The NCAA takes a bathroom break.

North Carolina had to know this was coming.

Basketball-crazed North Carolina has lost its next chance to host NCAA men’s basketball tournament games along with several other championship events due to a state law that some say can lead to discrimination against LGBT people.

And the fallout may not be over.

After the NCAA announced it is pulling seven championship events from North Carolina for this year, Atlantic Coast Conference Commissioner John Swofford – whose league hosts many sporting events in the state, including its football championship game – said the ACC’s council of presidents were set to discuss the law at a previously scheduled meeting later this week.

Without NCAA cover, you’d expect the ACC to follow in its footsteps.  Banning the ACC basketball tourney from the state, even the watered down version that exists today, is gonna sting.

The cognitive dissonance in the corner of the law’s defenders is about what you’d expect.

Of course, he might be complaining about more than just who’s going to which bathroom with that.

HB2 was signed into law by Republican Gov. Pat McCrory earlier this year. A spokesman with McCrory’s office couldn’t immediately be reached for comment Monday evening, but a spokeswoman with the state Republican party blasted the NCAA’s decision in a statement, saying it is “so absurd it’s almost comical.”

“I wish the NCAA was this concerned about the women who were raped at Baylor,” spokeswoman Kami Mueller said Monday night.

I bet you do, girl.  It’s probably a coincidence that I can’t find a single other public utterance of your concern about what happened at Baylor.

But now that you mention it, Baylor canned its president, AD and head coach in the wake of its scandal.  What’s North Carolina got to offer to get the NCAA off its back?

236 Comments

Filed under ACC Football, Political Wankery, The NCAA

236 responses to “The NCAA takes a bathroom break.

  1. Rp

    That’s tolerance right there: “Agree with us on LGBTQIAP issues or we will do our best to harm you any way we can.”

  2. DB

    I think it’s a stretch to think the State of North Carolina and Baylor have the same need to answer to the NCAA. NC will survive without these events. Baylor has invested too much in facilities etc. to receive major sanctions. I think she makes an interesting point.

  3. roswell dawg

    Sorry Senator but here your progressive politics is showing. So since this becomes about politics rather than football/sports, here goes my two cents. I have a 4 1/2 year old granddaughter. She goes to Target with my daughter in law all the time. Target says men who think they are women can go into their bathrooms. So potentially one day soon, a man can walk into the bathroom while my daughter in law and my little granddaughter are in there, ogle them or worse, and explain his presence by saying, he feels like he is a woman. Which may be true. Or not. So I ask you: Who is the most vulnerable of the two – a 43 year old man who is confused about his sexual identity or my 4 1/2 year old granddaughter? Talk about confusion and mental anguish. And please don’t offer up the argument that says men are NOT exposing themselves in bathrooms to women and girls – it has already happened and it will happen again. Do some research and you will see. Surely, if our society deems it necessary to stand itself on its head on the point of a pin for a microcosm of its population, then there are better accommodations available. Maybe a restroom with a question mark. The PC environment that is alive and well in the minds of the leadership of the NCAA and for that matter, the NFL, is in alignment with the left and its drumbeat for suppression of free speech by identifying all those who disagree with them as: “racists”, ” homophobes”, “xenophobic”, “bigots”. I could use those exact terms for those who have no sense of compassion for my granddaughter’s mental and emotional fragility. But…….I don’t. I have gay friends. The pastor of my church is black. If I was a bigot I would have left our church years ago. My regular golf foursome includes an african-american. How did these things happen, if I am a ‘bigot’? In conclusion, the NCAA has lost its moral compass, as you have so rightly pointed out in their treatment of the athletes they are supposed to enable and regulate, but in this case, for a vastly different reason than you have argued for in the past.

    • So since this becomes about politics rather than football/sports…

      I understand you feel strongly about the underlying issue, but that’s crap right there. The NCAA just banned postseason events in a state and the ACC is about to do the same thing. How is that not about football/sports?

    • The problem that you are blind to is that this law wasn’t needed to protect your granddaughter. Before and after the law it would be illegal for anyone to go into any bathroom and “ogle” anyone. Don’t you think that there are male sickos who are interested in 4 1/2 year old grandsons?

      Is a grandson’s victimization less an issue because the sicko and the grandson share the same chromosomes?

      This law was never necessary. If yesterday or tomorrow you thought there was someone in the bathroom doing something untoward, your could get the police involved. This law says it’s illegal for a mother to escort her 4 year old son into the ladies room. Would you rather send him in alone into the men’s room?

      • Mark

        It became necessary when the feds began pushing to allow men to use the same public restrooms as little girls. It is good for NC to take a stand against such absurdities.

        And lets use a little common sense here and not wait till someone takes a peak to ogle a 4 year old girl. Lets make sure they don’t have the chance to do it and keep men using men’s restrooms like we have for generations. The tradition of men using men’s restrooms and women using women’s has been widely accepted for generations. Frankly, there’s no good argument to changing it.

        • And lets use a little common sense here and not wait till someone takes a peak to ogle a 4 year old girl. Lets make sure they don’t have the chance to do it…

          I’m sure you’d have the same reaction to someone suggesting that gun control laws are needed.

          • Mark

            2nd amendment has been around since the creation of the republic. Separate bathrooms have been around just as long. No real reason to change either one of them. The political push of the NCAA here is very distasteful.

            • 2nd amendment has been around since the creation of the republic.

              The Second Amendment wasn’t ratified until 1791, so, technically speaking, no.

              And, just like every other amendment to the Constitution, it’s not an absolute right, as much as some would like to make it so. Even Scalia in Heller recognized that it had its limits.

              As far as the history of separate bathrooms goes, I guess I’ll defer to your apparently extensive knowledge of privies and their use.

              • Mark

                Of course, but people believed that the constitution (rightly I might add) limited the power of the federal government. The 2nd amendment was seen as redundant. The anti-federalist won out over the federalist and the amendment was added. But all believed it to be a right before it was put into the constitution. Thing is, courts have taken it upon themselves to change the constitution without amendment. We live in interesting times.

                The federalist believed that the states and the people kept any powers not given to the federal government by the constitution. How wrong they were! They were right about what the constitution said, but wrong about how it would be used in years to come.

        • Where is this “push” from the Feds? I saw a DOE memo suggesting that schools should try to accommodate children that was AFTER this NC law. What else you got?

          • roswell dawg

            Thanks for making the point. The “push” from the Feds could be best exemplified in the Dear Colleague letter from the Department of Education when they advised school systems that if they did not allow children to self-identify as gender and use whatever bathroom they choose, then they could expect to lose their federal funding. That sort of constitutes a push if I ever heard of one.

            • Again that was after the law and would effect schools not Target. So the “need” argument is bogus. If he Feds passed a law that effected Target their ain’t a damn thing NC could do. You ever heard of the supremacy clause?

      • Rp

        Great logic! Pedophiles can already ogle little boys in the restroom, so lets be fair and give them the opportunity to do it to girls as well. I’m now on board.

        • And same sex restrooms have led to how much sexual assault on kids? If it were a problem, wouldn’t that have come up at some point?

