Pretty simple. If you have a *****, use the men's room. If you don't, use the women's room.

(10-13-2015 07:09 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  Pretty simple. If you have a *****, use the men's room. If you don't, use the women's room.

Gay/Tranny Mafia can't understand this. Mental issues.

(10-13-2015 06:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 05:55 PM)maximus Wrote:  Again, do the gays and trannys have a full list of what they deem "rights"

If so please share

Your word starting with T is a strong pejorative and is equivalent in level of offense to using the N-bomb to describe a person of African extraction.

The correct term is Transgender. You can also use Trans Person. By the way, Transgendered persons aren't drag queens either.

Next time you use the term, I will assume that you are simply trolling by using deeply offensive language and will put you on ignore. Its really 5th grade level to use that language. And you know it.

---

The same rights under the law that members of Second Baptist have. Protection from discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, health care, etc. Full equal treatment under the law.

Tranny is perfectly acceptable and you've been told this multiply time. Stop being a drama queen.

And Second Baptist members don't have a right to use the wrong restroom either so trannys already have equality with them.

It's a good thing that it's coming for a vote. I'm sure and I'm hoping the majority of Houstonians are not mentally skewered like those trannys and their ilk (includes those that sympathize with this perversion.

And to equate what blacks had to go through to this perversion is a perversion in itself. A black cannot change his RACE and it was truly a fight for justice. This crap is just a Sodom and Gomorrah cryfest pushed by the nutty (and perverted) mayor.

(10-13-2015 07:09 PM)BcatMatt13 Wrote:  Pretty simple. If you have a *****, use the men's room. If you don't, use the women's room.

Then you would be voting against Berkman, who wants people with *****' to be using the women's room.

Your equipment determines your bathroom or shower facility. The rest is irrelevant.

Any potential rapist or pervert could then dress as a Female and legally enter any Female restroom and wack off or worse in a stall next to real Females under that law. I have a real problem with that law as You have No way of knowing Whom is legit or just getting Their jollies of at Your Wife, Daughters, Mothers, Sisters expense. Why is That so hard to comprehend ? Also What if a Female Transgender came into the Men's room and walked out saying Guys were trying to rape Her or take photos of Her ? This is where Transgenders need to use the restrooms that fit what is between Their legs only. No matter how They look outside.

(10-14-2015 06:18 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Any potential rapist or pervert could then dress as a Female and legally enter any Female restroom and wack off or worse in a stall next to real Females under that law. I have a real problem with that law as You have No way of knowing Whom is legit or just getting Their jollies of at Your Wife, Daughters, Mothers, Sisters expense. Why is That so hard to comprehend ? Also What if a Female Transgender came into the Men's room and walked out saying Guys were trying to rape Her or take photos of Her ? This is where Transgenders need to use the restrooms that fit what is between Their legs only. No matter how They look outside.

You realize that HERO doesn't change Houston or Texas laws on this matter. It is illegal to masturbate, expose oneself, assault others, etc. with HERO or without HERO.

If HERO is repealed, all that will happen is that people will be able to fire all Gay persons from all employment 'just because', trans persons will face humiliation, and Houston will lose a bunch of hosting rights for sports events.

Any connection between bathrooms and HERO is a lie.

(10-14-2015 01:21 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-14-2015 06:18 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  Any potential rapist or pervert could then dress as a Female and legally enter any Female restroom and wack off or worse in a stall next to real Females under that law. I have a real problem with that law as You have No way of knowing Whom is legit or just getting Their jollies of at Your Wife, Daughters, Mothers, Sisters expense. Why is That so hard to comprehend ? Also What if a Female Transgender came into the Men's room and walked out saying Guys were trying to rape Her or take photos of Her ? This is where Transgenders need to use the restrooms that fit what is between Their legs only. No matter how They look outside.

You realize that HERO doesn't change Houston or Texas laws on this matter. It is illegal to masturbate, expose oneself, assault others, etc. with HERO or without HERO.

If HERO is repealed, all that will happen is that people will be able to fire all Gay persons from all employment 'just because', trans persons will face humiliation, and Houston will lose a bunch of hosting rights for sports events.

Any connection between bathrooms and HERO is a lie.

