Michigan pronoun bill

[Cloaca du jour 2,147]

If passed...using wrong pronouns to bully or intimidate can get ya 1 fed strike up to 5 yrs and a 10k fine.

 

[Cdub100 3,825]

So because I refuse to partake in a person's delusion and believe they need medical help not medical reassurance. I can be sent to jail... 

Good I hope it gets worse. Eventually, people will wake up. Particularly the idiot conservatives who vote for this crap over Trump.

[dogcows 1,030]

7 minutes ago, Cloaca du jour said:

If passed...using wrong pronouns to bully or intimidate can get ya 1 fed strike up to 5 yrs and a 10k fine.

 

That’s not an accurate picture of what the bill says or does. It’s a broader anti-harassment law that addresses attacking others for many reasons, one of which is gender identity.

Here’s the bill you can read for yourself:

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billengrossed/House/htm/2023-HEBH-4474.htm

Faux News strikes again.

[Cdub100 3,825]

13 minutes ago, dogcows said:

That’s not an accurate picture of what the bill says or does. It’s a broader anti-harassment law that addresses attacking others for many reasons, one of which is gender identity.

Here’s the bill you can read for yourself:

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billengrossed/House/htm/2023-HEBH-4474.htm

Faux News strikes again.

I read the bill and that's exactly what it does.

If someone is trying to force me to participate in their delusion and I refuse to they can say they feel threatened or intimidated.  5 years in the slammer

[squistion 1,944]

14 minutes ago, dogcows said:

That’s not an accurate picture of what the bill says or does. It’s a broader anti-harassment law that addresses attacking others for many reasons, one of which is gender identity.

Here’s the bill you can read for yourself:

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billengrossed/House/htm/2023-HEBH-4474.htm

Faux News strikes again.

Yeah, this guy looked at the proposed legislation and says the word "pronoun" or "pronouns" are not found in the bill:

 

[Cdub100 3,825]

Just now, squistion said:

Yeah, this guy looked at the proposed legislation and says the word "pronoun" or "pronouns" are not found in the bill:

 

does any of the following to an individual based in whole or in part on an actual or perceived characteristic of that individual listed under subsection (2), regardless of the existence of any other motivating factors:

(e) Gender identity or expression.

[dogcows 1,030]

Just now, Cdub100 said:

I read the bill and that's exactly what it does.

If someone is trying to force me to participate in their delusion and I refuse to they can say they feel threatened or intimidated.  5 years in the slammer

Hmm nope. It doesn’t mention pronouns even once. Calling a boy a girl doesn’t even come close to the standard for the level of harassment laid out in that bill. This is about serious harassment. Read section 1, a-d. Violence, bodily injury, intimidation, or damaging their property. 

[Cdub100 3,825]

So you guys are hung up on it being called the pronoun bill. But totally okay with calling desantis bill the don't say gay bill.

 

A person is guilty of a hate crime if that person maliciously , and intentionally does any of the following to an individual based in whole or in part on an actual or perceived characteristic of that individual listed under subsection (2), regardless of the existence of any other motivating factors:

(d) Sexual orientation.

(e) Gender identity or expression.

(a) "Gender identity or expression" means having or being perceived as having a gender-related self-identity or expression whether or not associated with an individual's assigned sex at birth.

"Intimidate" means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened. Intimidate does not include constitutionally protected activity or conduct that serves a legitimate purpose.

 

The simple fact of refusing to acknowledge a person's delusion could be taken as intimidation or frighten people. We've all seen these mentally ill people freak out. So yeah this is a terrible pronoun bill.

[weepaws 3,152]

It doe Matter if it’s Biden or Trump in office, this is the next faze to end freedom.  

Who we need in control is God, bring God back to lead are nation.  We removed God, and now we will pay.   

Amen. 

[Fnord 2,051]

19 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

So you guys are hung up on it being called the pronoun bill. But totally okay with calling desantis bill the don't say gay bill.

 

A person is guilty of a hate crime if that person maliciously , and intentionally does any of the following to an individual based in whole or in part on an actual or perceived characteristic of that individual listed under subsection (2), regardless of the existence of any other motivating factors:

(d) Sexual orientation.

(e) Gender identity or expression.

(a) "Gender identity or expression" means having or being perceived as having a gender-related self-identity or expression whether or not associated with an individual's assigned sex at birth.

