Target To Eliminate Signs Specifying Boys Or Girls Toys

[beej]

this is my opinion and just my opinion and I'm not going to argue it with anybody.
But everybody has a god except God himself. God, being omnipotent has no god. If an athiest says that he has no god. Then he in essence has declared himself to be god. Therefore when you say the pledge of Allegiance. and you get to the under God part. just recognize what you're saying, "One Nation, Under ME". It might make you feel better. LOL

 

[-X-]

But if what Target is doing is social engineering

It's not Target.

I won't touch on the rest of your post because we could do that for weeks, and I'm not what one would consider to be religious. You're kind of talking about religious indoctrination, and that's not parallel to social engineering in the context of this particular conversation.

And just to be clear, I'm not upset, outraged, infuriated, or hysterical about any of this stuff. On the contrary, I find this shift to be fascinating. I almost want it to play out just to satisfy my Orwellian curiosity.

 

[Stranger]

As to the Constitution, out of curiosity where does one get their rights if they do not believe in a creator?

Just to be clear, we are talking about the Declaration of Independence (DoI), not the Constitution. Big difference. The first sets out how sovereign individuals are sovereign, and where this emanates (i.e. A "Creator"). The Constitution was then created by these Sovereign Individuals in order to establish a government, and to specify and limit that gov't's powers.

So, in our system, powers travel from a "Creator" to a Sovereign Individual to a Government. That's the hierarchy.

If one doesn't buy into the concept of a "Creator" then the entire system falls over. It is the root of everything, the foundation for our entire system. The Founders used the word "Creator" because they wanted to create a system of rights and liberty that even you or I could not give away. In other words, the rights that you and I have were not given to me by me, or another man, so even if I wanted to give them away I could not. A higher power gave us our rights, and they are ours, not matter what. They cannot be infringed upon by anyone else other than our Creator.

The Founders put a lot of thought into creating a system that would prevent smart men from co-opting the rights of poorer or more common men. I never saw this move as a religious or spiritually motivated move, I've always seen it as a logical one.

Hence, if one doesn't buy into the "Creator" concept, I'm not sure how that person resolves their own dilemma, nor am I not sure how that person protect there own liberty.

 

[Stranger]

And I'd venture to say that most (if not all) of us haven't been down the toy aisle in Target;

FYI, I'm in that aisle at least once every month for no less than 30 mins per visit.

Unfortunately, there are going to be several dozen things that happen on this scale in the very near future that will begin to form the picture for you. I just hope that by the time it comes into focus, you haven't completely bent to the point of inflexibility.

The gender thread I started in off-topics is also relevant to the trajectory we are on. While the thread can be interpreted as upsetting, which it is, it also helps to illustrate the melding of gender in the eyes of the public via multi-national celebrities and icons.

From a network science point of view, which is my area of specialty, this will reduce what is called variety in the social system, which results in a weakened or less agile state that is more predictable and therefore easier to influence.

 

[Angry Ram]

very time some "issue" surfaces, be it Caitlyn, or Cecil, or Barbaro, or Target, it's the same mindless twits tweeting phony outrage, just like X said.

Yup pretty much. Social media mob.

Right now no one cares about Jenner or Cecil (well I personally do on the latter, I have a vested interest in endangered species).

But you gotta admit, it must absolutely SUCK to be a kid these days.

 

[PA Ram]

This could broaden into a wide discussion but keeping it focused on Target, I do have to say that I can't remember, when I was growing up that aisles WERE labeled for Boys or Girls or that building sets were labeled that way. Really, I just can't recall that. The boys just migrated to the boy aisles and the girls just migrated to the girl aisles. They didn't need signs.

I don't even really recall that when I was taking my kids shopping(unless I just never noticed it).

I just don't remember seeing any of that.

Maybe it's just me. Maybe it has always been there and I honestly never noticed.

Does anyone else remember this as being how it has always been? Signs designating Boys and Girls toys?