          The suggestion that men are raping boys in the men’s rooms so that we must do something before it spreads to the ladies room is a bit of a reach wouldn’t you say?

          • Rp

            I don’t put much stock in the pedophile argument either. I can’t wait for the first regular male high school swimmer, track athlete, etc. that wants to shower with the ladies. Under the new age view of the world there is nothing you can do to stop him. If Steve can shower with the ladies because he thinks he’s a lady, Dave should be able to simply because he likes to shower with the ladies. That’s why I think these policies are brain dead stupid and need to stop.

            • If Steve can shower with the ladies because he thinks he’s a lady, Dave should be able to simply because he likes to shower with the ladies.

              Wut?

              • Rp

                Easy. This policy effectively allows any male or female to use whatever locker room they feel like at any time for any reason. Straight high school males can now use the women’s showering facilities any time they want. If questioned they can simply state they “identify as a woman” and no judge or administrator can prove otherwise.

                My other point is if one male has the right to use the women’s locker room because he “feels like a girl” any other male should be able to use the women’s room for what ever reason they choose (i.e. “I like showering with girls”). Why is one reason more valid than the other?

                • This policy effectively allows any male or female to use whatever locker room they feel like at any time for any reason. Straight high school males can now use the women’s showering facilities any time they want. If questioned they can simply state they “identify as a woman” and no judge or administrator can prove otherwise.

                  You’re talking out of your ass with this, but so be it.

                  What I’ve never been able to understand is why the same people who feel it’s necessary to legislate against transgender folks and gays can in the same breath talk about how people would want to claim to be trans or gay. Who goes out of their way to have shit dumped on them?

                  • FlorineseExpert

                    It helps if you have a narrative where the straight whites are the ones being oppressed.

                    • @gatriguy

                      I don’t know what you’re talking about. It’s not like there’s entire cable news channel or websites or an entire radio industry dedicated and built upon telling suburban white men that they’re the true victims in American….oh, wait.

                      It is what it is. Like I’ve said before: markets outrage is big business (on all sides to be sure).

                  • Mark

                    Its not legislating against them Senator. Its the other way around. Men go to men’s restrooms. You want to be a woman? Fine. When you become one, then you go to the women’s restroom. But just because you “feel” like a woman doesn’t make you one. Your gender is still that of a man and you have a restroom to use called “Men’s Room”. That’s the way it has been for years but now we are getting fiat rulings from regulators pushing to change the law without going through congress. NC just decided to legislate what has always been. Should have never come to this but states have little choice anymore with the power grab going on by the courts, executive branch, and the 4th branch of government, the regulatory branch otherwise know as the bureaucracy.

                • Alt right deplorable Guy

                  And is is happening in Virginia and several other sates as we speak. The Virginia case is the most visible, but there are many others.

      • roswell dawg

        I think male and female children deserve protection, Derek. Did not mean to exclude them in any way.

      • PTC DAWG

        I posted my comment below before reading this. Tell it all Brother!

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        Actually, the law grants permission for a mother to escort her minor son into a bathroom.

    • PTC DAWG

      Men can walk into any women’s room today meaning to do harm. You see, lawbreakers do not recognize rules.

  4. Mark

    Kudos to the state of NC for taking a stand.

  5. Navin Johnson

    I hate the days when reading the comments section reminds me that I should limit my conversations with many of my Dawg brethren to college football. The Dawg Nation is huge and diverse of mind, and we are stronger for it. But I am discouraged when, on those occasions when we stray from college football, we all reflexively and intolerantly start flinging sh*t at each other.

    (Full confession: My first draft of this comment was one of those sh*t-flinging exercises.)

  6. roswell dawg

    I did not fling anything at anyone personally.

  7. ASEF

    The part of the NCAA that picks venues is a business. Businesses get to choose where they do business.

    The NC law makes any local discrimination ordinance illegal. ANY. Only HB2 applies now, and HB2 gives businesses right to discriminate gay people. And protects state workers who want to deny services to gay people.

    So:
    The NCAA wants to pick a venue? Political correctness! Strong-arning! Liberal fascism!

    NC wants to discriminate against gay people? Hey, just religious freedom, man.

    Last I checked, picking WHO you would do business with based in gender, race, etc was discrimination. Not freedom.

    And then whining about a business taking its business elsewhere? Priceless.

    • Logic doesn’t enter into the picture here. It’s about certain people being uncomfortable with aspects of human sexuality – and I don’t say that as a way of passing judgment – and certain politicians being more than happy to cynically play to those folks. (I am passing judgment there.)

      As you say, if you want to argue that it’s about politics, it seems to me that everyone’s opinion is valid and the NCAA has as much right to flex its economic muscles as North Carolina’s Republican Party had to flex its political muscles. All’s fair in love, war and bathrooms. 😉

      • UGA85

        Yes, everyone’s opinion is valid. But not equally so. Hitler’s opinions of the Jews were not equally valid with Einstein’s opinions and theories of relativity. A pedophile’s feelings for a child aren’t equally valid with my feelings toward my wife. My feelings, if clearly wrong and inconsistent with reality, are not equally valid to someone else’s. Personal feelings cannot be the ultimate rule and guide to life and rules in society, if we expect to live in a free and civil state.

        • A pedophile’s feelings for a child aren’t equally valid with my feelings toward my wife.

          Are you equating the NCAA’s position to the pedophile and North Carolina’s to you? Because otherwise, this is a complete non sequitur.

      • Mark

        Gender and sexuality are two different things.

    • Its ok to say racist things and its “PC” to complain about the racist statements. What’s not ok is to call a racist “deplorable.” That’s just wrong.

      Calling Mexicans rapists is fair. Calling David Duke deplorable is an attack on America. Got it?

      • Sh3rl0ck

        This is where the word racism has lost all meaning. Racism is the belief that a race or group of races is inherently superior or inferior to others. In essence, it was the denial of individualism and the collectivization of persons based on physical appearances. In modern times, the word has become an epithet for someone who said something insensitive or noninclusive. There are differences between racism, bigotry, prejudice, and stereotyping. Mexican is a Nationality not a race. Calling Mexicans rapists is stereotyping and factually incorrect, but it is not racist. When I hear someone say a phrase such as “that is racist against gay people”, I cringe. Language matter.

        • Thank you Sh3rlock. Let’s at least get our definitions correct. When you start in a place not based on reality things can go off the rail easily. “Words” mean things and should be properly used. Otherwise “Words” become meaningless.

        • The plane is going down!

          You know that can’t end a sentence in a preposition.

          The plane is going down, asshole!

          The only thing more annoying than thought police are the grammar police. Thanks for the tutorial.

          I think that the issue was one of hypocrisy above. Sorry. I think that the issue was one of hypocrisy above, asshole.

          Would you care to address anything of import?

          • AthensHomerDawg

            You’re a fun read …sometimes. but then ya dilute your post with the juvenile name calling. Knowledgeable bright kid…you got some growing up to do son. Lose the goofy shit.
            Just sayin’

          • Sh3rl0ck

            I was not correcting your grammar; I was commenting on the definition of words. Language matters. Words have meanings. This is not simple pedantry. There is a reason that we have Godwin’s Law, and it is for the same reason that the person who decries another as a Nazi is the one who loses the (non)argument.

