rofl wtf is that title for that article

I also agree with this, being a state level thign. that way people can gather and congregate in the sort of areas they want to live in instead of being forced to live with a certain thing

This post was edited by ChrisKz on Feb 22 2017 01:36pm

as long as i don't live in a state that wastes millions to billions going back and forth on this issue for a few decades with zero cases of actual abuse to appease complete fucking morons sure.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/mexico-says-not-accept-trumps-173258264.html

wait you mean we can't just dump millions of people into someone else's country and transport proven criminal illegals through their country to questionable destinations? Seems like the "oh they're gonna pay for it, that i can tell you" rhetoric didn't really scare Mexico too much. shit they'll prob decline to pay for a cent of the wall out of pride and deal with the tariff rather than take one on the chin.

it's almost like when you piss people off on the campaign trail it doesn't go away once you're in office, shocker.

Gotta love it when the country goes backwards and there are people stupid enough to call it progress.

can't forget the "people can disperse to where they're comfortable" argument by idiots like Chris. "Oh you're a highschool trans person with crackhead parents in a non-trans friendly state, no problem just convince your parents to quit drugs, save money, find a job a few states away, and move. Easy!"

Its a legitimate argument. Calling him an idiot is uncalled for and doesnt invalidate states rights arguments.
It doesnt mean its feasible for every person to move, but its easier to move over a state than find a new country.

sorry master i won't call your pet an idiot again...

i wasn't arguing against states rights, i was arguing against state's rights specifically in this context of trans bathroom rights. based on the incredibly expensive process of writing a law, the invariable repeal attempts that will cost states money, and repeat and repeat. All with no tangible proof that such laws are even needed, from either side. The only difference is that in one case the fed is fixing a problem that likely doesn't exist once and for all, whereas the states will waste massive piles of money going back and forth.

that is why anyone arguing for states rights in this specific context is an idiot. the only other intelligent argument in my eyes is to be in favor of no laws at all as they're hardly worth the cost.

People who believe it is a states issue are not saying so based on the potential for less litigation. As such you cannot rightly dismiss them as idiots with that as the reason.

The constitution and proper ethics do not hinge on your feelings and the amount of potential appeals.
Calling anyone who disagrees with your weak assertion that it shouldn't be a state rather than federal issue an idiot is more telling of your own lack of intellect and knowledge (and class) than anything about them.
Saying it should be left to the states is not equivalent to saying every state should actively craft legislation to dictate one way or the other. They could simply carry on business as usual.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Feb 22 2017 04:00pm