 

[Stranger]

Every time some "issue" surfaces, be it Caitlyn, or Cecil, or Barbaro, or Target, it's the same mindless twits tweeting phony outrage, just like X said.

Yes, this is what Lenin gave the world - new techniques to manipulate the masses via small groups of outraged and vocal citizens.

 

[bluecoconuts]

Just to be clear, we are talking about the Declaration of Independence (DoI), not the Constitution. Big difference. The first sets out how sovereign individuals are sovereign, and where this emanates (i.e. A "Creator"). The Constitution was then created by these Sovereign Individuals in order to establish a government, and to specify and limit that gov't's powers.

So, in our system, powers travel from a "Creator" to a Sovereign Individual to a Government. That's the hierarchy.

If one doesn't buy into the concept of a "Creator" then the entire system falls over. It is the root of everything, the foundation for our entire system. The Founders used the word "Creator" because they wanted to create a system of rights and liberty that even you or I could not give away. In other words, the rights that you and I have were not given to me by me, or another man, so even if I wanted to give them away I could not. A higher power gave us our rights, and they are ours, not matter what. They cannot be infringed upon by anyone else other than our Creator.

The Founders put a lot of thought into creating a system that would prevent smart men from co-opting the rights of poorer or more common men. I never saw this move as a religious or spiritually motivated move, I've always seen it as a logical one.

Hence, if one doesn't buy into the "Creator" concept, I'm not sure how that person resolves their own dilemma, nor am I not sure how that person protect there own liberty.

Well the state does that, its the social contract right? I don't believe that my rights come from a creator, they come from the state. There are just rights that the state has said even they can't touch. However in reality if they really wanted to, they could because there is no higher power to enforce that. Given how our country is set up it would be extremely unlikely to ever happen, but the fact is if it came to that no creator would step in to stop them, there would be no higher authority saying no.

I don't think it's necessary to believe in a creator or probably better off a god to have natural rights. You can say they come from nature (natural) and during during the process of birth you get those rights. Those rights are given to me because the state says they are though. North Korea probably doesn't give those rights to people (or at least very limited ones) and nobody stops them. If the US was built the same way and it was sustainable it wouldn't be any different.

 

[Memento]

this is just a push for the transgender/transsexual agenda. so how does that work in bathrooms and locker rooms and in the military for transsexuals. should we just go to unisex bathrooms now?

Agenda? Dude, I'm transgendered. All I want is to not be discriminated against, beaten, or even killed just for being who I am. And how it works? Yes, there should be unisex/gender-neutral bathrooms. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with being fair to everyone?

As for this? Who cares? Who cares if boys and girls want to play with toys that don't fit the specific gender profile? It doesn't hurt anyone.

 

[Robocop]

Agenda? Dude, I'm transgendered. All I want is to not be discriminated against, beaten, or even killed just for being who I am. And how it works? Yes, there should be unisex/gender-neutral bathrooms. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with being fair to everyone?

As for this? Who cares? Who cares if boys and girls want to play with toys that don't fit the specific gender profile? It doesn't hurt anyone.

thats fine I wouldn't have any problem with that if thats a 3rd bathroom option. when did I ever say there was anything wrong with that? as for the toys why are you arguing with me on that? I'm the one who said i don't give a crap about kids playing with whatever toys. my only argument was I don't think its right for anyone, transgender or whoever to simple pick which bathroom or locker room they feel like using. if ppl want a 3rd bathroom option be it unisex or gender neutral then great i don't care. my only concern was making it fair for everyone else too and not having little kids be exposed to that against their will. but do not paint me as if i was trying to discriminate against anyone because you won't find anything in my arguments to support that at all.

 

[Zombie Slayer]

Again, no one is saying that they don't want kids to play with whatever toys they want to. I keep seeing that brought up on here and I don't think I've seen a single person say that.

