Sexual predators now allowed to haunt women's bathrooms in NH, MA

[Don Corleone]

It never ends.
Because some folks who want to pretend to be women or pretend to be men get their feelings hurt when somebody points out, no, sorry... if you have a penis, you go in the men's room, Jillian and Allison will meet strange men in public women's washrooms.

Is it just me, or are we really jumping the shark as a society these days. Obama bows to the Saudi King in a room full of foreign dignitaries, we allow pirates to seize our crews because it's uncivilized to defend yourself... and now this...

Am I am the only one who forsees child molestors all of a sudden developing "transgender issues" so they can lurk in womens' rooms?

[Strike For The South]

1. Calm down
2. Link?

[InsaneApache]

1. Calm down
2. Link?

Aye mate, watch that blood pressure.

[KarlXII]

bows to the Saudi King in a room full of foreign dignitaries, we allow pirates to seize our crews because it's uncivilized to defend yourself... and now this...

Jeez, talk about going off on a completely unrelated tangent. It's always been my understanding that bowing to a King or Queen was simple courtesy and custom.

As to the pirates, well, I've addressed that point in the right thread.

[Meneldil]

Wow Don, I find you to usually be a quite enjoyable poster, even when I strongly disagree with you, but like, wow... These two topics you just opened are kind of disturbing.

1 - Obama has to respect the tradition, whether it is with the Queen of Britain (England?) or with the King of Saudi Arabia. Remember the outrage in UK when Obama's wife touched the Queen? I'm pretty sure the POTUS doesn't want to cause something like that in the arab world.

2 - The pirate thingy. Well, do you like plan to blow up Somalia? These people are pirating because they don't have anything else to do. I'm not saying you should not defend your sailors, as you obviously should, but behaving like the pirates are flesh-eating barbarians isn't going to lead you anywhere.

3 - Are you assimilating transexuals to sexual predators?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

3 - Are you assimilating transexuals to sexual predators?

Did he say that? Please reread the OP before presuming.

[Meneldil]

Item 1: In the 208 year history of our Constitutional republic, no president has ever bowed to anyone. This was actually an issue in the 90s when then President Clinton made a gesture remotely resembling a bow to the Emperor of Japan.

Well, do you agree that the POTUS should respect the protocol? Like, not touching the Queen of England and what not? If you do, then, don't you think he has to bow to the King of Saudi Arabia as well?

Now mind you, I think Saudi Arabia is a shame of a country, and that his king should be kicked in the groin. But you can't really have double standards: bow to the Pope (who is just as much of an idiot) and not bow to the King of S.A.

Item 2: Did I say blow up Somalia? I said do SOMETHING. ANYTHING. I never said anything about blowing up Somalia, I just said our "Vote Present" president is going to have to start earning the title one of these days.

Fair enough. Now I'm not aware of the latest developements, but the situation isn't nearly as one sided as you make it to appear in the other thread. These people are islamic terrorist, they're doing that for a living. You might kill these ones, but other ones will come, as long as piratery is the best way to earn one's life.
And well, as far as I know, most trading ports prohibit armed personal. I kind of think it is not a bad thing, but were free to disagree.

Item 3: No, nor did I remotely say anything of the sort. But can YOU tell the difference between a legitimately transgendered man who feels they belong in the ladies room and a sexual predator that wants to hang out in there?

Okay, I blame either a poorly written title or my broken understanding of English. No, I could probably not make a difference. Hell, I can't tell the difference between a transgendered person and a "normal" one most of the time.
Now I still don't see the issue. Even though I find transsexualism to be weird as hell, it seems kind of a no-brainer to me that transgendered persons should be allowed into the bathroom that fits their sexual orientation.
Sexual predators could enter in women's bathroom before that, and they will continue to do it after that.

A bow to a king IS a show of political submission.

I call double-standard. The King of SA is also in a way a religious leader (Custodian of the Two Mosques is part of his title). Why would Bush's bow to the Pope be alright while Obama's bow to the other dude would not? Is separation of the State and of the Church a characteristic of the US?

Now, whatever, do you think that Obama should not respect the protocol when dealing with any other foreign leader? Should he hug and pat the Queen? Should he high-five the Pope and the King of Saudi Arabia?

If you have no respect for your country, that's your right.

Save me the condescending tone. I loathe monarchy, I loathe Saudi Arabia, just as much as you do. I'm probably one of the most radical republicans of that forum. I can't help but have a good laugh when british tabloids go crazy because someone dared to touch the Queen.

However, international relations are ruled by protocol and tradition. If the tradition is to bow in front of the King of some country, well, the POTUS has two choices:
1 - Bow and be done with it, even if it leaves a bad taste in his mouth
2 - Don't bow and cause outrage, or piss off one of his allies.

