up to 72,000.

You either suck at math or youre a bald faced Liar, maybe both.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

WTF kind of logic is that??? Just because more self identified gays are of working age, it doesn't necessarily mean they work at a higher rate than straight people fo. There is grasping at straws, and then there's just making **** up. I kinda want to know what your sources are regarding lgbt workforce participation numbers. Don't happen to have a source for that do you?

I don't really care to look it up and verify Tom's claim, but it wouldn't surprise me if it is true. Gays on average are better educated and earn higher incomes. People with higher education levels have higher rates of employment.

Wonderful, gays are (supposedly) more educated. When you do the math, his ridiculous claim still doesn't hold water.

(05-11-2016 11:09 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:17 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:54 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 09:18 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  I call total fabrics on these numbers Tom. Stop making schit up.

I stand by my numbers. But you know, the LGBT community wants the US census bureau to ask the question "Do you self identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, or Transgendered"? The anti-Gays don't want that question asked. 100,000 people would only represent 3 percent or so of greater Charlotte's workforce. Since urban areas tend to have much higher LGBT percentages than rural areas, and LGBT persons tend to congregate in urban cores, the 100,000 number is reasonable.

And every single LGBT employee in Charlotte is now subject to immediate and arbitrary firing because the NC legislature wants to enable discrimination against LGBT persons.

If you look at this "New" poster's thread history, it appears to be one that seems to target my comments exclusively.

Lmfao... "Your numbers" suck.

You think 100k represents 3% of Charlottes workforce? If literally everyone human being inside the Charlotte metro (2,400,000) was of working age and actually working, 3% would only add up to 72,000.

You either suck at math or youre a bald faced Liar, maybe both.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

WTF kind of logic is that??? Just because more self identified gays are of working age, it doesn't necessarily mean they work at a higher rate than straight people fo. There is grasping at straws, and then there's just making **** up. I kinda want to know what your sources are regarding lgbt workforce participation numbers. Don't happen to have a source for that do you?

BTW folks....Tom's use of the word "Holocaust" in this post should immediately tell us all we need to know about him. Personally...I think using it in this context is deplorable and disrespectful to those that actually went through the Holocaust.

(05-12-2016 11:24 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  BTW folks....Tom's use of the word "Holocaust" in this post should immediately tell us all we need to know about him. Personally...I think using it in this context is deplorable and disrespectful to those that actually went through the Holocaust.

Yeah that made me laugh. Even in it's generic definition it would be the wrong term.

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

Boy and I thought Jim Crow comparisons were out in left field..

(05-12-2016 11:36 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

Boy and I thought Jim Crow comparisons were out in left field..

No folks...He knew exactly what he was doing by using that term. He believes that there was an intentional spread of AIDS to kill Homosexuals...thus..the holocaust comment. THAT is what he meant.

(05-12-2016 11:47 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(05-12-2016 11:36 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(05-11-2016 10:26 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  But Self Identified Gay people are not children. And because of the AIDS holocaust, the number of older LGBT persons is lower than for straights too. We participate in the workforce at higher rates than straight folks.

"Liar"...Now I know who you are. LOL.

Boy and I thought Jim Crow comparisons were out in left field..

No folks...He knew exactly what he was doing by using that term. He believes that there was an intentional spread of AIDS to kill Homosexuals...thus..the holocaust comment. THAT is what he meant.