Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
Author Message
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #61
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 11:04 AM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
07-05-2017 11:00 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,525
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 850
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #62
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

...you wouldn't be equipped to discuss it intelligently anyways.
07-05-2017 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
lew240z Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 664
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 20
I Root For: Wyoming
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Post: #63
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:10 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 08:21 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 08:01 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 12:56 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  FCS Championship in Frisco, Texas. The three California schools, if they go into the playoffs and get to that point will be in a pickle as well.

Potentially, the California teams would have to forfeit. It would be the end of either championships in certain states, or the end of the NCAA.

I doubt it's the end of the NCAA and I doubt the California state government is going to risk the backlash they would be sure to receive if one of their state schools were to be forced to forfeit the opportunity to play in a major bowl or national championship game due to it being played in a state on their ban list. If that occurs then hopefully networks have the intestinal fortitude to either sue them or strip them of P5 status. If either occurs then adjustments to the ban would most likely be made.

Sue them? For what? Obeying California state law? The state of California OWNS the Athletic Department at UCLA and SDSU. Its their property and they can do with it what they wish.

Who would really kick up sand if say Cal had to forfeit a bowl game? Sure there'd be some alumni who are upset (and they'd be loud), but its Cal....I think you overstate how important FBS football is to the average Californian or the average Cal student.

Who would take away P5 status for UCLA and Cal? The networks? Do you think the Pac12 would expel them for that? I promise you all hell would break lose at pretty much EVERY Pac12 institution (from significant portions of their own student bodies and alumni) if they tried that.

And the NCAA isn't going impose sanctions on schools for refusing to subject their students and fans to discrimination in other states.

So no, if California wants to do this, and other states want to join them, then there's little that can be done to change it.

If USC makes it to the play off and doesn't go because they would play in a banned state wouldn't that give the networks grounds for a lawsuit? To be honest I don't know but I would think they would.

USC is a private school. The law doesn't apply to them.
07-05-2017 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,066
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 46
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #64
California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 12:35 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  California has drawn a line in the sand. Soon half the country will be banned, and it will be VERY difficult politically for CA to back down.

I'm an employee at one of the institutions affected, and I'm pissed off at being used as a pawn in an economic war against other Americans.


I bet you voted to elect those clowns.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
07-05-2017 11:49 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BullsFanInTX Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,198
Joined: May 2008
Reputation: 184
I Root For: USF
Location:
Post: #65
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Again, Texas doesn't give a rat's behind what CA is doing with official gov't travel. Texas will not cower or succumb to pressure, no matter what. Ultra conservative guys like Ted Cruz are winning big in state wide elections. Texas swagger runs deep and you don't mess with Texas and expect them just to fold. It ain't happening. If anything, I'd expect an even bigger travel ban by TX to CA as reciprocation, rather than changing any laws. You just don't get it. This means less than nothing to Texas politicians.

Tens of thousands of Californians leave their state and head to Texas by choice every year. Wonder why that is?
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 01:20 PM by BullsFanInTX.)
07-05-2017 01:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #66
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 01:16 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Again, Texas doesn't give a rat's behind what CA is doing with official gov't travel. Texas will not cower or succumb to pressure, no matter what. Ultra conservative guys like Ted Cruz are winning big in state wide elections. Texas swagger runs deep and you don't mess with Texas and expect them just to fold. It ain't happening. If anything, I'd expect an even bigger travel ban by TX to CA as reciprocation, rather than changing any laws. You just don't get it. This means less than nothing to Texas politicians.

Tens of thousands of Californians leave their state and head to Texas by choice every year. Wonder why that is?

LOL. That's why California real estate is so expensive.

There's nothing Texas can do about it. California doesn't care about Fresno State's football team as much as they do about the next Democratic primary

The AG is expanding the scope of the bill, not dialing it back. That should provide some clarity as to the seriousness that he's taking with this. You'll find that California has swagger too.

