"I'm not sure anyone has suggested that anyone should be forced to work with anyone else."
Your post mentioned (critically) a hypothetical "lawsuit and government intervention SUPPORTING the employee". I agree and am saying that type of support doesn't support anyone. I don't want to work with redneck jerks, and they probably don't want to work with me. Firing and quitting are under-rated IMHO. There are so many more people and projects than a human lifespan gives us time to work on. I see no value in spending time on projects with bigots, identity collectivists, jerks, or whatever we're going to call them.

I'll bite -- what was he a hypocrite about?

The cost of entering the media business is lower than it's been in decades. Soon the lefties are going to wake up and realize they don't control the business anymore. Then they'll start calling for re-regulation.

Of course, the right answer to the "trans" question is to make all bathrooms one-person-at-a-time, so nobody has to share one. (Or at least extend the partitions to the floor and ceiling.) The transaction cost of a technical solution to this problem is much lower than of solving it by passing laws.

I'm familiar with the incident to which you are referring. I was wondering if the black female would have been equally vehement at refusing the admittance of another black female who had dyed her hair blonde.

Reversing the situation as seen is always a good method to expose the double standards of PC and race card politics. For example, as you watch TV ads that depict white people (especially white males) as idiots and fools and the sage of the ad is not, reverse the color/gender and see if it will still fly without protest or lawsuit.

It appears that you are assuming people that disagree with your ideological agenda are bigots. It is a false assumption.

"...reducing risk is not in itself sufficient reason for creating criminal penalties." Really? Now let's think about that one for a while.

"What kind of enabling screwed up mentally sick namby pamby bizarro..."
"Oh, never mind..."

Nailed it, Dino!

As I suggested Ayn might think, I do not have an issue with a person or company deciding who they should fire, hire, work for or buy products from for ANY reason. This is freedom.

I'm not sure anyone has suggested that anyone should be forced to work with anyone else.

Personally, I don't care who comes into a men's bathroom.

However, you have conveniently defined bigots and non-bigots, in a manner suiting yourself. You are entitled to your opinion, like everyone else, but the government should not take sides, and the very definition of politically correct is a problem.

"If someone's messing with my children..."

Indeed, I think we are of the same mind with that scenario.

Precisely. The underdog syndrome. Exactly how income inequality became an issue.

Now THAT's objective.

And the "mental pros'" need help themselves because they too deny nature and the physical laws. No where does north attract north nor south attract south and without a north AND south attraction, existence doesn't exist.

"That would make sense until you have a predator hunting your children or grandchildren."
If someone's messing with my children, private parts aren't on my mind.

That would make sense until you have a predator hunting your children or grandchildren.

You could also not think about a donkey right now as well.

"some less amount of risk"
Your unstated premise is that laws controlling bathrooms in some way reduce risk. I have no evidence for this premise. In any case, reducing risk is not in itself sufficient reason for creating criminal penalties.

Yes it is.................

Sorry for what you had to endure as a child.
I just know there has to be pervs out there who are at least thinking of dressing up like women for the very first time in their evil lives.
In all 50 states!

Neither do backyards, even fenced-in ones.. Even locked bedrooms.
As for my (if not just not just rational) afterthought above, it occurred to me that even a homosexual would want his mother, sisters, female cousins and platonic female friends to able to use the restroom with some less amount of risk.

"Imagine a person supporting transgender bathrooms being fired. "
I think firing is under-rated. If someone were uncomfortable with my support for LBGT issues, I would rather they not have me work on a project than to work with me grudgingly. Similarly, most bigots probably wouldn't want to do a project for me. Pressuring bigots and non-bigots to work together might seem to supporting one side or the other, but pushing people to work with people they're don't like is not helpful to anyone.

John Galt said it best "By extorting your acceptance of supernatural absolutes, it has forced you to reject the absolute of nature".

The "absolute" of nature is what your were born with. If you can't deal with that, you need help from a mental professional.

http://conservativerepublicannews.com...

Your hypothetical is such a great way to evaluate these Social Justice issues. Flip the situation on its head and see if the results would be the same. I think I am going to use this method.

Recently a black female assaulted a white male for having cornrows at a San Francisco college. Apparently, this isn't considered a situation that needs to be remedied. But I bet if the situation was reversed, the male would be expelled and there would be protests to eliminate the racist elements on campus.

Yes, we are!

I've had it, too, allosaur. I had the unfortunate experience of "meeting" a pervert when I was ten years old. I had wonderful support from my family and from a super detective in the Detroit police department who lived next door. Still, I suffered from nightmares for years. So, I have firsthand knowledge of what can happen in restrooms, parking lots, etc. This whole thing is horrible and insane.

" who I'm certain wants to protect women and little girls from pervs"
I do not think bathroom restrictions protect children from perverts.