Oakland Bridge Collapse by terrorists.....

[mxlm]

You can get off in my mouth, if you want.

Oh, not what you meant? Nevermind.

[Jeppan]

No, everyone isn't equal. I'm sorry but you can't eliminate social inequality by being indescriminate.

So how do you motivate treating transgender like second-rate citizens? Please say why Mik does not deserve to have the same rights as you do.

I can understand why it's funny to you Jeppan. I know why it is. . .
btw. . . "Helios me da verguënza ajena."
Watch it Jeppan. give me an inch, and I'll take a yard.

Well come on then. Firstly it is spelled vergüenza, secondly your posts are a disgrace (even if you were funny there for a while). I am glad that you are on the other side of the fence, it makes everything so much easier.

[Grand Fromage]

You can get off in my mouth, if you want.

Does that offer stand for all of us?

[NickD]

I love you jeppen. I wish I knew where you're from so we could point out it's fundamental flaws.

Sweden has fundamental flaws?

Apart from being the home of Ikea that is...

[mxlm]

Does that offer stand for all of us?

If you're clean, I'm down.

[paazin]

No, everyone isn't equal. I'm sorry but you can't eliminate social inequality by being indescriminate.

So how do you motivate treating transgender like second-rate citizens? Please say why Mik does not deserve to have the same rights as you do.

Just because groups of people suffer from social inequality doesn't mean they're treated as 'second-rate citizens.' Their ability to vote and lobby is not in question, which is probably the most important right - it simply describes natural social stratification. It's present in every situation, after all.

[Jeppan]

No, everyone isn't equal. I'm sorry but you can't eliminate social inequality by being indescriminate.

So how do you motivate treating transgender like second-rate citizens? Please say why Mik does not deserve to have the same rights as you do.

Just because groups of people suffer from social inequality doesn't mean they're treated as 'second-rate citizens.' Their ability to vote and lobby is not in question, which is probably the most important right - it simply describes natural social stratification. It's present in every situation, after all.

There are certain aspects of the civil righs that are not granted to transgender people (like the right to adopt, marriage and so on I think. I will let Mik fill in the details on which those rights are that are being denied to people because of their sexuality.) I am not talking about common discrimination, I am just asking on what motives one can support this state-biggotry.

Just to be clear here, since you all know I am a big US-hater ( ), it is not an attack on the US. I am sure this exist in many other countries. Biggotry is an international movement (often connected with religious belief sadly).

[paazin]

There are certain aspects of the civil righs that are not granted to transgender people (like the right to adopt, marriage and so on I think. I will let Mik fill in the details on which those rights are that are being denied to people because of their sexuality.) I am not talking about common discrimination, I am just asking on what motives one can support this state-biggotry.

Just to be clear here, since you all know I am a big US-hater ( ), it is not an attack on the US. I am sure this exist in many other countries. Biggotry is an international movement (often connected with religious belief sadly).

eh? state bigotry? the only thing that isn't legal is marrying someone of the same gender. as far as adoption goes, if I recall correctly, it's often done case-by-case, presidency given to traditional married couples.

afraid I don't see the state-sponsored bigotry. at least, I don't consider the two previous cases to fall into the description of 'bigotry'

[paazin]

There are certain aspects of the civil righs that are not granted to transgender people (like the right to adopt, marriage and so on I think. I will let Mik fill in the details on which those rights are that are being denied to people because of their sexuality.) I am not talking about common discrimination, I am just asking on what motives one can support this state-biggotry.

Just to be clear here, since you all know I am a big US-hater ( ), it is not an attack on the US. I am sure this exist in many other countries. Biggotry is an international movement (often connected with religious belief sadly).

eh? state bigotry? the only thing that isn't legal is marrying someone of the same gender. as far as adoption goes, if I recall correctly, it's often done case-by-case, presidency given to traditional married couples.

afraid I don't see the state-sponsored bigotry. at least, I don't consider the two previous cases to fall into the description of 'bigotry'

Anyway, as I can see this whole discussion is slowly heading towards perceptions of sexuality and sexual orientation I'll just say it flat out: looking at it from a purely utilitarian perspective, homosexuality is an aberration. It serves no genetic purpose and, along with transgenderism, can be viewed as an 'error' or physical 'defect' within the person. It can be viewed as the same as many other genetic and environmental diseases and illnesses and just accepted as a natural fact of life for those people.

[Jeppan]

There are certain aspects of the civil righs that are not granted to transgender people (like the right to adopt, marriage and so on I think. I will let Mik fill in the details on which those rights are that are being denied to people because of their sexuality.) I am not talking about common discrimination, I am just asking on what motives one can support this state-biggotry.

Just to be clear here, since you all know I am a big US-hater ( ), it is not an attack on the US. I am sure this exist in many other countries. Biggotry is an international movement (often connected with religious belief sadly).

eh? state bigotry? the only thing that isn't legal is marrying someone of the same gender. as far as adoption goes, if I recall correctly, it's often done case-by-case, presidency given to traditional married couples.

afraid I don't see the state-sponsored bigotry. at least, I don't consider the two previous cases to fall into the description of 'bigotry'

I am no expert on US law exactly but I would guess, that like in many other countries, being married gives you certain benefits taxewise. I am guessing on this though, so please prove me wrong here if I am. But if I am right, why should some people be excluded from this, just because their sexual preferences are different from the norm?