            Now I will correct your grammar. Your first sentence, “The plane is going down!”, is actually correct. While down can serve as a preposition in a prepositional phrase, in this situation it is actually a directional adjective. Your “corrected” second example is still incorrect. The syntactically correct version would be “I think that the issue above was one of hypocrisy, asshole”, asshole. In your example, above is a non-participial modifier as it does not modify the word hypocrisy.

            • Tlkdawg

              Excellent use of verbal spanking, well done!

            • And my point is that this discussion has no meaning. If my poor English deprives my sentences of meaning then say so. In other words if you couldn’t follow my point that would be worthy of a critique but I don’t think that is at issue. Language is about communication, not rules. At least it isn’t to those who use it to convey ideas. There are those for whom language is useless except for expression that can only be described as pedantic. I’d rather my words have meaning than be banal in perfect grammar. To each their own I guess.

              • Sh3rl0ck

                I’d rather my words have meaning than be banal in perfect grammar.

                This was my original point. When you ( I mean the royal you here. This applies to large swaths of the population not just you personally) misuse words they lose meaning. Racist is not a word to be used lightly. There is a very serious connotation to the word. It should not be used when actually referring to bigotry, prejudice, stereotyping, etc. Re-read my original message. The point should be quite clear. If you want your words to have meaning then use them in the proper context and meaning. To quote BRD above as he got the point immediately:

                When you start in a place not based on reality things can go off the rail easily. “Words” mean things and should be properly used. Otherwise “Words” become meaningless.

                This is exactly what happened. You assumed I was concerned with your grammar or syntax. I am not. Words have meaning. Misuse them and they become meaningless. Calling a racist a racist is fine. Calling a bigot a racist is counter-productive.

                • And your mistake is that because I used racist and insulting Mexicans in the same post that I somehow misused the word. Even if you have to read the 2 sentences together, and it isn’t necessary, could not the “racist” be connected to David Duke? Wouldn’t that be fair?

                  Moreover if I said:

                  Trump supporters are racists

                  And

                  I was talking to a trump supporter who was illiterate

                  Aren’t those just two different points?

                  The first sentence and the second sentence in the post were not inextricably tied together. Moreover, it was never unclear what the point was:

                  Trump makes it a point of “saying it how it is” and that complaints about his “plain talk” are PC. Then you tell the truth about his supporters and they cry like the worst PC, safe zone babies ever.

                  I think that point was made and made clearly in spite of your needless complaints.

    • Napoleon BonerFart

      Actually, you’re guilty of the kind of logical inconsistency you’re accusing others of. Forcing a man dressed as a woman to use the men’s room? Discrimination! Forcing a Christian to celebrate gay marriage? Freedom!

      • Cojones

        How is the presentation of food or clothing to be purchased by the public forcing a Christian to celebrate gay marriage?

        • Napoleon BonerFart

          Are you really confused? Do you object to my use of the term ‘celebrate’ to describe participating in trade to facilitate gay marriage? OK. I guess I could reword my point accordingly. But I really didn’t think it was confusing. Whatever.

          Forcing a Christian to trade with homosexuals in furtherance of a gay marriage? Freedom (at least for the people who count)! Better?

          • ASEF

            Let me help you out on the definitions in play here:

            Picking WHO to do business with based on their sexual orientation, gender, or race: “freedom”

            Picking WHERE to do business based on $$$: “discrimination”

            • Napoleon BonerFart

              So the where is fine, but the who isn’t? I keep getting confused about which liberties are bad and which are good.

              Freedom to discriminate against conservatives is good, right? But freedom to discriminate against sexual deviants is bad? I would hate to get it wrong.

              • ASEF

                1 – Kick you out of my restaurant for being an asshole? Seems acceptable.
                2 – Kick you out for not wearing shirt or shoes? Seems acceptable.
                3 – Kick you out because you’re speaking Spanish, which makes you a likely rapist or robber? Seems like a “me” problem.
                4 – Kick you out for holding hands with another guy? Seems dickish.
                5 – Kick you out because you’re literally taking a crap on the floor? Should have called the police.
                6 – Kick you out because you’re conservative? Never seen it happen, ever, unless you were also taking a crap on the floor or yelling obscenities at the top of your lungs – which, let’s face it, makes your political views a correlating factor, not a causative one.
                7 – Kick you out because you were having sex on one of the tables after hours? Rick? Is that you?
                8 – Kick you out because it’s your rehearsal dinner, but you’re gay? Seems like a “me” problem.
                9 – Kick you out because you are harassing my gay guests? Seems acceptable. Especially if they run better bar tabs and leave better tips.
                10 – Kick you out because you offend my religious sensibilities (such as leaving pathetic tips after your post-church Sunday meal, which is highly non-Christian and sends me into spritual spasms of anxiety that my soul might be at risk for celebrating both your gluttony and greed by serving you? Seems extreme.

                So many scenarios. How do we sift through them all?

                • Napoleon BonerFart

                  It depends on your goals and your abilities. If you kick out someone who happens to be gay, was it because of that, or because of something else? Is a gay conservative a victim or an oppressor?

                  My preferred course of action is to err on the side of liberty and let people choose their own actions freely without external coercion to force them to choose correctly.

  8. UGA85

    Thank you to all who wrote in support of NC’s law and stance on gender specific bathrooms. I certainly agree that this is the NCAA bringing politics into sports and demonstrating a degree of intolerance that is breathtaking. And, speaking of sports, why not bring men into women’s sports? If the NCAA is determined to make gender neutrality an issue, then why do women’s sports even exist? All the athletes should compete together, and let the best person win. That would be a natural extension of their current policies, if indeed physical/genetic gender no longer define anything of import.

    • ASEF

      The bathroom stuff gets 100% of the press, but it’s only about 10% of the law. Let’s say Asheville wants to pass a minimum wage hike. HB2 makes that illegal. Did your wife get paid $10 an hour to do a job a less experienced guy got $20? Can’t address it in state court anymore. HB2 forbids state courts from hearing ANY discrimination cases. Your black neighbor goes with his white fiance to get a marriage license, only to have the clerk tell them, “Hell, no?” Sorry, their interracial marriage offends his religion. HB2 at work.

      And you want consistency? Here’s one: there are literally NO instances of a transgender person or a person pretending to be transgender committing some sort of sexual assault in a bathroom.

      There are, however, hundreds of recorded cases of children being secuallt assaulted in churches.

      So, to be consistent, North Carolina should ban churches. Right?

      • @gatriguy

        Bingo. They want to have a way to supercede the Rule of Law.

      • mp

        Thank you! The bathroom issue was a canard to push through the other provisions. If all they cared about was transgender use of bathrooms, that is all the bill would have addressed.

      • UGA85

        Well, churches certainly are under fire, and some sort of ban would not surprise me at all in the future. That would not change my view that biology and genetics and life itself show us that male and female gender are foundational and important.

        • DawgPhan

          You are correct that they are foundational and important. That’s why we should let be use the bathroom that they identify with. They should be able to address one of their most basic and biological needs without fear and anxiety.