[Don Corleone]

Wow Don, I find you to usually be a quite enjoyable poster, even when I strongly disagree with you, but like, wow... These two topics you just opened are kind of disturbing.

1 - Obama has to respect the tradition, whether it is with the Queen of Britain (England?) or with the King of Saudi Arabia. Remember the outrage in UK when Obama's wife touched the Queen? I'm pretty sure the POTUS doesn't want to cause something like that in the arab world.

2 - The pirate thingy. Well, do you like plan to blow up Somalia? These people are pirating because they don't have anything else to do. I'm not saying you should not defend your sailors, as you obviously should, but behaving like the pirates are flesh-eating barbarians isn't going to lead you anywhere.

3 - Are you assimilating transexuals to sexual predators?

Item 1: In the 208 year history of our Constitutional republic, no president has ever bowed to anyone. This was actually an issue in the 90s when then President Clinton made a gesture remotely resembling a bow to the Emperor of Japan.

Item 2: Did I say blow up Somalia? I said do SOMETHING. ANYTHING. I never said anything about blowing up Somalia, I just said our "Vote Present" president is going to have to start earning the title one of these days.

Item 3: No, nor did I remotely say anything of the sort. But can YOU tell the difference between a legitimately transgendered man who feels they belong in the ladies room and a sexual predator that wants to hang out in there?

[KarlXII]

Item 1: In the 208 year history of our Constitutional republic, no president has ever bowed to anyone. This was actually an issue in the 90s when then President Clinton made a gesture remotely resembling a bow to the Emperor of Japan.

OH NO HE BOWED OUT OF COURTESY BEHEAD THAT TRAITOR MUSLIM COWARD OSAMA BIN OBAMA. He's not submitting America to Saudi rule, he's being courteous. Did you expect him to "terrorist fist bump" the King?

If I ever met a King or Queen in my life, I would bow out of courtesy.

[Strike For The South]

Don, there is always risk in public restrooms. ESP for small kids. I remember having to run into the bathroom once to protect my brother from some creepy old guy. There is always inherent risk my friend. Just be wary.

I would bow to the Saudi king to. Respect

[Crazed Rabbit]

I would bow to the Saudi king to. Respect

No American official should show any such deference to royalty, anywhere.

CR

[Tribesman]

No American official should show any such deference to royalty, anywhere.

Yet the father of your nation said such actions cannot be negleted when they are due .
If you want officials that don't follow simple protocol then make sure you only elect Quakers

Yeah, basically. Our head of state bowing to a foreign leader is pretty bad form.

Yeah basically 10 of your heads of state have bowed to one current head of state let alone the hundreds of times they did it with other heads of states ,so its not bad form its just normal .....unless of course Obama does the samething because thats comletely different as its errrrr....Obama doing it .

Funny topic though Don . So tell me , before this really absolutely terrible earthshattering ruling that allows sexual predators to pretend by putting on a dress so they can walk into a womans restroom what was to stop a sexual predator putting on a dress and walking into a womans restroom ?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Not a snapshot of Bush dozing off standing. He is actually bowing. Condi* Rice kissed the pope's ring as well.

*Condi, because I don't remember how to spell condolleaza(?)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Edit: sorry, my mistake. C. Rice is looking on approvingly. It is Nancy Pelosi who is doing the actual kissing of the pope's ring.

[Tribesman]

Unnecessary and potentially offensive joke removed. SF

[KarlXII]

Obama bows to SHAKE THE KINGS HAND? Kill him.

[Don Corleone]

Obama bows to SHAKE THE KINGS HAND? Kill him.

Take a look at the photograph. He's not bowing to shake anybody's hand. He's hunching over, in a show of submission.

[KarlXII]

Take a look at the photograph. He's not bowing to shake anybody's hand. He's hunching over, in a show of submission.

I'm attributing this to bad eyesight. Pause around 0:04. You can clearly see him putting his hand out for the shake, which is accepted.

[KarlXII]

Oh, and Don, are you a mind reader? You seem to know, almost perfectly, that Obama's intention was to surrender the United States to Osama bin Ladin, or whatever that drug lord's name is.

[InsaneApache]

I actually knew a guy who wanted to be a woman. His name was Graham Sandra and he had three kids. He seemed level headed enough when I broached the subjected of his sexual orientation. I don't think he was a 'kiddy fiddler' though. In fact I'm sure he wasn't.

Just because a person has a problem with their sexuality doesn't mean that they're perverts. Not with kids anyroad. The assertion that they do reminds me of my dads second wife, long dead, who was convinced that homosexuals preyed on children.

No matter what I said to her she wasn't having any of it. It's my opinion that your mixing your apples up with pears here old friend.

