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

[Strike For The South]

I think fetus's have the right to own guns to defend themselves against abortion clinics.

That is the best picture in my head. A doctors hand goes in and a stump comes out.

[Marshal Murat]

I would like to point out that Don's intent was to highlight the possibility of a sexual predator taking advantage of the transgender law to enter a women's bathroom and not be kicked out. He could claim he was "Sandra", and no one could really prove otherwise. Who's going to monitor those entering a bathroom for "gender confusion"? Maybe we should give transgendered people stars that they can put on their clothes

I do not care for Obama bowing to anyone. He's the President of the United States, not a mollycuddler! He shouldn't bow to anyone. Get some respect for the office, I mean, you had Aretha Franklin sing at your inauguration! We Americans have the most profound disrespect for anyone with a royal title, and to give in now signals the end of the American Dream.

[InsaneApache]

Did Aretha bow?

[KarlXII]

I do not care for Obama bowing to anyone. He's the President of the United States, not a mollycuddler! He shouldn't bow to anyone. Get some respect for the office, I mean, you had Aretha Franklin sing at your inauguration! We Americans have the most profound disrespect for anyone with a royal title, and to give in now signals the end of the American Dream.

Point to you. LOL.

[Lemur]

I think the reason Obama bowed was that he was pregnant, and he was also giving a signal to the Ay-rabs that they can kidnap whomever they like and he won't do anything about it. Also, by bowing to the Saudi King, he was indicating that he intends to take all of the guns away and sign the U.S.A. over the the Caliphate.

But it might have had something to do with global warming ....

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I don't believe Obama was bowing to his suzerain or anything of the sort (though I have little doubt that some will spin it that way). I do think he's a little lacking in respect for some of our "chip on the shoulder" traditions -- President never bows, flag doesn't get dipped, etc. -- because his sense of America as a nation is quite different from mine. Sure, they are little things and largely symbolic, but to me it is part of national pride. I have a sense that Obama's pride in the USA is less of the old-fashioned kind than is mine.

Raising a wee lass is WAY different than raising a little laddie. Both need your protection for many years, but girls think/act/relate to the world differently. In many ways, they have the advantage, but ...

[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

[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.

[Vuk]

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.

The pope is a religious entity, and things of religious importance can and are sometimes of political and social importance to be sure (abortion, gay marriage, etc). Still though, those are personal beliefs, and a show of reverence to the pope shows Obama's personal convictions. That is entirely seperate from bowing to a king though. Obama is there not to pay respect to religious beliefs, but to represent his country to another country. That representation should not be one of America bowing to that country. Obama should definately have showed respect to the Saudi king, as the US should be showing respect, but he should NOT have bowed to the Saudi king, as the US does not bow to any nation or king. I stated in another thread that nothing Obama did could disappoint me because me expectations were so low, but I was wrong. I think you are Ser Clegane are making the mistake though of thinking that I do not like what Obama does because I do not like Obama, when in fact, it is the opposite. I do not like Obama because I do not like the things Obama does. As I said before, if McCain had done this my reaction would be the same...no, a lot stronger probably, because I would be a lot more disappointed in McCain because I would expect more from him.

[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:

[Vuk]

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:

When the president meets the pope, he meets him as a religious leader, not a political leader.
Wiggle my way out of what? A kiss is a greeting, not a show reverence or submission. People greet each other in the street with a kiss in Saudi Arabia, France, etc. They do not bow to each other in the street, as that is not a greeting, it is a show of submission. When two powers meet and seek to treat each other as equals, they greet each other, not bow to each other. They can kiss, shake hands, etc, that is showing respect and is what two equals do. They do not bow though, because a bow shows rank. If Obama bowed to a South Korean or Japanese leader IN THEIR COUNTRY I would not mind so much (though I still would not agree with the reasoning), because customs are different over there, and a bow is a greeting, and a sign of respect - different than in the US, Europe, and the Middle East. Shaking hands is all he needed to do with the Saudi king. (or he could have kissed him if he wanted :P) The US should greet those it has diplomatic ties with, and should show them respect. The US should never bow before them though.

[HoreTore]

Can we work gun control and abortion into this thread? That would be KEWL!

I think we're scheduled for another 5 Israel-threads before we have another aborted gun-thread...

[Pannonian]

Was there any tongue?

[Lemur]

When the president meets the pope, he meets him as a religious leader, not a political leader.

Sez who? You? The pope is both a religious and a political leader, always has been.



Can we all at least agree that our President, no matter who he is, should kneel before Zod?

[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.

[Vuk]

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.




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.



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.



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?


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.

Obama was not meeting the Saudi king personally to pay respect to his religion, he was meeting him in a political function. When Bush met with the Pope, he was not meeting him for important war plans with the Vatican nation, he meeting him as the leader of the Catholic religion. Also, respecting the costumes of the queen by not touching her is not showing submission to her, and Michelle is not leader of the country, Barrack is. Surely you see the difference? A US president does not bow to another country (again, the two exceptions I see possible being Japan and Korea, but still think it is better to not bow at all), and if the country is not willing to honour OUR corner stone belief of freedom, then them. What other leaders of countries bowed before the Saudi king? I am sure he would not be offended because the rest of the world did not submit to him as his subjects did.
If it is a custom of a country to have foriegn powers pay reverence to them, then they have serious imperial ambitions and we should not be dealing with them. Don't play games, you know it would not have been an insult to SA for our president not to bow to its king.

[Crazed Rabbit]

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).

The thing is, with the new law, the sick weirdos can sneak into woman's restrooms legally, and just claim they have some gender identity issue or something.

CR

[Rhyfelwyr]

Both the Pope and the Saudi Kings have temporal and spiritual positions. The Vatican has been a state since 1929 remember.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

So the Pope and the Saud walk into a ladies' restroom...

[Strike For The South]

I would bow to the pope to and I'm a catholic hating baptist.

[Crazed Rabbit]

The Pope isn't royalty, ie someone who got their position because of who their were born to.

And I don't think this sort of deference should be shown any royalty, be it the Queen of England or the King of Saudi Arabia.

CR