Actually, Texas is essentially an "employment at will" state. Basically this means that, unless you have an employment contract, you can be fired or you can quit at any time, for any reason, or for no reason at all.

And the connection between bathrooms and HERO is not a lie. Public accommodations means any public place and anything under that public place is subject to the law, including restrooms. From your own corner of the web...

"Actually, “public accommodations” are categories of businesses that serve the general public. If a business is covered by a public accommodations law, access to all facilities that are open to the public is covered by that law as well. (Similarly, if a business is covered by an employment law, then an employee’s access to the restrooms is covered by that law.)"

http://www.transequality.org/know-your-r...mmodations

(10-13-2015 04:13 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 03:52 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  "Oh yes, I have absolutely no qualms about letting 4-year old little Lisa utilize the same bathroom as a 37-year old who was born a man, complete with a set of twig and berries, but at the same time is so mentally deranged as to physically defile his own body as much as artificially possible in effort to kind-of look like a woman. Anyone who has a problem with this is a hateful bigot and should be strung up and quartered in the town square."

Gee whiz..calling someone mentally deranged, simply because they are transgendered, is hateful and is opposed by every reputable psychological organization on Planet Earth. To insult their looks is also hateful. And was deliberate on your part.

Actually, Lance wants it to be required for a POST OP Transgendered f to m to use the bathroom with his daughter. They go by 'physical gender assigned at birth'. So does the Texas GOP. And every supporter of discrimination.

By the way, I'd call that posting pretty hateful and extremely bigoted.

So, a guy who thinks he's Jesus is mentally ill, but a guy who thinks he's a girl and wants to cut his nuts off is just misunderstood?

Quite the leap there

Rice Grad Baseball Player takes on Rice Grad Mayor.

If Parker was smart, she'd drop the "Bathroom Language" out of the Ordinance. Then it would be non-controversial ordnance. It's headed for a Vote in November and many Liberal City Councilmembers are scared of a Higher than normal Conservative Turnout that might push them out of office.

Blame it on Mayor Porker..

(10-13-2015 08:35 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 06:15 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-13-2015 05:55 PM)maximus Wrote:  Again, do the gays and trannys have a full list of what they deem "rights"

If so please share

Your word starting with T is a strong pejorative and is equivalent in level of offense to using the N-bomb to describe a person of African extraction.

The correct term is Transgender. You can also use Trans Person. By the way, Transgendered persons aren't drag queens either.

Next time you use the term, I will assume that you are simply trolling by using deeply offensive language and will put you on ignore. Its really 5th grade level to use that language. And you know it.

---

The same rights under the law that members of Second Baptist have. Protection from discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, health care, etc. Full equal treatment under the law.

Tranny is perfectly acceptable and you've been told this multiply time. Stop being a drama queen.

And Second Baptist members don't have a right to use the wrong restroom either so trannys already have equality with them.

Did you know Dale Earnhardt Jr. Blew a Tranny in the second turn of Charlotte Motor Speedway?

Now the Houston Texans owner has gotten into the action against Proposition 1. I think he donated some money against the cause.

(10-15-2015 09:16 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Now the Houston Texans owner has gotten into the action against Proposition 1. I think he donated some money against the cause.

Its not surprising...

Why didn't Michael Sam get a fair shot?

Because NFL owners are donating money to make firing someone for being Gay illegal.

Its going to be a very interesting Super Bowl in 2017.

(10-15-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 09:16 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Now the Houston Texans owner has gotten into the action against Proposition 1. I think he donated some money against the cause.

Its not surprising...

Why didn't Michael Sam get a fair shot?

Because NFL owners are donating money to make firing someone for being Gay illegal.

Its going to be a very interesting Super Bowl in 2017.

Michael Sam did get a fair shot, he got drafted.

(10-15-2015 10:35 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 09:16 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  Now the Houston Texans owner has gotten into the action against Proposition 1. I think he donated some money against the cause.

Why didn't Michael Sam get a fair shot?

He did. A few times.

He got a shot with the Rams and failed.

He got a shot with the Cowboys and failed.

He got a shot with the CFL and failed.

He just isn't NFL talent.

Nope..