[Samurai Waki]

You know Don, as a fellow parent of two young girls I'd hope that you were aware that it is indeed okay for you to escort them into a men's restroom to do their business behind closed doors so that you could safely be secure in the knowledge that a child predator isn't lurking about.

I'm actually a bit more nervous about the ragged drifter looking types who don't have any children of their own present, but like to watch them play about at the park.

[Don Corleone]

You know Don, as a fellow parent of two young girls I'd hope that you were aware that it is indeed okay for you to escort them into a men's restroom to do their business behind closed doors so that you could safely be secure in the knowledge that a child predator isn't lurking about.

I'm actually a bit more nervous about the ragged drifter looking types who don't have any children of their own present, but like to watch them play about at the park.

Me too. I was very happy with the hidden camera 20/20 that showed parents' reactions to some lone adult man trying to talk a young girl into leaving with him to look for a puppy (both were actors). One guy (which would have been me) had to be physically restrained until they could explain the situation to him (that it was staged).

[Andres]

Because some folks who want to pretend to be women or pretend to be men get their feelings hurt when somebody points out, no, sorry... if you have a penis, you go in the men's room, Jillian and Allison will meet strange men in public women's washrooms.

Nowadays, any sick weirdo can dress himself as a woman and enter womens' rooms with the purpose of harassing them.

A law allowing men with transgender issues to enter womens' rooms won't change that.

Note: I'm not really in favor of such regulations, I'm just saying that you should be concerned about sick weirdo's, not about a possible bill to add "gender identity and expression" to discrimination laws (allthough there is something to say about the non discrimination of such people, but, as open minded as I am, allowing men dressed as a woman into womens' showers goes a step too far imo).

Is it just me, or are we really jumping the shark as a society these days. Obama bows to the Saudi King in a room full of foreign dignitaries, we allow pirates to seize our crews because it's uncivilized to defend yourself... and now this...

Not sure how that relates to the article you referred to in your OP, but ok.

I agree that something must be done against those pirates.

Maybe it's because I'm not an American, but I really fail to understand what is so outrageous about Obama nodding (slightly bowing?) to a foreign head of state out of respect for protocol/old traditions/customs. It's not like he surrendered the United States and all its' inhabitants to Saoudi-Arabia

[Vuk]

Seeing that there are two seperate topics being discussed in the same thread, I will tackle them each one at a time.
1. Bowing to the Saudi King.

When a president bows to a pope, that is a personal acknowledgement of the sovereignty of God over your individual soul, and the power of the pope as the way to reach it. (I am not Catholic, and this is not my belief) This is not medieval europe, and the pope does not hold the political power over rulers as you used to. Bowing to the pope is a thing of soul, and personal. Bowing to a king is something completely different and very political. We fought a war so that America would never have to bow to a king again. Obama (unfortunately) represents America now, and when our leader bows before another nation, so does America. It is symbolic, but symbols mean things. It may not have been Obama's intent, but he did a very stupid thing that shames America. America does NOT bow before ANYONE, and the leader of the American people does not before ANYONE! We fought Britain twice to prove that to the world. Obama's mistake is no small one.

2. The Original Topic

I think most of you are missing the point of the original poster. His point was that this is now going to allow men into women's restrooms. Predators will no doubt take advantage of this to get into the women's WC and prey on them. I think it is a very serious concern. We should be doing what we can to hinder predators, not make their task easier.

[Rhyfelwyr]

I don't get the big deal about Obama bowing to the Saudi King. Surely it is just a standard gesture of respect, it's not like it means he's now his loyal subject or anything.

On the original topic, this is the sort of nonsense that makes me disdain of the human rights brigade. I don't care if these freaks get discriminated against, the fact is they are not normal and they should not get to act like they are a normal person of whatever gender they prefer.

[Ser Clegane]

1. Bowing to the Saudi King.

When a president bows to a pope, that is a personal acknowledgement of the sovereignty of God over your individual soul, and the power of the pope as the way to reach it. (I am not Catholic, and this is not my belief) This is not medieval europe, and the pope does not hold the political power over rulers as you used to. Bowing to the pope is a thing of soul, and personal. Bowing to a king is something completely different and very political. We fought a war so that America would never have to bow to a king again. Obama (unfortunately) represents America now, and when our leader bows before another nation, so does America. It is symbolic, but symbols mean things. It may not have been Obama's intent, but he did a very stupid thing that shames America. America does NOT bow before ANYONE, and the leader of the American people does not before ANYONE! We fought Britain twice to prove that to the world. Obama's mistake is no small one.