"Intimidate" means a willful course of conduct involving repeated or continuing harassment of another individual that would cause a reasonable individual to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened, and that actually causes the victim to feel terrorized, frightened, or threatened. Intimidate does not include constitutionally protected activity or conduct that serves a legitimate purpose.

 

The simple fact of refusing to acknowledge a person's delusion could be taken as intimidation or frighten people. We've all seen these mentally ill people freak out. So yeah this is a terrible pronoun bill.

So, a long-winded way of saying "I don't respect you enough as a person to refer to you in the way in which you prefer." Got it. It's not about making people conform to someone else's beliefs, it's about basic fukking respect.  You should find some for those that aren't white male conservatives. 

[Baker Boy 1,687]

4 minutes ago, Fnord said:

So, a long-winded way of saying "I don't respect you enough as a person to refer to you in the way in which you prefer." Got it. It's not about making people conform to someone else's beliefs, it's about basic fukking respect.  You should find some for those that aren't white male conservatives. 

Respect is earned, not demanded. HTH

[Cdub100 3,825]

15 minutes ago, Fnord said:

So, a long-winded way of saying "I don't respect you enough as a person to refer to you in the way in which you prefer." Got it. It's not about making people conform to someone else's beliefs, it's about basic fukking respect.  You should find some for those that aren't white male conservatives. 

I'm not going to talk to your schizophrenia episode imaginary friend either. So sure I do not respect a mental illness.

[Cdub100 3,825]

12 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

Respect is earned, not demanded. HTH

Being mentally ill doesn't mean I have to play along. Respect has nothing to do with this.

[Cdub100 3,825]

23 minutes ago, Fnord said:

You should find some for those that aren't white male conservatives. 

Why? So they can tell me what a terrible person I am while living in the society my white male ancestors built? Yes, white men built this country. It's time people remember that.

[squistion 1,944]

4 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

Why? So they can tell me what a terrible person I am while living in the society my white male ancestors built? Yes, white men built this country. It's time people remember that.

It is something Native Americans certainly can't forget.

This almost sounds like the White Supremacist arguement that SIDA use to make in another forum.  

[dogcows 1,030]

21 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

Why? So they can tell me what a terrible person I am while living in the society my white male ancestors built? Yes, white men built this country. It's time people remember that.

Racists gonna racist. If you’re focking idiotic enough to be a racist, then you also can’t keep even the most basic historical facts straight.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/white-house-was-fact-built-slaves-180959916/

Frederick Douglass was correct when he said, in 1875:

Quote

“Colored people have had something to do with almost everything of vital im­portance in the life and progress of this great country.”

 

[Cdub100 3,825]

8 minutes ago, squistion said:

It is something Native Americans certainly can't forget.

This almost sounds like the White Supremacist arguement that SIDA use to make in another forum.  

When you look around Native Americans didn't build any of this. They were too busy scalping and enslaving each other. They, like countless other cultures, were conquered.  Again I'm not apologizing for something every other human society has done including Native Americans. 

Oy Vey someone said something I don't like he's a racist white supremacist. History is history. Facts are facts. And men can't be women.

[Cdub100 3,825]

Just now, dogcows said:

Racists gonna racist. If you’re focking idiotic enough to be a racist, then you also can’t keep even the most basic historical facts straight.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/white-house-was-fact-built-slaves-180959916/

Frederick Douglass was correct when he said, in 1875:

 

Douglass is wrong. 

[Baker Boy 1,687]

22 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

When you look around Native Americans didn't build any of this. They were too busy scalping and enslaving each other. They, like countless other cultures, were conquered.  Again I'm not apologizing for something every other human society has done including Native Americans. 

Oy Vey someone said something I don't like he's a racist white supremacist. History is history. Facts are facts. And men can't be women.

When Europeans arrived in North America, the Native Americans did not have the wheel.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,919]

1 hour ago, squistion said:

Yeah, this guy looked at the proposed legislation and says the word "pronoun" or "pronouns" are not found in the bill:

 

And the don’t say gay bill doesn’t say gay.  

[Hardcore troubadour 14,919]

I like how liberals blame some guy in overalls in Alabama for the legacy of slavery yet flock to Lisbon.  

[RaiderHaters Revenge 4,236]

5 hours ago, Fnord said:

So, a long-winded way of saying "I don't respect you enough as a person to refer to you in the way in which you prefer." Got it. It's not about making people conform to someone else's beliefs, it's about basic fukking respect.  You should find some for those that aren't white male conservatives. 

