ADVERTISEMENT

A.C.C. Pulls League Championships Out of North Carolina

cigaretteman

HR King
May 29, 2001
77,132
58,313
113
The Atlantic Coast Conference announced Wednesday that it would move neutral site championships for this academic year, including the football title game and the women’s basketball tournament, out of North Carolina in reaction to a state law that curbed anti-discrimination protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.

The decision came two days after the N.C.A.A. announced that it would move championship games for the coming year, including six in the Division I men’s basketball tournament, touching off contentious debate between opponents of the law, who praised the N.C.A.A. for taking a principled stand, and supporters of the law, who said the association was inappropriately inserting itself into politics.

“The A.C.C. Council of Presidents made it clear that the core values of this league are of the utmost importance, and the opposition to any form of discrimination is paramount,” Commissioner John Swofford said in a statement. “Today’s decision is one of principle.”

The law, commonly referred to as House Bill 2 or H.B. 2, nullified local government ordinances establishing anti-discrimination protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, and required people in publicly owned buildings to use restrooms that correspond with the genders listed on their birth certificates.

James P. Clements, the president of Clemson, said: “The decision to move the neutral site championships out of North Carolina while H.B. 2 remains the law was not an easy one, but it is consistent with the shared values of inclusion and nondiscrimination at all of our institutions.”

The A.C.C., which is based in Greensboro, N.C., includes four member institutions in North Carolina, two of them state universities: the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and North Carolina State. In recent days, those universities’ athletic directors as well as the ones at Duke and Wake Forest issued statements expressing concern about the law or its effects.

In a joint statement, the chancellors of U.N.C. and North Carolina State, Carol L. Folt and Randy Woodson, said, “We appreciate the Council of Presidents’ reaffirmation of the A.C.C.’s strong commitment to diversity and inclusion,” adding, “However, we regret today’s decision will negatively affect many North Carolinians, especially in the affected host communities.”

The speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, Tim Moore, said the week’s decisions by the N.C.A.A. and the A.C.C. were “very unfortunate.”

“No one ever wants to lose events under any circumstances, but these organizations are certainly entitled to host their events wherever they choose,” said Mr. Moore, a Republican who supports H.B. 2. “The truth remains that this law was never about and does not promote discrimination.”


The conference, which said it would announce future sites, has just a few weeks to relocate its first affected championship, for women’s soccer, which had been scheduled to take place in Cary beginning Oct. 30, and fewer than three months to find a new venue for its marquee event, the football championship game, scheduled for Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte on Dec. 3.

Six other championships featuring sports like men’s and women’s swimming and diving, men’s golf and baseball are scheduled to be held at in-state venues. The men’s basketball tournament, frequently held in the state, was already to be staged in March at Barclays Center in Brooklyn.

Some championships hosted by specific universities will not be affected, like the men’s and women’s cross-country championships at North Carolina State.

Beyond those championships and regular-season A.C.C. games, the other major college sports event set to take place in the state is the Belk Bowl, which will pit an A.C.C. team against one from the Southeastern Conference on Dec. 29 in Charlotte.

The Charlotte Sports Foundation, which hosts the Belk Bowl and the A.C.C. football championship, said in a statement Wednesday that it was “disappointed” that the football title game was moving, adding: “We recognize the economic impact moving the game and its events have on the Charlotte area. We will continue to work to bring high impact sporting events to Charlotte in the future.”

Frank Kay, a spokesman for the host organization, said there were no talks about relocating the Belk Bowl.

Mr. Swofford had presaged the A.C.C.’s decision in a statement late Monday night, saying the N.C.A.A.’s decision “continues to build upon the negative impact” the law “has already had on the state,” and adding that he personally felt the law should “be repealed as it’s counter to basic human rights.”

Officials in North Carolina cities with close ties to the A.C.C., including Greensboro, have been worried about the long-term fallout from the N.C.A.A.’s decision Monday.

“We are in the process right now of bidding games and tournaments for the next four years, so we are really looking at the possibility of a five-year drought,” Mayor Nancy Vaughan of Greensboro, whose father was a longtime A.C.C. official, said in an interview Tuesday.

“It’s really hard to get back into the cycle when you’re out of it,” she added. “And it’s hard to maintain these facilities that you don’t have these marquee events being played in.”

Scott Dupree, the executive director of the Greater Raleigh Sports Alliance, said that for sports events in North Carolina, this week had been “unprecedented and historically bad, probably the worst ever in terms of lost business and damage to our brand.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/15/s...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
 
N.C. is dumb. They knew the risk. Not sure why they blew off huge lucrative deals just to be able to tell people where they can go to the bathroom?
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
Good for them. Teach the hyper right legislature and governor that actions, and statement legislation, can have consequences. Forcing people to face their bigotry makes them very uncomfortable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
Good. As a father I welcome the idea of grown men being able to go into the girls lockerroom and watch my young daughters change clothes.
 
This was the other shoe. There will now, hopefully, be huge pressure brought to bear against those idiots.
 