          • If you’re saying that in a free country that we should be able to decide which bathroom we can use without police involvement all I can ask is what about the children?

            You can’t just be out there all by yourself thinking and deciding things without the benefit of the police state and your state legislature! That’s just anarchy. Show us your papers!!

            You are free to do as we tell you and yes that includes where you can and can’t pee.

        • ASEF

          Here’s the deal UGA85: that’s an entirely fair view to have.

          Making your stand on HB2 is the worst possible location to make that stand. It’s a bad law. It was passed in the least democratic way possible. It’s 90% a bill that makes large-scale employers (like Art Pope, the man who owns our NC governor) much more powerful relative to the people those employers employ.

          The bathroom provision was a shiny distraction. Anyone who ever claimed to ever have housed a conservative political bent should be opposing this law.

          • @ASEF: If you distract from what you really want with a really shiny distraction: people will fall over that and forget the other. I agree 90 percent of this law is designed for Pope and his buddies. If more people would read it and see what it is—there would be more screaming about the bill, not the bathrooms. These are the same folks who scream bout lawyers and how evil they are: then when they need one, they want the biggest bad ass lawyer on the block. There are parts of this bill that will and should be thrown out in federal court. Yet, people scream about the bathroom part. It is a SHINY distraction. I still do not get why people who consider themselves true conservative are not up in arms about the other parts of the bill. Oh well rant over.

      • +100 – this is the part of the HB2 debate has been largely ignored and I think personally weakens the argument for the NC position.

        Assume the position that the NC legislature and governor did have an altruistic cause to ban transgender citizens from using the bathroom of their identity – why did the legislature also feel the need to nullify local municipalities for different anti-discrimination ordinances, minimum wage law, child labor and laws for city workers?

        So the city enacts an ordinance and the state steps in and says no – you can run your city how you want to run it. When the Feds tell the state no – the law you just passed is unconstitutional – you can’t do that – the state says the “Feds are overstepping.” Gotta love that type of hypocritical thinking.

      • roswell dawg

        Sorry ASEF, there are instances of predatory activity of this sort all over the country. Including right here in good old Roswell GA. The larger argument here is what we deem to be a broadly accepted set of moral guidelines for culture. You and I are apparently in different camps. Post modernists open the door to any and all behaviors because their fundamental assumption is that all individuals get to determine their ultimate truth. Truth is relative to individual perspective. So, if you believe you are a woman but you are physically a 50 year old man, then you are a man. And far be it from anyone to challenge that assumption. If you do, you are bigoted, hate-filled, a homophobe (insert invective). It is always interesting to me to note that post modernists say anyone can believe anything they want but are by and large the most vociferous critics of evangelicals who espouse their own beliefs, beliefs espoused WITHOUT hatred, just simple position statements, statements that are highly different than the post modernist. So actually post modernists show their philosophy to be bankrupt. What would be more intellectually honest would be for them to say I believe this and you are wrong, not I believe this and you can believe anything you want, and then openly criticize others who disagree with them. You can’t have it both ways. So to be clear, all the discussion around the provisions in the bill is at the end of the day smoke – smoke to cloak the real issue and that is…….. and I say this because I believe it and others are free to believe what they want……………… sexual identity is God ordained and God intends for us to live as men and women and gender confusion is a work of our shared enemy, Satan. He hates me and he hates you. And wants to destroy all of us and all that is good. I think God loves you and loves me and wants the best for us. I settle for less than what is best when I choose to live outside His plan for me.

        • Cojones

          I agree with your right to post any belief that you have, but all Christians don’t think that way and last I saw, you don’t have the right to impose your religious thought process on other Christians as well. Goody for you if that is a comforting religious thought to you about God and sexuality, but for many of us Christians, it doesn’t fit the bill for the remaining tenants of our religion.

          If Jesus were present in society today, you would condemn him for running around with all those guys and a known whore. Where and how did all those people sleep and go to the bathroom in their day? “Good” Christians want to know.

          By the way, this sort of thinking about Satan is what went into outlawing a plant that furnished twine for rope manufacturing; ropes required for sailing ships that brought the religious pilgrims here who were trying to escape a church domination of all that they did. The medicinal qualities of that plant were Satanized such that a plant created by your God was outlawed by man. “Devil weed” is now making a comeback from what man tried to put asunder and there are some Christians working toward that end.

          Want a cookie?

          • roswell dawg

            Who is imposing any thought process on anybody? You just proved my point again. I state my position and you say I am trying to ‘impose’ my views. How? And where? Even when I said, I believed what I did and you were free to believe what you do. Which is STILL what I believe. And as far as condemning Jesus, you just exercised a pretty hefty level of judgment, brother, on me. You just called me a Pharisee. I find myself more in the camp of Tim Keller, and the conclusions he reached in his book, Prodigal God, where he points out that if we were preaching the gospel as Jesus preached, we would be attracting more outcasts and misfits to our churches rather than those we are comfortable around. So there is a good chance that we are NOT preaching the gospel as He did. There, does that make me OK in your eyes?

            I have no idea what your last paragraph means even after reading it and re-reading it.

        • ASEF

          @Roswell: Sorry. That to me sounds like a collection of Platonic platitudes wrapped in Christian platitudes. Aristotle called them “glittering generalities”.

          First: Children have been assaulted in churches at vastly more significant rates than public bathrooms. Child predators s rarely prey on strangers. They usually insinuate themselves into positions of trust and power over the kids, which is why churches have had so many issues over the years – and have had to implement so many phsical plant changes and policies over the past 2 decades.

          Even the rare predators preying on strangers have largely moved online.

          And that’s all beside the point that almost all sexual predators are not transgender. It’s also beside the point that most sexual predators do not call attention to themselves by pretending to be transgender. The transgender part of this bill is a complete smoke-screen. A hypothetical wrapped in a delirium.

          Second: Post-modernism was at inception a system for poking holes in clearly irrational constructs. You know, like the operative assumptions behind eugenics, racial segregation, gender biases, and all manner of socially encoded, very non-Christian nonsense. Out of it spun some dyfunction, certainly – but you’re rather self-servingly only looking at half the equation.

          I’ll use evolution as my example. Growing up, I never understood the people who insisted that evolution proved there was no God. Those people to me seemed irrationally rooted in a “if it can’t be replicated in a lab, then it doesn’t exist” empiricism which precluded all manner of evident knowledge and experience. But the camp on the other side sounded just as ridiculous: “Because I believe in God I cannot acknowledge scientific evidence about the age of the Earth.” Those people to me seemed irrationally rooted in a “if I believe it, then it’s true because I believe it” theory of values which precluded obvious physical evidence. Yes, some people out there refuse to believe in value systems (and that predates post-modernism, by the way). And yes, some people out there refuse to acknowledge scientific evidence if it creates conflict in their value system (and that pre-dates post-modernism as well).

          The rest of us are over here trying to assimilate an ever-growing body of empirical research into a humane (and in my case, Christian) moral system. I have family members who are gay. I have friends who are gay. They attend church. They do good works. They are happy with themselves. They are good people trying to be themselves in a world where their simple existence creates conflict in some people’s value systems – and those people hate them for it. I don’t have to deal with that non-Christian hate directly, but I will stand against it at every opportunity I see. I see that as a Christian obligation.