 

[Stranger]

Agenda? Dude, I'm transgendered. All I want is to not be discriminated against, beaten, or even killed just for being who I am. And how it works? Yes, there should be unisex/gender-neutral bathrooms. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with being fair to everyone?

As for this? Who cares? Who cares if boys and girls want to play with toys that don't fit the specific gender profile? It doesn't hurt anyone.

Under our current system, I can't infringe on another's liberties (...to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness), and another can't infringe on mine - we all get to do whatever we wish, as long as we don't infringe on another's ability to do what they wish. If someone does infringe, then we bring in the gov't to moderate the process of resolution in front of a group of other sovereign individuals sitting on a jury of judgement.

Well the state does that, its the social contract right? I don't believe that my rights come from a creator, they come from the state. There are just rights that the state has said even they can't touch. However in reality if they really wanted to, they could because there is no higher power to enforce that. Given how our country is set up it would be extremely unlikely to ever happen, but the fact is if it came to that no creator would step in to stop them, there would be no higher authority saying no.

I don't think it's necessary to believe in a creator or probably better off a god to have natural rights. You can say they come from nature (natural) and during during the process of birth you get those rights. Those rights are given to me because the state says they are though. North Korea probably doesn't give those rights to people (or at least very limited ones) and nobody stops them. If the US was built the same way and it was sustainable it wouldn't be any different.

So, you'd rather trust politicians & bureaucracies with your rights than believe that your rights came from a Creator and therefore are untouchable by men? I don't understand the logic. We fought a war of independence to get this system, why would we dishonor those dead soldiers by giving away what we won in battle?

Irrespective of what I just said, you can't give away your rights, as they are not yours to give away. That's the beauty of the system and the brillance of the Founders. Your stuck with your liberties, whether you believe in a Creator or not

 

[bluecoconuts]

So, you'd rather trust politicians & bureaucracies with your rights than believe that your rights came from a Creator and therefore are untouchable by men? I don't understand the logic. We fought a war of independence to get this system, why would we dishonor those dead soldiers by giving away what we won in battle?

Irrespective of what I just said, you can't give away your rights, as they are not yours to give away. That's the beauty of the system and the brillance of the Founders. Your stuck with your liberties, whether you believe in a Creator or not

I don't trust them at all, I just don't think that if they did decide "well screw em, we're not going to honor those rights" and they had enough support from the military etc (obviously it'll never get to that, but just for sake of hypothetical) there's nothing that could really stop them. A creator wouldn't come and lay the smack down so to speak for not allowing people to have the rights that they gave them. I don't think that not acknowledging a creator dishonors those who died for our independence either. If our rights came from a creator then why did we need to fight the British for them? The British gave the colonies the right to life, liberty (for the most part) and the pursuit of happiness, in fact we were some of the "freest" people in the world.

Honestly, while I'm not religious myself (if there was scientific evidence then I'd be all for it) I don't really care if people feel better throwing religion into things as long as they don't use it as an excuse to put others down. What I don't like is when people say we shouldn't accept homosexuality because we're a "Christian" nation or we shouldn't allow a Mosque because we're a Christian nation, etc. I don't think it's necessary to have god in the pledge of allegiance, and I don't feel it's necessary to insert religion into things, but if it makes others feel better than that's okay by me.

I had people tell me that they prayed for me while I was in the military, and that's fine I never said anything. One person asked to see my dog tags and noted that they said Jedi. When I told them that I'm not really into religion they said that because I wasn't a Christian soldier, god wouldn't watch over me and I would be killed. I didn't care for that obviously, and that's the type of religion I don't like. Otherwise, if you're not hurting anyone, do what you gotta do.

 

[Stranger]

I don't trust them at all, I just don't think that if they did decide "well screw em, we're not going to honor those rights" and they had enough support from the military etc (obviously it'll never get to that, but just for sake of hypothetical) there's nothing that could really stop them.