You don’t have to respect someone just cause they say so. It’s a free focking country. Of course wokists want all those freedoms removed 

[Cdub100 3,825]

5 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

When Europeans arrived in North America, the Native Americans not have the wheel.

Muh Great Native American cities doh!!!!

The never talk about what the Indians did to each other and the wars they waged on white Europeans and each other do they? 

[Patented Phil 1,469]

42 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I like how liberals blame some guy in overalls in Alabama for the legacy of slavery yet flock to Lisbon.  

Bingo.

[TBayXXXVII 2,482]

2 hours ago, dogcows said:

Hmm nope. It doesn’t mention pronouns even once. Calling a boy a girl doesn’t even come close to the standard for the level of harassment laid out in that bill. This is about serious harassment. Read section 1, a-d. Violence, bodily injury, intimidation, or damaging their property. 

Is this like the "Don't Say Gay" bill that never says "Gay" in it?

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, Cdub100 said:

Douglass is wrong. 

 How to tell everybody you should never be taken seriously.

[jerryskids 6,557]

7 minutes ago, dogcows said:

 How to tell everybody you should never be taken seriously.

Depends on the context.  If he meant physical labor, then sure, we can have that discussion.  If he meant anything intellectual/leadership, then no, that's silly.

[dogcows 1,030]

16 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Depends on the context.  If he meant physical labor, then sure, we can have that discussion.  If he meant anything intellectual/leadership, then no, that's silly.

What’s “silly” is ignorance of black contributions to America throughout its history, all the way back to its founding. 

Quote

After the Declaration of Independence was issued, on July 4, 1776, Lemuel Haynes, a 23-year-old Massachusetts man who was the son of a Black father and a white mother and who had fought in the Continental Army, copied out its opening lines on a manuscript he titled “Liberty Further Extended.” And then he wrote an amendment: “An affrican has equally as good a right to his Liberty in common with Englishmen: Consequently, the practise of slave-keeping which so much abounds in this land is illicit.”

Quote

In 1788, after Connecticut voted to ratify the Constitution, a group of Black men in New Haven submitted a petition to the state legislature but addressed to “all mankind.” They asserted their rights; asked the government to “grant us a liberration”; and criticized “eni law” — any law or constitution — that sanctions slavery, asking, “Is this to be rite and justes?” Their answer: “No it murder.” 

Do you really wanna choose the “Frederick Douglass was wrong” hill to die on with c-dub?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

5 hours ago, Cloaca du jour said:

If passed...using wrong pronouns to bully or intimidate can get ya 1 fed strike up to 5 yrs and a 10k fine.

 

I mean, this is a CLEAR violation of the first amendment, is it not? No way this survives judicial review.  I man, how can this possibly survive?  What am I missing?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

4 hours ago, Cdub100 said:

I read the bill and that's exactly what it does.

If someone is trying to force me to participate in their delusion and I refuse to they can say they feel threatened or intimidated.  5 years in the slammer

Yeah, it's clear they' are trying to make an end around the 1st Amendment with this by classifying it as "threatening behavior".  It's another example of the left redefining the meaning of words to try and push their far left views.

No way this survives judicial review.

whatever happened to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me"?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

5 hours ago, squistion said:

It is something Native Americans certainly can't forget.

This almost sounds like the White Supremacist arguement that SIDA use to make in another forum.  

Tough shiat.  While the rest of the world was advancing the Indians continued to live in mud huts and still hunted with bows and arrows.  The strong civilizations survive, the weak ones don't.  This has been the way of the world since man first arrived on the planet and not just in America.  Suck it up, buttercup.

Whether it's right or wrong is mostly irrelevant.  The history of man has been built on blood, violence and war and that will never change but it's been those conflicts that have gotten us to where we are today - an advanced functioning civilization built on laws, you smart phone, online sissy.  Had we let the Indians run things we'd still be in huts and using bow and arrows.  In all actuality, civilizations collapse, get snuffed out or get taken over EXACTLY because of weak men like you.

Advanced and good civilizations just don't happen overnight.  It's an iterative process over thousands of years of learning from your successes but mostly from your mistakes.  Make no mistake, though, bad civilizations are still competing and we've seen what bad civilizations look like when your crowd gets in control: Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba to name a few, which is why it is of upmost importance to prevent your kind from taking over the greatest country in the world.

Also, I don't hear about you giving back all of your things to those Indians (or whatever minority group is the flavor of the week with your crowd).  All you do is talk.  How about you walk the walk instead of talking the talk you f'n hypocrite?