This will eventually be resolved in a manner that is acceptable to the LGBT people. But that will take time. Until then, I can't see how any conference with a state institution in California can credibly discuss adding a team from a banned state.
07-05-2017 01:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,615
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 589
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #67
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 08:21 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 08:01 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 12:56 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(07-03-2017 10:44 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Seems like this could really impact California team participation in NCAA championships and bowl games, many of which are held in "banned" states. E.g., the 2018 Final Four is in San Antonio. I presume if UCLA advances that far, they won't be able to participate?

And what about the PAC tie-ins with bowls in Texas, or playing in the Cotton Bowl there? Presumably, no dice.

And also there would seem to be negative recruiting implications. Can't send coaches or staff to certain states to recruit players.


FCS Championship in Frisco, Texas. The three California schools, if they go into the playoffs and get to that point will be in a pickle as well.

Potentially, the California teams would have to forfeit. It would be the end of either championships in certain states, or the end of the NCAA.

I doubt it's the end of the NCAA and I doubt the California state government is going to risk the backlash they would be sure to receive if one of their state schools were to be forced to forfeit the opportunity to play in a major bowl or national championship game due to it being played in a state on their ban list.

I'm not sure you are 100% in touch with reality here. My reading of the mainstream media is that the backlash is more likely to occur if California was to bend on the ban so as to allow their schools to do something as trivial/insignificant as play in a major bowl or national championship.

To CNN, WAPO, NY Times, etc. the principles behind the California ban are far, far more important than whether a school gets to play a Major Bowl game or not.
07-05-2017 02:08 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,615
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 589
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #68
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3
07-05-2017 02:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Side Show Joe Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,656
Joined: Mar 2010
Reputation: 167
I Root For: North Texas
Location: TEXAS
Post: #69
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
The Texas Governor has already warned the NBA and NFL about getting political in our state. California can do what they want, but Texas will not change our laws.
07-05-2017 02:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,066
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 46
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #70
California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3


What do you expect from a typical liberal loon from California? It is always do as I say, and I can do whatever I want as the rule only applies to peons who don't agree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 02:31 PM by Jjoey52.)
07-05-2017 02:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,525
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 850
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #71
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3

Did you honestly expect better?
07-05-2017 02:41 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
HeartOfDixie Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,525
Joined: Oct 2013
Reputation: 850
I Root For: Alabama
Location: Huntsville AL
Post: #72
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3


What do you expect from a typical liberal loon from California? It is always do as I say, and I can do whatever I want as the rule only applies to peons who don't agree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

In fairness to him, he wanted to have a conversation about the issue--one where he controlled the bounds of it. You know, the kind of conversation where only buzzwords and disingenuous explanations are allowed--the kind of conversation where you not so secretly just get bombarded with bull****.

Don't believe me? See the post to Coog and every subsequent one brushing up on it.

Disingenuous post by disingenuous poster is disingenuous.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 02:44 PM by HeartOfDixie.)
07-05-2017 02:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bearcat65 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,718
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation: 49
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #73
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:08 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 08:21 AM)bearcat65 Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 08:01 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-04-2017 12:56 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  
(07-03-2017 10:44 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  Seems like this could really impact California team participation in NCAA championships and bowl games, many of which are held in "banned" states. E.g., the 2018 Final Four is in San Antonio. I presume if UCLA advances that far, they won't be able to participate?

And what about the PAC tie-ins with bowls in Texas, or playing in the Cotton Bowl there? Presumably, no dice.

And also there would seem to be negative recruiting implications. Can't send coaches or staff to certain states to recruit players.


FCS Championship in Frisco, Texas. The three California schools, if they go into the playoffs and get to that point will be in a pickle as well.

Potentially, the California teams would have to forfeit. It would be the end of either championships in certain states, or the end of the NCAA.

I doubt it's the end of the NCAA and I doubt the California state government is going to risk the backlash they would be sure to receive if one of their state schools were to be forced to forfeit the opportunity to play in a major bowl or national championship game due to it being played in a state on their ban list.

I'm not sure you are 100% in touch with reality here. My reading of the mainstream media is that the backlash is more likely to occur if California was to bend on the ban so as to allow their schools to do something as trivial/insignificant as play in a major bowl or national championship.

To CNN, WAPO, NY Times, etc. the principles behind the California ban are far, far more important than whether a school gets to play a Major Bowl game or not.

