Crossdressing and bandmates.

[Robroy]

I'm fairly sure hate speech examples are subjective, I'm not sure if there is a definitive definition.

That's the problem. The law is quite black and white. That is why speed limit signs give a number and don't just say "safe".

And the first amendment really lays down the gauntlet on this one.

But internet sites are quite a bit more subjective and have the right to be. So I'm done here while I'm still a member. Bye. D

 

[Funk³]

That's the problem. The law is quite black and white. That is why speed limit signs give a number and don't just say "safe".

And the first amendment really lays down the gauntlet on this one.

But internet sites are quite a bit more subjective and have the right to be. So I'm done here while I'm still a member. Bye. D

Yeah, normally I'd say quit whilst you're ahead, but, let's face it, you're a little slower than the rest of us

 

[MultiScaleMale]

So, what is "hate speech"? And can the majority decide to violate the constitution without a constitutional amendment?

Violate the Constitution or violate your interpretation of the Constitution?

 

[jasonrp]

So yeah, OP. I'd run it by the band first. If they're cool with it, have at it.

 

[alaskaleftybass]

Everybody get back in line. On subject. One two one two bring it on down... one two three four... one-two... three four!

 

[One Drop]

What if you think a thing should not be tolerated, but it is. If you had a strong opinion on the situation, would you not find yourself intolerant of the tolerance.

I would say I don't agree with the thing itself, not attack those who argue that the thing should be tolerated, nor would I complain that tolerance for things I don't agree with is bad in itself.

 

[RoadRanger]

Oy vey - all y'all ought to check out "Transparent" on Amazon to get edjukated about the differences between Transvestite, Transgender, and sexual preference. Plus it's funny as Hades, especially as the non-Transgender characters are the dysfunctional ones .

 

[MultiScaleMale]

OK, I get that. So, lets say I have a deli and a homosexual couple comes in and orders sandwiches and are very loyal customers. I make them sandwiches and actually enjoy talking to them. But then one day they ask me to cater their wedding and the event violates my religious beliefs, and I am taught to not participate in such events.

I'm not discriminating against them when I deny. I've proved it by serving them sandwiches for a long time. Rather, I'm refusing to take part in an event to avoid violating my religious convictions. The first amendment protects my right to NOT participate in something that violates my religious beliefs.

Does that not seem reasonable?

Or are you saying that a person with religious convictions must not be allowed to put food on the table by owning their own business. That sounds kinda in violation of the first amendment.

I'm pretty sure that you're deli is not going to heaven nor hell. You're running a business that is incorporated to gain protections the legal system affords you and tax benefits. But now when it comes to catering a gay wedding, now you want to be an individual and claim those individual rights.

I think your business should cater the event and if you personally object to it, hire someone to cover you on that day.

 

[One Drop]

Oy vey - all y'all ought to check out "Transparent" on Amazon to get edjukated about the differences between Transvestite, Transgender, and sexual preference. Plus it's funny as Hades, especially as the non-Transgender characters are the dysfunctional ones .

I like threads like this because I sometimes learn about things I know very little about.

Even though I have gay and cross dressing friends. There has been is no real reason for me to find out about how many people wish to be defined or the current thinking in these circles. There is no scene in my village and cities here tolerate everything but are fairly small and there is very little discussion in general media, nor much political debate or activism, at least on the surface.

Which is cool too, I don't know much about how my straight friends feel about their sexuality or how they identify either. It's no big deal, societies only make it so.

 

[RoadRanger]

Rather, I'm refusing to take part in an event to avoid violating my religious convictions.

Could we please avoid references to religions and religious issues, especially as we're not allowed to tell anyone to go **** their arsehat *** and/or the horse they rode in on ?

 

[gln1955]

OK, I get that. So, lets say I have a deli and a homosexual couple comes in and orders sandwiches and are very loyal customers. I make them sandwiches and actually enjoy talking to them. But then one day they ask me to cater their wedding and the event violates my religious beliefs, and I am taught to not participate in such events.

I'm not discriminating against them when I deny. I've proved it by serving them sandwiches for a long time. Rather, I'm refusing to take part in an event to avoid violating my religious convictions. The first amendment protects my right to NOT participate in something that violates my religious beliefs.

Does that not seem reasonable?

Or are you saying that a person with religious convictions must not be allowed to put food on the table by owning their own business. That sounds kinda in violation of the first amendment.

I think you have an overlinflated opinion of yourself if you think that supplying food to an event is a special endorsement of that event. I'm sure the couple who hires you couldn't give a rat's ass what you think of their wedding.

 

[JimmyM]

Could we please avoid references to religions and religious issues, especially as we're not allowed to tell anyone to go **** their arsehat ***, and/or the horse they rode in on ?

I don't see how you can avoid it on a topic like this, because the biggest objections are always religious in nature. Me, all I care about is how it could affect my paycheck But there's always someone who has to waltz into these threads and start moralizing like they're the last word on everything.

 

[devnulljp]

I still think it's weird that a piece of cloth can be seen as "for men" or "for women" anyway.
Wear what you like, whether it's jeans and a T-shirt or high heels and a tutu, I don't care.
Anyone that has a problem with what other people do or wear is a doofus IMO.

 

[-Asdfgh-]

guys like prince and scott weiland never struck me as effeminate. good for them for doing what they want.

In a roundabout way high heels probably killed Prince

 

[MultiScaleMale]

I still think it's weird that a piece of cloth can be seen as "for men" or "for women" anyway.
Wear what you like, whether it's jeans and a T-shirt or high heels and a tutu, I don't care.
Anyone that has a problem with what other people do or wear is a doofus IMO.

Yeah, think about it, Jesus wore a dress. Just saying.....

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Agreed

Tasteful look done well.

 

[I am Soma]

Yeah, think about it, Jesus wore a dress. Just saying.....

on the topic of wizards from books so did Gandalf

 

[I am Soma]

i wonder if religious bands follow that whole no two fabrics at the same time thing too

 

[-Asdfgh-]

Transgender is not the same thing as cross-dressing. One literally has nothing whatsoever to do with the other. Read up on it. Seriously.

A classic case is Eddie Izzard who cross dresses sometimes but AFAIK is straight and not transgender.

 

[slobake]

Could we please avoid references to religions and religious issues, especially as we're not allowed to tell anyone to go **** their arsehat *** and/or the horse they rode in on ?

I hear you. If anyone goes to the lobby they can see how I feel about a certain subject that we should not talk about here but that we can talk about in the lobby. If we could talk about that subject here I would say that respect and understanding for others does not violate my convictions about a certain subject. Of course I wouldn't say that because we can't talk about that here.