GTFO.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,919]

The Indians were still doing human sacrifices when the Europeans got here. Sure they gave  them gonorrhea, but they put an end to the human sacrifice. And later on they got penicillin.  It all worked out in the end. 

[jerryskids 6,557]

1 hour ago, dogcows said:

What’s “silly” is ignorance of black contributions to America throughout its history, all the way back to its founding. 

Do you really wanna choose the “Frederick Douglass was wrong” hill to die on with c-dub?

Anecdotes about a few people who wrote some op eds is your evidence of significant contributions to our founding?  I can't believe I am wasting my time on this, it is so silly.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

5 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Anecdotes about a few people who wrote some op eds is your evidence of significant contributions to our founding?  I can't believe I am wasting my time on this, it is so silly.

It's that revision history I keep talking about.  They've used it so much they are actually forgetting REAL history.

[Patented Phil 1,469]

5 hours ago, Fnord said:

So, a long-winded way of saying "I don't respect you enough as a person to refer to you in the way in which you prefer." Got it. It's not about making people conform to someone else's beliefs, it's about basic fukking respect.  You should find some for those that aren't white male conservatives. 

No.  This bill is EXACTLY about making people conform to others’ beliefs.  It’s a bill where the Government can prosecute people for the words they use, with the barometer being how another person felt about those words.  What focking country is this?  The day when little Leftist pukes like you enact laws enforcing what real Americans can and cannot say is they day people like me start taking up arms to put fascists like you down like the dogs you are.  This is a hill I will gladly die on, as will most Conservatives.  

[Patented Phil 1,469]

1 hour ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

I mean, this is a CLEAR violation of the first amendment, is it not? No way this survives judicial review.  I man, how can this possibly survive?  What am I missing?

I’ve been asking myself these same questions.  I think you and I both underestimate the degree to which the hardcore Leftists in this country despise the Constitution, particularly 1A and 2A.   They are unhappy, unintelligent, and have way too much time on their hands.  One thing I know for certain - they will not stop, so expect this to continue.

But yeah, the Supreme Court will strike this down, 100%. But think how close we came to a Hilary Supreme Court.  Sometimes saviors come in strange presentations, and Trump was exactly that.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

3 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

I’ve been asking myself these same questions.  I think you and I both underestimate the degree to which the hardcore Leftists in this country despise the Constitution, particularly 1A and 2A.   They are unhappy, unintelligent, and have way too much time on their hands.  One thing I know for certain - they will not stop, so expect this to continue.

But yeah, the Supreme Court will strike this down, 100%. But think how close we came to a Hilary Supreme Court.  Sometimes saviors come in strange presentations, and Trump was exactly that.

Hopefully Biden will get kicked out of office next year and be replaced with a conservative POTUS.  At this point, I don't care who - we just need to stop the far left from taking control again.

They want to remake this country in the style of Soviet Russia, Communist china or North Korea.  That's the ultimate goal and we've seen in the 20th century alone what that goal does to a country and its people

[dogcows 1,030]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

Anecdotes about a few people who wrote some op eds is your evidence of significant contributions to our founding?  I can't believe I am wasting my time on this, it is so silly.

You’re ignorant of the contributions of black people to the building of this nation, so you call it silly. Maybe you could do some reading about it sometime instead.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,828]

2 minutes ago, dogcows said:

You’re ignorant of the contributions of black people to the building of this nation, so you call it silly. Maybe you could do some reading about it sometime instead.

No thanks. We'll stick the real history instead of the revisionist history you're reading.

[Fnord 2,051]

59 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

No.  This bill is EXACTLY about making people conform to others’ beliefs.  It’s a bill where the Government can prosecute people for the words they use, with the barometer being how another person felt about those words.  What focking country is this?  The day when little Leftist pukes like you enact laws enforcing what real Americans can and cannot say is they day people like me start taking up arms to put fascists like you down like the dogs you are.  This is a hill I will gladly die on, as will most Conservatives.  

So totally cool if we meet and you tell me to call you Phil. And I respond by calling you "redneck booger eater" all day. 

Here's how a person in a functional society starts an interaction with another: by showing respect. Behavior will show you whether they deserve to continue being respected. They've earned it until they show they don't deserve it. If someone prefers to be called "they/them" instead of he or she, get the fuk over it. Only sheltered selfish sissy whiny crybabies have a problem with this concept.