I'm certainly not in touch with California reality. But hey if they don't allow their public schools to participate in NCAA tournament games and bowls located in banned states and forfeit the associated tournament unit and bowl pay outs then more power to them.
07-05-2017 03:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
msm96wolf Offline
All American
*

Posts: 3,467
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation: 110
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #74
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

No, the law was preset to HB2 and there were not anti-gay laws. Men went to mens bathrooms and Women went to Womens bathroom. What people don't get that each state has laws in their state constitutions that grant powers. Charlotte did not have the power to make the laws they made, a point that was overlooked. Then the Legislature took an ax to kill a fly and went beyond where is should be. The reset button was hit and to prevent another town doing what Charlotte did there was a 5 year ban agreed to by the newly elected Dem Governor to prevent towns from starting this whole fiasco over. Irony of irony, the deal the that was agreed to prior to this only had a six month ban under the lame duck GOP gov and the newly elected Dem Gov told them to vote no. So there is no discrimination, the law was preset but the LGBT did not like that it was setback and really got screwed by the Gov the went all out to get elected. Again, I am not saying HB2 was right or wrong but both sides FUBARed. Sadly, since journalism is a dead art, it never got covered very well because reporters from both sides put their slant on it.
07-05-2017 04:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #75
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:44 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3


What do you expect from a typical liberal loon from California? It is always do as I say, and I can do whatever I want as the rule only applies to peons who don't agree.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

In fairness to him, he wanted to have a conversation about the issue--one where he controlled the bounds of it. You know, the kind of conversation where only buzzwords and disingenuous explanations are allowed--the kind of conversation where you not so secretly just get bombarded with bull****.

Don't believe me? See the post to Coog and every subsequent one brushing up on it.

Disingenuous post by disingenuous poster is disingenuous.

For the record, Coog actually make a patently political post attempting to call this somehow religious discrimination on the part of California.

I've found you to be personally rather passive aggressive. Its like expert level. You have a patently political viewpoint too.

These are the facts

1) States ARE passing laws clearly targeting the LGBT community that clearly affirm discriminatory treatment towards LGBT persons.

2) California has passed a law that prohibits state funding for travel and contracting for events where its citizens or employees will face discrimination. This bill, in no way, has anything to do with religious discrimination. It even allows Cal to schedule a game at Liberty.

3) This bill might impact conference realignment.

---

You and I hold different viewpoints. But my viewpoint is probably similar to that of those in California. And its a valid one on here, because that's one of the viewpoints driving this issue. And will remain a salient one. The OP is one that voices the views of those who put up the bill. You are free to put up your interpretation with all the buzzwords and whooey you'd like.

But you rarely bother with discussing the merits on demerits on issues. You seem to just insult me. You are free to bring up your legal opinion as to the legality of the Assembly Bill or the AG's interpretation. You haven't done it. Come on man, show off your training. I'd love to see how you try to shoehorn the ICC into requiring California to use taxpayer dollars to ship LGBT people to Texas so they can be discriminated against.

BTW, I'm perfectly able to understand your arguments. I think I know where you were trained.

Perhaps you should consider contributing to the discussion rather than simply insulting anyone who has a viewpoint that doesn't mesh with yours.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 05:28 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
07-05-2017 05:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #76
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3

Just correcting someone else's incorrect statement. He asked why NC was still on the list. A list that will impact athletic scheduling. Want to talk about how this impacts conference realignment?
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 05:17 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
07-05-2017 05:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #77
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 02:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3


What do you expect from a typical liberal loon from California? It is always do as I say, and I can do whatever I want as the rule only applies to peons who don't agree.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm from Mobile Alabama and I live in Houston Texas. LOL. The whole reason this ban developed was that some states want to enable people to discriminate against minorities. Try again.

The whole reason California is passing these laws that impact athletics is in response to other states not treating people equally.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 05:29 PM by Tom in Lazybrook.)
07-05-2017 05:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,066
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 46
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #78
California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 05:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3


What do you expect from a typical liberal loon from California? It is always do as I say, and I can do whatever I want as the rule only applies to peons who don't agree.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm from Mobile Alabama and I live in Houston Texas. LOL. The whole reason this ban developed was that some states want to enable people to discriminate against minorities. Try again.