          • roswell dawg

            Since when did I say I hate gay people? Where did I say that? I have gay family members too. Cousins and nieces. Guess what? I don’t hate them. I don’t embrace their lifestyle as being what they are created for, though. But that doesn’t equate to hate. Unless you want to mislabel disagreement as hate. Which is what a lot of people do. “You are a homophobe because you don’t accept my lifestyle”. Is that what you consider me? A homophobe? Wow……….

            • ASEF

              Slow down there, Roswell. I never accused you of hating gay people. I never even alluded to something along those lines. I explained why I think the bill is bad law wrapped in rhetorical nonsense, and I explained why my Christianity compels me to speak up about it. I see the hate that my gay friends and family deal with. I’d have to be wilffully blind not to.

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        I thought you were a fan of the supremacy clause. Is it just when the federal government imposes its will on states and municipalities that you’re a fan, but not when states impose their will on municipalities? Or is it just when you agree with the impositions?

        Also, the legislature has already amended the law to restore the right to sue for discrimination in state court. So no need to get worked up about that.

        Also, you should be careful about using absolute statements like “literally NO instances.” There are instances.

        http://linkis.com/www.lifesitenews.com/12D80
        http://www.dailywire.com/news/4844/transgender-advocates-say-men-dressed-women-will-amanda-prestigiacomo
        http://www.dailywire.com/news/4522/man-drag-caught-macys-womens-restroom-secretly-amanda-prestigiacomo

      • Will (The Other One)

        Exactly this: the “cities can’t pass higher minimum wage laws than the state” is a really odd example of “local government is best” conservatism.

  9. @gatriguy

    Lost is this whole f’ing mess is another example of why the GOP is dying: they’re the party of local control….until a local government (Charlotte) passes an ordinance that offends their Bible beating sensibilities. Then they have no problem with executive/gubernatorial overreach.

    You’re either down for live and let live classical libertarianism, or you’re not. Ultimately, despite what they say, they have no problem with big government micromanaging everyone’s lives….as long as said government is Targeting (hey-oh!), the lifestyles/choices they don’t approve.

    • UGA85

      I am certainly conservative and a fan of limited government. But “live and let live” has its limits. Would you justify the holocaust, for example, by not wanting to interfere with Hitler’s plans? How about our laws that protect children and the innocent? Do away with those and allow predators “live and let live”?

      • @gatriguy

        Executing people isn’t exactly “letting live”, isn’t? That argument collapses in itself.

        • UGA85

          Stealing, robbing, killing, whatever, can be seen as “live and let live” by those committing the act. My point is that we make moral judgments all the time about right and wrong and what can or cannot be tolerated in society.

      • Navin Johnson

        Ok, got it. Trans = predator. Just like gay = predator. Same weapon, new war. The gay rights battles were very recent — we can all remember when these same scare tactics were trotted out before.
        Perverts are perverts. Predators are predators. Trans does not equal predator or pervert, just like gay does not equal predator or pervert.

        In terms that should sound very familiar and comfortable to anti-gun-regulation, let’s enforce the laws that are on the books.

    • Napoleon BonerFart

      Hardly anyone is a classical liberal. Both right and left want the government to micromanage citizens’ lives. They just care about different things.

      • @Napoleon: And there in lies the part that sends me up the wall. If both would recognize, they are being total hypocrites in these cases, at least it would be honest. All I see if the same old statement, my daughter used to make when my wife and I would get on to her about something. She would say ” Oh that is so different and it does not apply to me”. She was 7. That would make her a great politician today. Sorry for the ramble, but the hypocritical part of it sends me up the wall.

  10. buddyblog

    The NCAA’s left-wing is showing.

  11. Hogbody Spradlin

    So. How many people have changed their minds because of the arguments here?

    • DawgPhan

      well i was right when I got here….sooo

    • Cojones

      What arguments? Do you mean the argument of whether the NCAA has the right and moral cudgel to take economically important sports venues out of NC where it affects college athletes and forces other visitors to not use the bathroom of their gender identity because they are, in the eyes of the politically religious, also automatically included as sexual pariahs? That argument? Looks like the NCAA is enforcing my part of that argument so I got nothing to add.

      If any of you give a shit, wait for a while and the NCAA will do some other things that affect the economy of any state that considers following NCs social-paranoid legislation instigated by the religious political right. Just as they did in Indiana where their headquarters are located.

      • I'm right, you're wrong

        Even the most liberal of scientists admit there is a difference between men and women and that you are BORN one or the other. Gender identification is complete and utter bullshit and you are total pussy for espousing this fairy tale.
        http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2015/08/scientists-uncover-a-difference-between-the-sexes.html

        • roswell dawg

          Wow that is a fascinating article. Thanks for posting it.

        • TerryGrad2016

          Clap, clap, clap. So even science disproves this whole bullshit argument. Watch out, though, I’m not sure what name they have come up with to bash you and your bigoted science. I’m sure the Lexicon will have a definition shortly…

        • DawgPhan

          So what happens when a person’s brain works in a manner that is different than their physiological genitals?

          They have a molecular functioning male brain and a female reproductive organs, which are they?

          Is it the molecular functions of the brain that define which bathroom they just use outside of Charlotte?

          • I'm right, you're wrong

            No, it’s pretty simple. If you’re born with a dick, use the men’s room. If you’re born with a pussy, use the women’s room. No one gives a fuck about the little boy or girl you think you have living inside of you so stop trying to be what you are literally, scientifically defined, not to be.

  12. 92 grad

    Oh my. My faith in society and humanity continues to decline. People suck. We simply have too many laws, too many law makers that think we need more laws, and too many people that think anyone in our federal government can do anything good for us (as in all of us nationwide). We just need to stop, go through the laws and throw out 80% of them and enforce the ones that make sense.

  13. I don’t understand the desire to punish people for not believing the way you believe (NCAA, Kaepernick, et al). Economic sanctions to strong arm people into doing what you want them to do is “within your rights,” but it just reeks of oppression. Regardless of my opinion on transgender issues, I think NC overstepped. They went looking for a fight, and they got one. I hope other states take notice and not go looking for a fight. Just live and let live.

    • It’s just choice. It’s no different than what happened to South Africa in the 1980’s. You can do what you want, but don’t think the rest of the world will give you a pass. They won’t and shouldn’t.

      Should the US and UN and China be on North Korea’s ass or just let them do whatever?

      I think we should take the bastard out.

      • Normaltown Mike

        which bastard?

      • Mad Mike

        They won’t though. Governments need bogeymen to keep the unwashed masses in line. Whether it’s arguing over crap like this, the specter of terrorism, communism, or the tribe across the river leaders know having your people hate someone else keeps the heat off of you. Balkanization is the current term I believe.

        • Normaltown Mike

          “They won’t though. Governments need bogeymen to keep the unwashed masses in line. ”

          pfft, government? It’s the pentaverate that’s behind it all.

        • The problem is the Chinese. They don’t want millions of Koreans fleeing north should Pyongyang fall. I can’t really blame them for that, but they give the DPRK cover. The question is at what point do the Chinese say that he’s no longer worth it?

