[ScrtAccess]

What one chooses to wear to represent themselves alone does not make one a pervert.

Programs designed to protect one from narrow minded people most likely ain't goofy.

How do you define "regular folk"? The drug dealer around the corner? The drunk at the end of the block? The homeless man standing in the middle of the intersection? The lady that cheats on her husband? "Regular folk" is a subjective term. Everyone pays taxes for these programs.

[jwalsh07]

What one chooses to wear to represent themselves alone does not make one a pervert.

One can choose to wear whatever he or she wants.

One may not force me to hire them unless the government controls the means of production across the board.

Choices have consequences, or at least they used to.

[Brad’s Gramma]

Wow. Just wow.

[the Deejay]

"Everyone pays taxes for these programs."

Not if "everyone" isn't working. And if they want "protection" by FORCING an employer to hire them, I don't think that's right. Supposing someone FORCED you to WORK & you didn't need or want to work? Would that be fair?

[the Deejay]

Where, in the US Constitution, or Bill of Rights, is it written, that everyone is "entitled" to a job, house, car, welfare, sex preferences, etc., etc.?

[MonroeDNA]

That scarf clashes with your dress.

[First Amendment]

Programs designed to protect one from narrow minded people most likely ain't goofy.

It is not narrow minded to consider homosexuals and "transgendered" people abnormal deviants. Indeed, it is using one's God-given common sense. And now, it's getting to the point where a person needs a backbone to acknowledge it. Calling people like me and many others here "narrow minded" is a small step from calling us "haters" and "homophobes" - and THAT is a small step from calling the Thought Police.