Ok, what do you expect from a typical liberal loon who has a California liberal loon mentality, but stuck in Texas? With these types it will so always do as I say, not as I do as the Ryle only applies to those who disagree. Better?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
07-05-2017 05:27 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Tom in Lazybrook Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 20,987
Joined: Jul 2011
Reputation: 438
I Root For: So Alabama, GWU
Location: Houston
Post: #79
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 05:27 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 05:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:30 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3


What do you expect from a typical liberal loon from California? It is always do as I say, and I can do whatever I want as the rule only applies to peons who don't agree.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm from Mobile Alabama and I live in Houston Texas. LOL. The whole reason this ban developed was that some states want to enable people to discriminate against minorities. Try again.

Ok, what do you expect from a typical liberal loon who has a California liberal loon mentality, but stuck in Texas? With these types it will so always do as I say, not as I do as the Ryle only applies to those who disagree. Better?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Actually, which side wants discrimination? That appears to be yours. So I'm not really understanding why you'd come after me as if I'm trying to say rules apply to some but not all. I think that's the whole point of the laws in Mississippi, Texas, NC, etc., and why California has a bill in the first place.

Again, the California bill simply says 'no travel to states where people can be discriminated against because they are LGBT or that pass laws endorsing/enabling that discrimination'.

And I think this discussion is the reason why the California bill and its ramifications for college athletics will become an issue and will remain one for a while.
07-05-2017 05:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 26,615
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 589
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: Baton Rouge, LA
Post: #80
RE: California's Travel Ban - Ramifications
(07-05-2017 05:16 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 02:12 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 11:00 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:40 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  
(07-05-2017 10:35 AM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Since I am a state's right guy, I have no issue if Ca does this. I hope they just don't complain if there is a backlash if other states or entities attempt to use this against them. Again, the only city that was truly hurt by NC HB2 was Charlotte. NC despite the inaccurate reporting had record years in tourism and industry gain. It was Charlotte that suffered, not NC losing the ACC Championship Games and NBA All-Star game. I will say the NCAA ban probably hurt some other cities but all those events are returning have NC went back to pre-existing law of HB2. Once again, why is NC still on CA ban list? Why would Texas believe if they change the law, CA will re-instate the travel?

Well, this is actually something the Federal government has a completely legitimate point in getting involved in.

Remember that little thing about interstate commerce?

That's what this is about.

All this stupidity about discrimination is just that, stupidity.

I think that the ICC might have some views on discrimination too. Not sure you want to open up that can of worms if you support the discriminatory bills.

To answer the previous posters question, NC is still on the list because HB2 still is in substantial effect. The 'solution' left in place a ban on protecting LGBT persons from discrimination. It was a full throated affirmation and endorsement of discrimination by the NC legislature.

Wow, for someone who admonished everyone to "not make this political" at the start of this thread, you sure haven't shied away from making it political. 07-coffee3

Just correcting someone else's incorrect statement. He asked why NC was still on the list. A list that will impact athletic scheduling. Want to talk about how this impacts conference realignment?

I've made at least one comment on how this might impact on realignment, as well as bowl game and NCAA championship event participation, and recruiting. I've argued that the implications are likely to be pretty significant, and agreed that it was thus very appropriate for you to introduce the issue to this forum.

However, since your first reply to Attackcoog, you've used liberal-political language to describe the actions of California and the actions of the states that they have 'banned' travel to. You've continuously used the California language of "discrimination" to describe the actions of Texas et al., and not the language of those states, which have talked about their laws in terms of "affirming religious freedom". Point is, both views are political, the first liberal, the second conservative. If you want to focus this discussion on just realignment, you have to avoid both views and their associated ideological terms. But you haven't.

So if your goal really was to stick strictly to the implications of this ban for realignment, and not get bogged down in politics, you've been your own worst enemy here.
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2017 05:53 PM by quo vadis.)
07-05-2017 05:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2018 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2018 MyBB Group.