          Then the problem becomes who does the toppling and who has to clean up the mess? The Chinese are no more interested in us being north of the 38th parallel than we are interested in them being ON the 38th parallel.

          Sticky problem with no easy answers. And then you have dumb ones like encouraging nuclear proliferation in the region. Now that’s a real brilliant idea from the GOP nominee.

          For every problem there is a simple solution that is plain wrong.

  14. watcher16

    Does everyone not realize that this HB 2 is about more than just bathrooms?! There are many other discriminatory provisions but everyone thinks its only about a man walking into a woman’s bathroom. How many times did you worry about a some creepy man walking into a woman’s bathroom before this bill? Now all of a sudden everyone is up in arms. I think its funny now as I’ve seen people complain as female-to-male TG’s that look like men with beards and everything are walking into female bathrooms since they were born female and people want to try and say they can’t come in. Decide what you want America

  15. SouthernYank

    Progressives are all talk when it doesn’t affect them. But when Suzy calls home freshman (oh, sorry, freshperson) year and says my roommate has a penis, well, then there will be a different perspective.

    • SouthernYank

      This is the issue where Dems/Libs jumped the shark. People know it’s complete and utter lunacy.

    • SouthernYank

      And remember, Dems are the party of science. Listen to them, they’ll tell you it’s so.

      • The GOP nominated a candidate for high office who said that women can prevent a pregnancy during rape. Any more need to be said on this subject?

        • Napoleon BonerFart

          And the Dems elected a man to high office who worries that Guam will capsize. Any more need to be said?

          • I didn’t start this argument. If I said dems are smart at science, or the opposite, your comment would be well taken. That’s essentially what I was responded to. We should acknowledge that both sides have complete idiots in office.

    • SouthernYank

      And today I am identifying as a 6’4″ Chinese man. If you call me white, I’m suing you.

    • Conservatives are all talk about freedom and liberty etc unless it is a freedom or liberty that don’t happen to like. Then they talk about how we need to get back to “Making America Great Again” but restricting some freedom and liberty.

      • SouthernYank

        The freedom and liberty for a dude to use a woman’s bathroom, because he identifies as a woman? What about the freedom and liberty of a woman to not have a man in her bathroom? How about that?

        The most absurd aspect of this is that a fringe minority – which has mental health issues of absurd proportions – is deemed to have more freedom and liberty than the rest of us. It’s the definition of lunacy.

        • Really Southern Yank – this the only time? Transgender issues? Seems to me that conservatives wanted to restrict marriage laws too. They were for privacy laws too until they weren’t.

          They are for free speech until they don’t like the speech or the method of free speech.

          It cuts both ways

        • Cojones

          SY, how can you think that a fake crossdresser will now dare to attack women in their bathroom or get some satisfaction out of watching them freshen up or watch their feet under the stalls? They can do that any time and get arrested and punished for it. If they are trans-gender, they could care less about watching women’s fully-dressed bodies. Let me know when women begin exposing themselves in their own bathroom. The tranny (s) that I know wouldn’t think of such a thing and get embarrassed when such a thing is mentioned. If a sexual deviate wishes to goggle fully clothed women in a bathroom while disguised, he is an idiot of the world. He can watch them come out and ogle them without going inside.

          Last women’s bathroom I went into (accidentally) had privacy stalls and air fresheners in the stalls. A lady entered while I was washing my hands and was laughing while trying to tell me I was in the wrong restroom. I complained to management that no air fresheners were in the men’s bathroom. Got a quizzical look just before departing.

          • SouthernYank

            “They can do that any time and get arrested and punished for it.”

            Hey, how about you advertising you’re bad at this?

            And you seem to miss the point. It’s not just about bathrooms – the legal implications of this go much farther. See my Suzy at college example.

            What’s most amazing about this is that these are people with obvious, serious mental health issues. But we can’t say that. That would be wrong. And anyway, we’ve got a surgery for that…..

            It’s so f’d up that it’s unbelievable. And is shows how far off the reservation the Dems are.

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        Ditto for liberals. Freedom of religion is fine unless your religion disapproves of homosexuals. Then, you must worship the state.

        • Why yes Napoleon – it is the “liberals” in Newton County who have decided to place a moratorium on building house of religious worship because a non Judeo/Christian group wants to build in their County. Conservatives love freedom of religion as long it is the “right” religion.

          • Napoleon BonerFart

            Sure. Conservatives worship as Christians and Jews. Liberals worship the state. Everyone else is wrong.

            • Just to be clear Napoleon, if you are Christian or Jewish then you have freedom of religion. Any other religion is wrong and doesn’t deserve protection. Way to live the conservative stereotype.

            • A large percentage of Republicans voters think that Islam should be criminalized. A much larger percentage believe that than you can find are communist atheists. I’m sure there’s a couple out there but its not like the Democratic Party is preaching atheism and/or getting rid of the free market to get votes.

              Direct and clear appeals to fear and hate is why the GOP nominee is who he is. There is an audience for it. Not so much for the lefty bogeymen you hear about in theory but don’t actually seem to exist.

              • Napoleon BonerFart

                Free market? Where is this free market the left is committed to? All I hear from the liberal candidates are about how much we should get rid of it. Free college. Free healthcare. $15 minimum wage, for starters. The only time I hear about religion from the left is to either accuse the religious of being stupid and/or evil, or to posit that Jesus was a communist.

  16. I'm right, you're wrong

    If the NCAA doesn’t think there’s a difference between men and women, then let them only allow unisex basketball and let’s see how much money that makes.

  17. AusDawg85

    Excuse me, has anyone seen GTP around here? I’ve evidently walked into the wrong restroom.

  18. JCDAWG83

    Why are so many people so insistent on letting men into women’s bathrooms? Who becomes the final arbiter over what man actually “identifies” (total psycho babble crap in my opinion) as a woman? What if I simply want to follow a hot girl into the restroom and I declare to anyone that tries to stop me that I “identify” as a lesbian woman?

    • Napoleon BonerFart

      Then you’re good. Even the proponents of the NC bill acknowledge that there’s no enforcement provisions in it and no punishments laid out. So, even though it’s illegal for a man to go into a woman’s bathroom, the worst that can happen to him is that he’s expelled from the bathroom.

  19. CB

    As long as trannies (is that the correct plurality?) can use whatever restroom they want then we can all rest easy. The real question is what to pay the official pants checker as long as this law stands. Gotta make sure you’ve got the right equipment before enter this WC.

  20. Russ

    Dammit! I’m still outraged about Nicholls, I don’t have the bandwidth to be outraged about where someone pees!

  21. Squatch

    There is so much stupid in this thread.

    If the Charlotte City Council hadn’t tried to push it’s own LGBT discrimination laws (outside of their authority BTW) none of this would’ve happened. HB2 was a shoddy attempt to remedy this….but what do you expect when we start regulating who can go to what bathroom. Also, if you think having individual municipalities come up with their own discrimination and minimum wage laws – I can assure you this would not work out well for anyone.

    The impact to statewide employment laws has been fixed. Please don’t tell me anyone here thinks that the “secret” intent was to eliminate all employment laws in NC…..