Very interesting - bowing before a king is symbolic for America as a whole bowing before another country and NOT an expression of "personal" courtesy, while bowing before the pope is a completely personal and private soul thing an NOT a symbol for America as a whole bowing and expressing a specific religeous belief.
That is a very selective way of looking at the issue ... but I recognize your chuzpe of applying double standards to blatantly

[Ronin]

Very interesting - bowing before a king is symbolic for America as a whole bowing before another country and NOT an expression of "personal" courtesy, while bowing before the pope is a completely personal and private soul thing an NOT a symbol for America as a whole bowing and expressing a specific religeous belief.
That is a very selective way of looking at the issue ... but I recognize your chuzpe of applying double standards to blatantly

exactly....

Looking at the bright side of all this...I can´t wait to see what the daily show is going to do with this.....


You right wing people have to cool it with these made-up outrages.....it´s almost 4 years until the next presidential election....going by this pace you´re gonna get outrage fatigue.

[Vuk]

Very interesting - bowing before a king is symbolic for America as a whole bowing before another country and NOT an expression of "personal" courtesy, while bowing before the pope is a completely personal and private soul thing an NOT a symbol for America as a whole bowing and expressing a specific religeous belief.
That is a very selective way of looking at the issue ... but I recognize your chuzpe of applying double standards to blatantly

Not at all Ser Clegane. A bow to a king IS a show of political submission. When the President of the United States bows before another nation, he is symbolizing the United States' submission to said nation. A bow before a pope is RELIGIOUS, and thus is personal. I do not have double standards, and would not be upset if Obama bowed before the pope. If he wants to be a catholic and submit himself before the teachings of the papacy, or at least show them humble reverence, that is his choice. When he represents his country to a foriegn power and submits to or shows reverence to them though, that is an entirely different matter. They are two completely seperate things. There is a reason that US presidents do not bow before kings, because the idea that men are equal and should not be put under the submissive control of another is paramount to the idea of the country. US Presidents are supposed to support idea, bye treating other rulers with respect, but NOT signs of submission. A US president NEVER bows to ANYONE. When he does, the US bows, and that is not supposed to happen. Oh yeah, and did he bow before the queen of England BTW?


EDIT: And how can it be a double standard considering that I would be just as disappointed and disgusted if Bush had done the same thing, or if McCain had gotten elected and did the same thing. Get off the victim horse, it has nothing to do with him being Obama, it has to do with him doing what Obama does.

[Ronin]

Not at all Ser Clegane. A bow to a king IS a show of political submission. When the President of the United States bows before another nation, he is symbolizing the United States' submission to said nation. A bow before a pope is RELIGIOUS, and thus is personal. I do not have double standards, and would not be upset if Obama bowed before the pope. If he wants to be a catholic and submit himself before the teachings of the papacy, or at least show them humble reverence, that is his choice. When he represents his country to a foriegn power and submits to or shows reverence to them though, that is an entirely different matter. They are two completely seperate things. There is a reason that US presidents do not bow before kings, because the idea that men are equal and should not be put under the submissive control of another is paramount to the idea of the country. US Presidents are supposed to support idea, bye treating other rulers with respect, but NOT signs of submission. A US president NEVER bows to ANYONE. When he does, the US bows, and that is not supposed to happen. Oh yeah, and did he bow before the queen of England BTW?


EDIT: And how can it be a double standard considering that I would be just as disappointed and disgusted if Bush had done the same thing, or if McCain had gotten elected and did the same thing. Get off the victim horse, it has nothing to do with him being Obama, it has to do with him doing what Obama does.

The Pope often does statements that are political in nature, even if they are faith related and he is the head of an organization that inserts itself into political decisions in countries all over the world......so yes that´s a double standard.

[Louis VI the Fat]

A bow before a pope is RELIGIOUS, and thus is personal.

Bush is not a Catholic. Plus, the pope is a foreign monarch, like the king of Saudi Arabia.

But speaking of personal then, I am already looking forward to your trying to wriggle yourself out of this:

Bush making out with the Saudi king:

[Husar]

[...]and when our leader bows before another nation, so does America.

So essentially you are all slaves of your king president?

If I am a free man then the only actions that are representative for me are those of myself, yes, you elected him, so you actually approve of him doing that or you elected him, yet are not responsible for everything he does in which case he would not represent you with everything he does since you are free humans.

Apart from that I think it's a complete non-issue and only old-fashioned royalists would really care but I heard in America noone listens to them or cares what they think.

If you really think Angela Merkel represents me then I must disappoint you as she is married to a guy and I don't want to do that. There is something as taking this whole representation thing too far IMO.

On transgenderals, as has been said, they can enter the toilets anyway if there is noone around and if there is someone around then they can't really do much anyway. A public toilet that is not supervised/cleaned is not a place where I would want my kids to go anyway.