When NFL owners love employment discrimination against Gay persons so much that they give massive donations to enable the firing of all Gay persons from any employment in their cities,

then the bias against Gay persons is obvious.

Sam was never given a shot with the Rams. The SEC Defensive player of the year was allocated by the NFL to a team that didn't need him in order to spike his candidacy.

By the time he went to Montreal, the burden of being hated on by every single NFL owner and team got to him.

There's a reason there's never been an openly Gay player in NFL history. Out of 35,000 players. Because of bigotry and outright discrimination. Not because of a lack of talent.

Sorry, when NFL owners are paying money to enable FIRING people for being gay, its obvious that the reason no openly Gay players have ever played a down in the NFL is due to discrimination.

(10-15-2015 10:48 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Nope..

When NFL owners love employment discrimination against Gay persons so much that they give massive donations to enable the firing of all Gay persons from any employment in their cities,

then the bias against Gay persons is obvious.

Sam was never given a shot with the Rams. The SEC Defensive player of the year was allocated by the NFL to a team that didn't need him in order to spike his candidacy.

By the time he went to Montreal, the burden of being hated on by every single NFL owner and team got to him.

There's a reason there's never been an openly Gay player in NFL history. Out of 35,000 players. Because of bigotry and outright discrimination. Not because of a lack of talent.

Sorry, when NFL owners are paying money to enable FIRING people for being gay, its obvious that the reason no openly Gay players have ever played a down in the NFL is due to discrimination.

Do you have any source to your claims?

(10-15-2015 10:49 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 10:48 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Nope..

When NFL owners love employment discrimination against Gay persons so much that they give massive donations to enable the firing of all Gay persons from any employment in their cities,

then the bias against Gay persons is obvious.

Sam was never given a shot with the Rams. The SEC Defensive player of the year was allocated by the NFL to a team that didn't need him in order to spike his candidacy.

By the time he went to Montreal, the burden of being hated on by every single NFL owner and team got to him.

There's a reason there's never been an openly Gay player in NFL history. Out of 35,000 players. Because of bigotry and outright discrimination. Not because of a lack of talent.

Sorry, when NFL owners are paying money to enable FIRING people for being gay, its obvious that the reason no openly Gay players have ever played a down in the NFL is due to discrimination.

Do you have any source to your claims?

35,000 players. 0 openly Gay persons. Tony Dungy. Bob McNair. FCA. Reggie White. Its a friggin cesspool of hatred of Gay persons.

The Rams didn't need a defenseman. There was no spot on the roster for him. That was the point.

The Cowboys didn't have a spot on the roster for him either.

Dungy openly campaigned for Sam to not be given a shot

McNair is now openly campaigning to allow people to be fired simply for being Gay. How many other NFL owners think that its a wonderful thing to fire someone for being Gay? I'll bet a lot. But the fact that there is one who does certainly bolsters my assertion that Sam was never given a fair chance and was denied that fair chance because he is Gay.

(10-15-2015 10:51 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 10:49 AM)UTSAMarineVet09 Wrote:  

(10-15-2015 10:48 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Nope..

When NFL owners love employment discrimination against Gay persons so much that they give massive donations to enable the firing of all Gay persons from any employment in their cities,

then the bias against Gay persons is obvious.

Sam was never given a shot with the Rams. The SEC Defensive player of the year was allocated by the NFL to a team that didn't need him in order to spike his candidacy.

By the time he went to Montreal, the burden of being hated on by every single NFL owner and team got to him.

There's a reason there's never been an openly Gay player in NFL history. Out of 35,000 players. Because of bigotry and outright discrimination. Not because of a lack of talent.

Sorry, when NFL owners are paying money to enable FIRING people for being gay, its obvious that the reason no openly Gay players have ever played a down in the NFL is due to discrimination.

Do you have any source to your claims?

35,000 players. 0 openly Gay persons. Tony Dungy. Bob McNair. FCA. Reggie White. Its a friggin cesspool of hatred of Gay persons.

The Rams didn't need a defenseman. There was no spot on the roster for him. That was the point.

The Cowboys didn't have a spot on the roster for him either.

Dungy openly campaigned for Sam to not be given a shot

McNair is now openly campaigning to allow people to be fired simply for being Gay.

So no proofs of your claims? Got it!