About adoption, again, I am not sure how it is in the US, but here in Sweden we just recently passed a law allowing anyone to adopt, after the normal scrutiny. Can homosexuals or transgender adopt in the US? If not why exclude them? There is no scientic ground for homosexuals being worse parents, studies I have seen (not any links though...was a few years back) prove quite the opposite since the decision of adopting is more thought through than the average pregnancy.

If my above reasoning is true, it sure is state-sponsored biggotry.

[Jeppan]

There are certain aspects of the civil righs that are not granted to transgender people (like the right to adopt, marriage and so on I think. I will let Mik fill in the details on which those rights are that are being denied to people because of their sexuality.) I am not talking about common discrimination, I am just asking on what motives one can support this state-biggotry.

Just to be clear here, since you all know I am a big US-hater ( ), it is not an attack on the US. I am sure this exist in many other countries. Biggotry is an international movement (often connected with religious belief sadly).

eh? state bigotry? the only thing that isn't legal is marrying someone of the same gender. as far as adoption goes, if I recall correctly, it's often done case-by-case, presidency given to traditional married couples.

afraid I don't see the state-sponsored bigotry. at least, I don't consider the two previous cases to fall into the description of 'bigotry'

Anyway, as I can see this whole discussion is slowly heading towards perceptions of sexuality and sexual orientation I'll just say it flat out: looking at it from a purely utilitarian perspective, homosexuality is an aberration. It serves no genetic purpose and, along with transgenderism, can be viewed as an 'error' or physical 'defect' within the person. It can be viewed as the same as many other genetic and environmental diseases and illnesses and just accepted as a natural fact of life for those people.

I have no idea about the evolutionary, genetic or whatever aspect of the issue. Either way that does not matter, it is the choice of each and every person who he wants to get frisky with (barring children of course).

Why are people threatened by other peoples sexual preferences? Beats me. I guess they must be so insecure that violence and abuse is the only way out.

[Nyarlathotep]

Not allowing homosexuals to get married in the exact same manner as heterosexuals is discriminatory and bigoted. On the other hand this really isn't just an American issue; unless you happen to live in Denmark, Belgium, Canada, South Africa, or the State of Massachusetts your nation also engages in the same discriminatory practices.

Personally I'd like to see the word marriage stricken from the books and have nothing but civil unions but I know thats not gonna happen.

[Mikayla]

Helios:

I just want to say I'm sorry that you're treated poorly by the state. i.e. You're inability to vote, no civil

unions, no property ownership. You're a lawyer so, I guess you already know that you would never have a fair trial.

Vote? Yes. Serve in the military (openly)? No. Civil Union? Yes, in California and many other states. Get Federal marriage benefits (little ones, like, say, tax status)? No. Get married to my partner at all? No.

And that is not the end of the list. Until this year insurance companies in California were free to discriminate against transgender people on the basis they are transgender - and they did - I know, because I could not get health insurance and the agents would say something really subtle like "no, you're transgender." I had to get my medical coverage from the Veterans Administration (as I am disabled vet). And I am not talking about transgender specific care, either, I am talking about access to basic health care. Now California protects us - but its the only state in the country that does.


Helios:

I suppose you could march, but that would be out of the question.

I do march. In fact, I've helped with all three of the transmarches that have taken place, thank you.

But you know what I can't do? I can't get Steve Stanton, or folks like him, his job back in Florida, who get fired simply because they come out as transgender. See, only a few dozen cities and even fewer states protect transgender people from job discrimination - so often, we when come out or get outed, we get fired, as Steve did. That does not happen to white men so far as I know.

Helios

So yeah. . . Sorry america is a giant hatefest of awfulness Mikayla. Allow me to play my little violin, It's playing such a sad, sad song for you. . .

Gosh, I love it when straight (appearing) white men ridicule my attempts to be an equal citizen and tell me how good I have it.

Helios:

Mikyala, hows your job going? Pretty good? When is that adult rave called "Burning man" anyway?

Funny you should ask. Let me fill you in on my job history since you seem to think its so good - before I transistioned I worked for one of the largest law firms in the country making a LOT of money. Then I transitioned and now I don't work there anymore. I cannot talk about what happened at the firm, and I cannot talk about why I cannot talk about it. What I can say is that years later I work as temp for a fraction of the money I used to make because, despite my having graduated in the top 10% of my law school class, having won numerous honors and awards, and having worked on some huge litigation while I was at the law firm, I can't get a permanent job - not even where I am at now. I've been working where I am at now for 3 years - I am the 3rd most senior attorney of 11 in my unit now - and yet, I am the only temp. Now, they seem to like my work - they keep re-upping my contract, but somehow, they do not seem able to make me a permanent employee even though they have hired about 8 other people permanently into my unit after I came there.