    Weird how this comes to a head 60 days prior to an election in a battleground state….

    100 years from now they’ll write about the period of time when the US went broke while fighting wars all over the world – and cheered for either the most corrupt politician in history or a reality TV rodeo clown – but the lemmings were successfully manipulated by their political handlers into choosing sides based on what bathroom they should be allowed to go to.

    • 81Dog

      indeed. With all the serious issues facing this country, this is the kind of stupid crap we should be focused upon? The virtue signalers are running the asylum.

    • Is Nixon running for President from the grave? Because he is the most corrupt – hands down not even close.

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        Nixon participated in a cover-up, right? Wasn’t it just one? Hillary’s got him beat there. And did Nixon run any pay to play schemes like Hillary’s?

        • Don in Mar-a-Lago

        • Nixon and his campaign tried to fix an election that he was already going to win. They skirted campaign finance laws. Organized a break-in of the Democratic Party headquarters. They planted false stories about other potential candidates that disparaged the mental health of a candidates wife.

          Then they covered it up and tried to influence the investigation of these acts. 69 members of his staff were charged with a crime and 48 were found guilty. Most of them spent time in jail.

          Nixon resigned to prevent Congress from impeaching him and Gerald Ford pardoned Nixon to prevent the former President from being indicted on criminal charges.

          So yeah it was just a single cover-up but as cover ups go it was the Mother of all them. In fact, it was so big every single scandal since them adopts the nomenclature of Nixon’s cover up.

          Nixon was way more corrupt than HRC. He was the most corrupt ever but you can keep up your delusions if it makes you feel better.

          • Napoleon BonerFart

            Nixon’s greatest crime was that he was born too early and had a sense of shame. In the 21st century, he would have simply denied, denied, denied and changed his story several times. With a good PR guy, he could have come out smelling like a Clinton.

            • Really Nixon had sense of shame?

              Read some history – Checkers, “I am not a crook”, the Saturday Night Massacre.

              The guy was denying he was a corrupt politician from 1952 until 1974 when he had to resign because he faced impeachment.

              I am now thinking BonerFart is not handle but an apt description of your intellectual ability.

              • Napoleon BonerFart

                Sure, Nixon had a sense of shame. He resigned rather than be impeached, didn’t he? Do you think Clinton would have done that? Actually, you don’t have to wonder. He was impeached and remained defiant throughout.

                I doubt my intellectual capacity is lacking, since I can appreciate the delicious irony of someone disparaging me for failing to hold the Clintons up as paragons of virtue.

                • Nixon resigned in a brokered deal that came with the pardon so he wouldn’t have to go to jail unlike those who worked for him. Again – facts that you don’t seem to like to use but then make claims about how smart you are.

                  Exactly where did I praise the paragons of virtue Bill and Hiliary Clinton? You probably can’t find it because all I have done is point out that Nixon is by far the most corrupt candidate. Thank you for proving my point that you are so dumb.

  22. 81Dog

    Is this really the biggest issue in America today? Where did all the gender whatever people go to the bathroom before the Charlotte law? I was blissfully unaware that people were being denied discreet entry into the bathrooms of their choice/need prior to this legislative foray into the brave new world of fundamental transformation. This possibly unnecessary finger to the eye of regular, errr, deplorable America got just the response it was meant to provoke: a pushback.

    The whole thing is stupid. Nobody was checking genitals before the original stupid city ordinance. Go to the bathroom, don’t make an issue out of it, live your life. But quit throwing bombs and expecting everyone to meekly praise your handiwork. If the NCAA wants to avoid North Carolina, who cares? It’s their cartel. Let them play where they want. If the people in North Carolina don’t like the bathroom law, they can vote for someone who will overturn it. It’s called representative democracy, right?

    • Slaw Dawg

      81Dog: jeez, finally someone here I can agree with. I live in a (too) liberal northern state, drive up and down the Eastern interstates a number of times per year, have used hundreds of bathrooms in over 30 states, and not once has a woman walked in and flashed anything. No matter how long I wait or how pleasantly I ogle them in the parking lot.

      • 81Dog

        you should have been in the Superdome mens room I was in back on January 1, 1982. Fortified by one of those gallon sized Superdome beers, I sped down the concourse at halftime, hoping to hit the mens room and return before the second half kickoff. I dimly noticed the mile long lines outside the ladies room, pulled a Kramer-like burst into the mens room to find……a bunch of women outside the stalls to my left, a bunch of guys lined up for the urinals on my right. The confused look my face must have displayed was noticed by one of the women, a fortyish (but nice looking) lady who calmly said to me, “Honey, if you think I’m standin’ in that line out there for the ladies room, you better think again.” The women in line for the stalls all had their backs to the urinals. The men seemed indifferent to their present. Bladders were emptied. The Republic did not crumble. It seems there is a lesson here for the nattering tolerance police, namely that left to our own devices, 99.9% of us just mind our own business without the need for nanny state supervision, but I could be wrong.

        Honesty compels me to admit none of the women were showing any of the proverbial goods. Mostly, it was pretty damn funny (although the way the game ultimately ended, sadly, was not).

  23. Mr. T

    Funny, but since State Funds are remitted to the NCAA, it would be quite the shock to see Legislatures across the vast Republican dominated Nation cut them off like strings from a skirt.
    Tax exempt is the NCAA & NFL? Not for much longer, the Silent Majority is about to deliver a VAST SMACKDOWN to all this idiocy.

    • wow, thanks WarPlainsEagle, this link helps me realize the that this whole blogeshere is a strange and dangerous place. Really, I do appreciate the direct source material. This is not about what most of us are talking about. This law is about preemption. Clearly ,Charlotte tried to impose their own ordinances regarding vendors requirements , pay rates and gender identification and the State Legislature made it clear to them they are subject matter areas that are controlled by State not local law. The NC legislature and Governor are not the guys who started this, the City of Charlotte did . How did they become the bad guys for saying that despite the City fathers of Charlotte saying they do , little girls don’t have to go to the bathroom with adult males. For those who are interested the female head of ACLU in Atlanta recently quit because despite her employer’s position that everyone pees anywhere ,she after having several large cross dressing males walking into the women’s bathroom she and her young daughters were occupying….. she informed her boss that she could no longer support this absurd piece of social engineering and unless the ACLU changed its position she was leaving. They didn’t… she did..

  24. Macallanlover

    Leftist extremists have every much the right to express radical opinions as do the radical right extremists, as we see often on this blog when social issues are discussed. Regardless of how shortsighted, illogical, and destructive as I find them, nothing will ever change this as long as we are governed by this “every thing goes until you speak against what I believe” approach. The bullying by the Federal government has been in place for some time but is becoming increasingly intolerable as they stretch their powers beyond anything envisioned before our generation. Private businesses have a right to locate wherever they choose, but organizations like the NCAA which conducts business with schools that receive federal money should not be allowed to discriminate against positions they do not agree with. Freedom of speech and taking positions against the leftist agenda is every bit as protected as the attacks on America’s culture and lifestyle, but you would never know it listening to the radical left. The most violence occurs when a leftist protest occurs, and it is usually because they do not feel the other side has a right to be heard. Very little, to no, tolerance for differing opinions.