Good. As a father I welcome the idea of grown men being able to go into the girls lockerroom and watch my young daughters change clothes.
What if that man used to be a female? Still looks like a man, acts like a man, sounds like a man. Hell, he's even attracted to women. He just happened to have been born a female. That make you uncomfortable too?
 
When are they going to take it one step further and prevent regular season conference games from being played in NC? That will really show how serious they are. ESPN should refuse to broadcast the DUKE/NC game this year. Oh, wait, that might cost ESPN money.
 
What if that man used to be a female? Still looks like a man, acts like a man, sounds like a man. Hell, he's even attracted to women. He just happened to have been born a female. That make you uncomfortable too?

Sorry did I stutter? I don't care about my children's well being. Some guy with a penis having the right to watch little girls change clothes is much more important.
 
Good. As a father I welcome the idea of grown men being able to go into the girls lockerroom and watch my young daughters change clothes.

They could do that before the law. Was there some rash of it happening then? Is there a rash of that happening in area where laws like this aren't in place? Are you afraid of the boogie man too?
 
Sorry did I stutter? I don't care about my children's well being. Some guy with a penis having the right to watch little girls change clothes is much more important.
Your child locker room point aside, where exactly should these people go to the bathroom? You said you won't allow genetic men to use these bathrooms. Fair enough. But you said that post ops can't use them either. So where exactly do they go to the bathroom. Outhouse by the football field?
 
They could do that before the law. Was there some rash of it happening then? Is there a rash of that happening in area where laws like this aren't in place? Are you afraid of the boogie man too?

Exactly where is it legal for men to walk into girls lockerroom?

Many ymca and public pools do not have separate changing rooms for adults and children. Duh.

Where I live if an adult male walks into the girls lockerroom and takes his time so he can watch will be arrested and put on the front page of the paper as a sexual predator.

In the future maybe all buildings can be built with no walls so we can all watch everybody work, exercise, and take a dump.

I guess for some there is no line in the sand.
 
Exactly where is it legal for men to walk into girls lockerroom?

Many ymca and public pools do not have separate changing rooms for adults and children. Duh.

Where I live if an adult male walks into the girls lockerroom and takes his time so he can watch will be arrested and put on the front page of the paper as a sexual predator.

In the future maybe all buildings can be built with no walls so we can all watch everybody work, exercise, and take a dump.

I guess for some there is no line in the sand.
What about a post op female. No dick. Has boobs. Has a vagina. She just used to be a man. Ok for her to use the girl's locker room?
 
I wish someone like Dean Smith were governor. I know he would have shot that bill down. McCrory is a lapdog for the paranoid conservatives. He's even running a reelection commercial showcasing his dumb decision.
 
Exactly where is it legal for men to walk into girls lockerroom?

Many ymca and public pools do not have separate changing rooms for adults and children. Duh.

Where I live if an adult male walks into the girls lockerroom and takes his time so he can watch will be arrested and put on the front page of the paper as a sexual predator.

In the future maybe all buildings can be built with no walls so we can all watch everybody work, exercise, and take a dump.

I guess for some there is no line in the sand.

Again I ask is there a rash of this happening somewhere? Is a simple sign enough to prevent everybody from doing this? And if someone does go into the other gender under the ruse of transgender and whips it out and starts going at in front of a family, that's still a crime and that guy will still go on the front page.

It seems to be a boogie-man situation.

That thing that doesn't really happen, but it could happen! so lets pass a law that in no way prevents it from happening.
 
Exactly where is it legal for men to walk into girls lockerroom?

Show me where it's illegal, i've never seen someone charged with "entering the wrong locker room." I'm man enough to admit that not paying attention I walked into a woman's bathroom before realizing my mistake and exiting. Should I be charged for that "crime."
 
Show me where it's illegal, i've never seen someone charged with "entering the wrong locker room." I'm man enough to admit that not paying attention I walked into a woman's bathroom before realizing my mistake and exiting. Should I be charged for that "crime."

Is that really the same as a man walking into the girls lookerroom at the local ymca and sitting down on the bench and watching little girls change clothes and declaring himself transgendered if challenged?
 
Is that really the same as a man walking into the girls lookerroom at the local ymca and sitting down on the bench and watching little girls change clothes and declaring himself transgendered if challenged?

No. But, I ask again, in places outside of North Carolina that don't have a bill such as theirs, is this occurring at a high rate?
 
What does the ACC Championship have to do with a bathroom law. Everything is so damn political anymore. Can we enjoy anything without politics involved!?
 
No. But, I ask again, in places outside of North Carolina that don't have a bill such as theirs, is this occurring at a high rate?

Once is too much. Also people will be less likely to act in the children's best interests if their is gray area. If some dude walks into the girls lookerroom today and is spotted he will be confronted instantly. Pass a few of these laws and all of a sudden people might pause and do nothing because they are afraid of stepping into a transgendered mess.
 
For the record I don't care about restrooms.

I worry where this is headed in terms of lockerroom sand children.
 
Once is too much. Also people will be less likely to act in the children's best interests if their is gray area. If some dude walks into the girls lookerroom today and is spotted he will be confronted instantly. Pass a few of these laws and all of a sudden people might pause and do nothing because they are afraid of stepping into a transgendered mess.