But what we do have is:

1. the moral highground
2. thousands of ROTC programs around dthe country that do an excellent job teaching our country's founding history to it future military officers

I believe you're former/current military, Blue. I also have 10 yrs with the services, albeit as a civilian. And officers understand where power comes from, and would not turn on the public, no matter what politician gave the order. Hopefully, that won't change.

Honestly, while I'm not religious myself

I just don't see this issue as a religious one. It's more of a foundational framework from my perspective. I don't think I need to be religious in order to accept the Founders' perspective on how our right/liberties are formulated.

 

[bluecoconuts]

But what we do have is:

1. the moral highground
2. thousands of ROTC programs around dthe country that do an excellent job teaching our country's founding history to it future military officers

I believe you're former/current military, Blue. I also have 10 yrs with the services, albeit as a civilian. And officers understand where power comes from, and would not turn on the public, no matter what politician gave the order. Hopefully, that won't change.

I understand, most of the enlisted know as well, which is why I'm not worried about that ever happening. It was just in terms of the thought experiment (I actually think this is an interesting one).

I just don't see this issue as a religious one. It's more of a foundational framework from my perspective. I don't think I need to be religious in order to accept the Founders' perspective on how our right/liberties are formulated.

I accept how the Founders saw things in the sense that they see the rights as coming from a creator, and while I don't think someone needs to be a religious person and actively go to the place of worship for whatever religion they are, I would say that you need to have at least the belief of a creator. I can also accept that someone can say that rights come from a higher place than the state without believing a creator, which would be if they just simply believe that it comes from nature.

Again, it's an interesting thought experiment no matter how to slice it.

 

[Stranger]

Again, it's an interesting thought experiment no matter how to slice it.

yes, it is.

When I told them that I'm not really into religion they said that because I wasn't a Christian soldier, god wouldn't watch over me and I would be killed.

I'm by no means a religious person, but the person who said this is an idiot. No one with a brain who understands Christianity would make such an assine comment to a soldier. I guess every group or following has all kinds

 

[bluecoconuts]

I'm by no means a religious person, but the person who said this is an idiot. No one with a brain who understands Christianity would make such an assine comment to a soldier. I guess every group or following has all kinds

Yeah they do, I've met wonderful people of every faith and awful people of every faith. In the end it doesn't really matter, shitty people will use whatever they feel necessary to justify their actions.

 

[Stranger]

Yeah they do, I've met wonderful people of every faith and awful people of every faith. In the end it doesn't really matter, crappy people will use whatever they feel necessary to justify their actions.

I'm by no means a religious person. And quite honestly, I'm no expert in religion or religous history. Fortunately (or unfortunately), I have a wife who is both religious and an expert in these things

Well, one thing I've learned from her is that Jesus didn't buy into religion either. He upset the established religious leaders and hierarchy at the time because he told people not to participate in the [religious] institutions of the day, and to experience their own direct personal relationship with their "Creator".

It seems to me that many of our existing institutions, religious or otherwise, have been co-opted by people seeking power for themselves. So, it doesn't surprise me that these institutions have turned many away, or given themselves a bad name, or created followers who exhibit untenable beliefs.

So, I think finding your own definition for "Creator" that work for you personally, and is also consistent with the Founders' goals, is an acceptable and worthy approach for addressing this dilemma. I don't think you need to worry about trying to make your logic fit into some religious framework.

 

[fearsomefour]

Agenda? Dude, I'm transgendered. All I want is to not be discriminated against, beaten, or even killed just for being who I am. And how it works? Yes, there should be unisex/gender-neutral bathrooms. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with being fair to everyone?

As for this? Who cares? Who cares if boys and girls want to play with toys that don't fit the specific gender profile? It doesn't hurt anyone.

You can't be discriminated against, beaten or killed now. Legal protections for such things apply to everyone....status quo on that front.
In terms of bathrooms I couldn't care less. If I owned a business and this became a requirement I might very well go from two bathrooms to one and figure a way to convert that extra space into revenue generating space.
This thing is just such a non issue in so many ways.