    Perhaps it is an inevitable by-product of having just two dominant parties that we have become hopelessly divided due to the influence of the extreme portions of each party. Having 3-4 viable parties would require a move to the middle and more moderate, negotiated positions that would allow people to coexist. Currently we move further apart as outrageous positions are thrust down the other side’s throat. We are seriously fractured as a nation, and there is no easy path to divorce. I don’t think America was ever perfect, but we were pretty damned great for a while, but we will not regain that level of prosperity, security, or positive influence. Sad, didn’t have to be that way and I blame my generation mostly, but anyone over age 35 is now accountable and has to share the responsibility for what happens from here.

    The idea of men not being free to enter showers, locker rooms, and bathrooms of their choice even being challenged is concerning to me, seems a no-brainer, but if we stumble over something this small it is no surprise that we as a society are failing badly. Who sees your tee tee isn’t that big of a deal, but the force feeding of something repulsive under the name of political correctness, and then using my own tax money as the gun to my head is something we will just have to see as to how it plays out. NC isn’t the only state resisting this strong armed tactic, just the only one where the governor and legislature had the balls to take a stand. Can the NCAA get anything right?

    • Don in Mar-a-Lago

      “I don’t think America was ever perfect, but we were pretty damned great for a while, but we will not regain that level of prosperity, security, or positive influence. Sad,”

      I think somebody needs to buy a hat.

    • ASEF

      Unfortunately, multiple parties tend to give smaller, more extreme parties more power, as moderate parties must grant them out-sized leverage in order to achieve a majority.

      I’m kind of sad that you see NC’s governor as some sort of hero here. He passed a law hoping that the right to discriminate against gay people would elevate his base turn-out and secure himself a second term. It’s George Wallace all over again. I thought you hated Alabama?

      • Macallanlover

        You misread me totally, I don’t see the Governor as a hero at all. He just used common sense and acted rationally. And it has ZERO to do with gay people, just the 1/10 of 1/10 who are fucked up. His actions reflect the feelings of the citizens, again just doing his job. Charlotte was the problem here, not Raleigh, and driven by those who think they can impose their will on others.

        I don’t need the NC Governor, or the ACLU to help me know what is right here. I am no internet tough guy, but if I find you, or another male entering a locker room or shower that my wife, daughter, or granddaughter is dressing, or bathing in, I will kick your ass and take my chances with 12 of my peers on a jury. Hide behind PC all you want, there is no logic to this movement, just a blurring of the lines of what was clear before the leftists tried to tie this to other groups. Folks defending this are digging desperately for some iota of logic which simply isn’t there.

        And we will just have to disagree about why the crazies at both ends of the spectrum have divided the country with a winner take all approach. Multiple parties would require the extremists to modify their positions to get votes necessary to pass legislation which would ultimately moderate the positions to the middle which would make them more acceptable. Before parties were able to dictate from the top, legislators voted the feelings of their constituencies, not the party leadership, which made things less contentious.

        • ASEF

          Are you seriously calling the forfeiture of literally billions of dollars as a solution to the thought of 0.3 percent of the population using a stall in a public bathroom “rational”?

          I call that bad government and cynical politics.

  25. Turd Ferguson

    All to coddle some folks with gender dysphoria. This fucking country.

  26. mp

    All to placate some homophobes. This fucking country.

    • Turd Ferguson

      Gender dysphoria is an actual mental illness. Homophobia is not a thing. It’s a word that bleeding heart liberals like yourself made up. Literally no one is afraid of homosexuality, except closeted gays.

      • Cojones

        Homophobia has been in my dictionary since before the 80s. And I don’t think that “liberals” invented it. It was invented by sailors after they got off the sailing ships of old.

      • ASEF

        Fine. What’s your word for, “Hey, let’s go get some baseball bats and beat some queers tonight”? Or: “You’re a faggot.” Or: “God hates fags, and that’s why He knocked down the World Trade Towers.” Or: “Let’s tie him to this fence post and beat him to death.” Or: “No child of mine is gay. Get out and never come back.”

        I could give you about a million other examples. Can we find a term for that category? Or are we going to refuse to acknowledge it as a category and deal with each case individually?

        • Scott

          Yep. Just like with racism, people saying “this is a made up thing that doesn’t exist” does not actually mean that the thing doesn’t exist. One of the hardest things to do when it comes to positive social change is convincing the people who are not being discriminated against (and, to be fair, may not be discriminatory in their own personal life) that the discrimination actually exists and needs to be addressed. That part of the change is always the ugliest (for example, this comment section).

        • Napoleon BonerFart

          Not to mention, “I don’t want my labor conscripted to support activities I disagree with,” or, “since gay men are more likely to be HIV positive, they shouldn’t donate blood,” or, “absolute truth can be identified using facts and logic and has nothing to do with one’s identity as a victimized minority.” I mean, all of those statements are just examples of the homophobia that must be quashed in this country.

        • Turd Ferguson

          Do you really not understand the many differences between hatred, disgust, and fear? We have different names for these mental states for good reason — i.e., because they’re different.

          It’s a defense mechanism to ascribe irrational fear to anyone who disagrees with you, or happens to have different values. People should stop doing this.

      • Coach Bobby Finstock

        Literally no one. Except some people.

        • Turd Ferguson

          No. Literally no one. But there are some people who are too fucking stupid to recognize the difference between “disagrees with” and “is afraid of.” Maybe you’re one of these people.

  27. Normaltown Mike

    I, for one, am afraid of homosaxuality

    • WarD Eagle

      I know this is in good fun and I’m embarrassing myself to defend him, but Kenny G is a monster among working musicians who admire him for his incredible skills AND for his ability to make major $$$$ selling dreck. If you’re ever somewhere and get the chance to hear him, he’s worth it.

  28. Debby Balcer

    NCAA boycotts work so well in changing state laws. The one they did against SC changed things immediately. ( Sarcasm font) If they had their own backyard cleaned up they could focus on other issues this is their way of distracting us from what they are not doing.

  29. Scott

    163 comments….hahahahahahahaha.

    Surely you guys solved all of this by now, right? We’ve all reached a consensus, yes?

  30. Will (The Other One)

    Meanwhile, under all our noses, there’s been a unisex bathroom right on UGA’s campus since at least 1997 (in the History building. It was far cleaner than any men’s room on north campus.)

    • Them History guys probably figured if non gender specific bathrooms were good enough for several thousand years of civilization, it wouldn’t bring down UGA either. (Per Time Magazine May 16, 2016: “The first regulation requiring separate toilet facilities [in the US] for men and women was passed in 1887.” In Massachusetts no less.)

      • Napoleon BonerFart

        Right. For millions of years, there have been multiple stalled, public bathrooms that weren’t sex specific. And everything was great. It’s not like they waited to start regulating public toilets until indoor plumbing and public sewers made them more common, was it?

    • dubyadee

      And upstairs in the law library annex–the double secret sh***er. And it always had a Red & Black on the sink.

  31. Dawgpa

    So wait the NCAA plays games in China and Cuba but refuses to play in NC. Wow!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s