Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day

You presuppose the debate presupposes a two way conversation.

Hope this helps.

I would choose living because dead people can't talk.

Sure, the American Family Association says it is sending men into womens restrooms to "test the law". This isn't a measure of risk but one of paranioa. A conservative group here is a the problem not transgenders. This still doesn't support any of the shortcomings that have been voiced ad naseum.

Never mind that your children/women have a higher chance of being abused by men they know rather than strangers, you know; family, members of school, teachers, priests. Never mind that transgenders do not equal predators. Never mind that you don't advocate for keeping predators out of restrooms you try to keep people predators "might pose as" instead.

Your logic is akin to saying bad guys might use guns...so guns are the problem. Either that or you have bigoted feelings towards transgenders and your crusade here is just another way for you to punish a group you don't like. Maybe a bit of both.

It doesn't seem like a good business model. I would want the car that tries to save me if there was ever an "either or" situation.

They have noses like humans so they probably smell like humans.

;)

Maybe men prone to those things are the types that the Kardashians' are attracted to.

Edit. Double post.

Lets treat them like how we treat Radical Christians.

Sure a person has the right to offend someone else. The problem occurs when the "right to offend" is actually the continuation of systemic abuse towards others, then the "right to offend" is a fallaciously reduced excuse used to continue the systemic abuse of others. Saying that something is only "offending" people can be to ignore that the consequences can be far greater than simple offending others.

Edit, double post again.