There are costs to being free. Sure could it happen, yes. Is it likely to be a rash, no. You can't live in a bubble and protect everyone from every bad situation.

That would be like banning people from parks if they don't have kids, just because someone might decide to go there and watch kids in the pool.
 
Just to clarify a few things for some of you people again.
1. Transgendered folks bodies produce urine and poo just like everyone else. They go into bathrooms for the purpose of evacuating these waste products just like other folks. When this simple function is complete they exit the bathroom and go on with their lives.
2. Perverts attempt to gain entry into opposite sex bathrooms to seek gratification of their sexual needs.
3. There are already plenty of laws on the books dealing with perversions, and exploitation like attempting to peep on children in a restroom.
4. Transgendered folks receive no sexual gratification that is attached to their gender identity from going pee or poo.
 
Just to clarify a few things for some of you people again.
1. Transgendered folks bodies produce urine and poo just like everyone else. They go into bathrooms for the purpose of evacuating these waste products just like other folks. When this simple function is complete they exit the bathroom and go on with their lives.
2. Perverts attempt to gain entry into opposite sex bathrooms to seek gratification of their sexual needs.
3. There are already plenty of laws on the books dealing with perversions, and exploitation like attempting to peep on children in a restroom.
4. Transgendered folks receive no sexual gratification that is attached to their gender identity from going pee or poo.

And to further clarify things, anyone who is uncomfortable about someone of the wrong gender going in the wrong bathroom is a bigot.

Your comfort doesn't matter. The only thing that's important is the tranny's comfort.

Shut it. Deal with it.

Did I get that right?
 
A little girl doesn't need a grown man looking at her naked. I don't give a shit what personal struggles te guy has.

A little girls privacy trumps everything and people that see it different are sick sons of bitches in my book.
 
A little girl doesn't need a grown man looking at her naked. I don't give a shit what personal struggles te guy has.

A little girls privacy trumps everything and people that see it different are sick sons of bitches in my book.

I don't think anyone disagrees with these thoughts.

Child predators are sick.

But, you keep missing the point I and others make. That without some North Carolina laws this would be a pandemic in our society. That without out these laws every locker room in America would have 4 45 year old pervs saying I'm a transgender and watching 8 years dress going "no, no slow it down there sunshine."

That so unlikely to happen.
 
I don't think anyone disagrees with these thoughts.

Child predators are sick.

But, you keep missing the point I and others make. That without some North Carolina laws this would be a pandemic in our society. That without out these laws every locker room in America would have 4 45 year old pervs saying I'm a transgender and watching 8 years dress going "no, no slow it down there sunshine."

That so unlikely to happen.

All of you liberal morons are missing the point. The NC law was pushback against an Obama EXECUTIVE ORDER.

if you want to make gender-neutral bathrooms a law, then get it through Congress. Not through Obama's phone and pen.
 
All of you liberal morons are missing the point. The NC law was pushback against an Obama EXECUTIVE ORDER.

if you want to make gender-neutral bathrooms a law, then get it through Congress. Not through Obama's phone and pen.

Got it.

Less pass dumb discriminatory laws because we don't like how the executive branch went about it. That seems like a good plan.
 
Got it.

Less pass dumb discriminatory laws because we don't like how the executive branch went about it. That seems like a good plan.

If Congress would simply pass a law, then NC's law would be moot.

Until then, state's rights matter.
 
If Congress would simply pass a law, then NC's law would be moot.

Until then, state's rights matter.

state rights do matter, but suggesting passing a discriminatory law because you didn't like an executive order is dumb.
 
state rights do matter, but suggesting passing a discriminatory law because you didn't like an executive order is dumb.


Oooooh!

"Discriminatory!"

Guess what, hot shot? Government "discriminates" all the time. "Discrimination" is not a bad thing. It's how we determine if a medical school graduate is qualified to have a doctor's license, or whether a developer should be allowed to build a building, or whether a business owner can get a license to operate.

The modifier you're looking for is ILLEGAL "discrimination".

And I'm not ready for a King to make our laws. Are you?
 
Oooooh!

"Discriminatory!"

Guess what, hot shot? Government "discriminates" all the time. "Discrimination" is not a bad thing. It's how we determine if a medical school graduate is qualified to have a doctor's license, or whether a developer should be allowed to build a building, or whether a business owner can get a license to operate.

Those aren't protected classes, you understand what a protected class is, right?

That's also not discrimination.
 
Those aren't protected classes, you understand what a protected class is, right?

There is no law passed by Congress that makes transsexuals as protected class. This is something that the Obama Administration decreed on its own.

Again, do you want the President to have this exclusive power?
 
There is no law passed by Congress that makes transsexuals as protected class. This is something that the Obama Administration decreed on its own.

Again, do you want the President to have this exclusive power?

We've already decided the gender and sexual orientation are protected classes. At worst, it's implied just like the right to privacy is implied.

I also find it kinda find you are now whining about executive orders. Especially cause the NC governor issued an executive order to "modify" some aspects of the bill.

Can you help me understand which executive orders are good and which are bad?
 
ADVERTISEMENT