Now, my job, even as a temp, is a decent one, even a good one - I don't work in a coal mine or get shot at - but I am not treated the same in the job market as I used to be Helios. And I am certainly not treated in the job market as a straight (appearing) white male is - I know, I used to be one long ago.

The rest of your post seems shotgunned at everyone and everything so I'll let others debate - as for you - few people in ALFA show as much anger without purpose as you do, and discussing almost anything with you turns into an attempt by you to offend the person you are speaking with - I don't know why that is, only thats what I've observed. So I don't find conversations with you fruitful or enjoyable - you're a mad little person. I hope you get better someday.

[Swift]

you're a mad little person. I hope you get better someday.

I dont know if im going to use it here or not, but that quote is totally becoming one of my signatures

[HATEFACE]

Helios:

I just want to say I'm sorry that you're treated poorly by the state. i.e. You're inability to vote, no civil

unions, no property ownership. You're a lawyer so, I guess you already know that you would never have a fair trial.

Vote? Yes. Serve in the military (openly)? No. Civil Union? Yes, in California and many other states. Get Federal marriage benefits (little ones, like, say, tax status)? No. Get married to my partner at all? No.

And that is not the end of the list. Until this year insurance companies in California were free to discriminate against transgender people on the basis they are transgender - and they did - I know, because I could not get health insurance and the agents would say something really subtle like "no, you're transgender." I had to get my medical coverage from the Veterans Administration (as I am disabled vet). And I am not talking about transgender specific care, either, I am talking about access to basic health care. Now California protects us - but its the only state in the country that does.


Helios:

I suppose you could march, but that would be out of the question.

I do march. In fact, I've helped with all three of the transmarches that have taken place, thank you.

But you know what I can't do? I can't get Steve Stanton, or folks like him, his job back in Florida, who get fired simply because they come out as transgender. See, only a few dozen cities and even fewer states protect transgender people from job discrimination - so often, we when come out or get outed, we get fired, as Steve did. That does not happen to white men so far as I know.

Helios

So yeah. . . Sorry america is a giant hatefest of awfulness Mikayla. Allow me to play my little violin, It's playing such a sad, sad song for you. . .

Gosh, I love it when straight (appearing) white men ridicule my attempts to be an equal citizen and tell me how good I have it.

Helios:

Mikyala, hows your job going? Pretty good? When is that adult rave called "Burning man" anyway?

Funny you should ask. Let me fill you in on my job history since you seem to think its so good - before I transistioned I worked for one of the largest law firms in the country making a LOT of money. Then I transitioned and now I don't work there anymore. I cannot talk about what happened at the firm, and I cannot talk about why I cannot talk about it. What I can say is that years later I work as temp for a fraction of the money I used to make because, despite my having graduated in the top 10% of my law school class, having won numerous honors and awards, and having worked on some huge litigation while I was at the law firm, I can't get a permanent job - not even where I am at now. I've been working where I am at now for 3 years - I am the 3rd most senior attorney of 11 in my unit now - and yet, I am the only temp. Now, they seem to like my work - they keep re-upping my contract, but somehow, they do not seem able to make me a permanent employee even though they have hired about 8 other people permanently into my unit after I came there.

Now, my job, even as a temp, is a decent one, even a good one - I don't work in a coal mine or get shot at - but I am not treated the same in the job market as I used to be Helios. And I am certainly not treated in the job market as a straight (appearing) white male is - I know, I used to be one long ago.

The rest of your post seems shotgunned at everyone and everything so I'll let others debate - as for you - few people in ALFA show as much anger without purpose as you do, and discussing almost anything with you turns into an attempt by you to offend the person you are speaking with - I don't know why that is, only thats what I've observed. So I don't find conversations with you fruitful or enjoyable - you're a mad little person. I hope you get better someday.

**Yawn.** Oh, I'm sorry. Were you done? Allow this homophobe to impart some honest opinions for once. Please don't get confused about me Mikayla. I'm not an angry person at all. The fact is, you are. And it's because you have to constantly defend your position from "Right wing nuts" like myself. I'm not made. I can proove it by pushing my face up against the screen and smiling. See? I'm phubing itfph riht noww.

Vote? Yes.
Okay, that's good.

Serve in the military (openly)? No.
Good, you're allowed to serve. Granted it's not openly but does that matter in the military? I'm glad you provided a service to our country.
I don't know if you actually regret doing it or not.

Civil Union? Yes, in California and many other states.
This should be all states, but it's not. It should be similiar to legal marriage.

Get Federal marriage benefits (little ones, like, say, tax status)? No.
You should be granted the same awful tax status like everyone else.
I'm all for living tax free in the backwoods and collecting jugs of my own urine because the carrots are plotting against me, being a Republican and all.

Get married to my partner at all? No.
If civil unions were more state supported then there wouldn't be a need for any religious aspect. If that is what you're refering too, if it isn't then I refered to it above. The state can't dictate religion to change it's laws and should remain that way. Marriage will always be defined by a man and a woman by religious mandate, unless you happen to find a religion that doesn't do this, and there are some out there. Find some sort of strange neo-hinduism, that would kickass.