I wonder how Keisling feels now about the issue with North Carolina Governor McCrory. McCrory does not identify as a bigot, but he is nevertheless bashed as one. Keisling would probably view him as ignorant, but I have to wonder if those are the only two categories for people of dissenting opinions or values. Does everyone have to agree in order to not be a bigot or ignorant?

This argument is a lot like the argument made by Governor Pat McCrory of North Carolina. He defends his passage of House Bill 2 by saying that the resistance to it comes from a values disagreement. Government is supposed to provide for the welfare of its people, but to what extent the role should be in this controversy is what makes the debate so heated.

This section of the article is written in a way that makes those who are merely uncomfortable with sharing their spaces the victims. However, it neglects to acknowledge the severe heath problems that may arise for the transgender person. For instance, "the high rate of mental health problems, including depression, anxiety, and and drug and alcohol addiction, as well as a higher suicide rate among untreated transsexual people than in the general population. Many transgender and transsexual activists, and many caregivers, point out that these problems usually are not related to the gender identity issues themselves, but to problems that arise from dealing with those issues and social problems related to them." To learn more about gender identity issues, visit: http://www.psychologistanywhereanytime.com/sexual_problems_pyschologist/psychologist_gender_identity_issues.htm

Morrill, Jim, and Tim Funk. "McCrory Says Good Friends Have Shunned Him, His Wife over HB2." Charlotte Observer. N.p., 11 Oct. 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016. This article is about the recent political issue in North Carolina, regarding transgender bathrooms. North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory has sparked conflict by stating that Caitlyn Jenner should have to use the men's restroom if she is to use government facilities. It is important to note that he does not include private facilities. Governor McCrory signed into law House Bill 2, which requires bathrooms in government facilities to be used by people based on the gender listed on their birth certificate. A majority of the responses to this bill have been not only negative, but calls to violent action, or at least exclusionary action. McCrory has received death threats. His wife has been shunned from events. Even life-long friends of the McCrory family are pulling support. An important point in this article, at least in my opinion, is that he is not hateful. Governor McCrory did not intend to incite or imply hatred. Being governor means that he is trusted to do what he believes is right, and he believes his view is right. He did not write this bill into law in any ill manner, but he notes that he has been confronted only with negative, hateful responses. He listens to opposing views, respectfully disagrees, and moves on. But he is not responded to in the same way. He does not identity himself as an ultra-conservative, but according to his audience, he sure is now. We are in a time of major societal change, and there is sure to be backlash and resistance. Governor Pat McCrory of North Carolina is part of the resistance, but he is not violent and he is not hateful. He merely disagrees with the majority, and that is no longer a viable option anymore. As Governor McCrory aptly notes, “It’s almost like the George Orwell book ‘1984’,” he said. “If you disagree with Big Brother or you go against the thought police, you will be purged. And you will disappear.”

The first thing that comes to my mind when I read this is the Westboro Baptist Church and the way it uses its faith to justify its bigotry as conviction. In the image above, these members protest everything that challenges their faith, but they do so in a way that, arguably I assume, denies their beliefs too. They use the bible to justify their dislike and opposition to such social movements as same sex marriage, but they do so in an alienating way that comes off as extremely hateful, which is something the bible also teaches against. https://www.splcenter.org/sites/default/files/group_images/SPLC_Westboro-Baptist-Church.jpg

There is evidence that there is a greater societal dysfunction in countries with higher religiosity rates. Though most arguments use this data to say that religious people are problematic, in this instance, it can be used to explain why people act out. Religion can influence people to believe, support, and enforce social constructs that may be alienating and negatively affect minorities that challenge the status quo. http://www.skeptic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/v12n03_images/fig5_6.gif

This goes along with my previous annotation about religiosity rates and societal dysfunction. It has an alienating affect, similar to Jim Crow laws and other private institutions.

The reason for this is that motivation is almost impossible, if not impossible, to prove in most instances.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1308 This site is from a government site, summarizing the act and giving other information. The argument is that churches have a religious exemption. They do not claim bigotry, but rather, their own right to do what they believe to be right and just. Personally, I attended a Catholic church a few days after the legalization of same-sex marriage, and the Priest was not hateful, but his sermon came from a place of concern for the ideals of the church.

This rings true in historical context of racial discrimination as well. Take the institution and laws that enforced slavery for so long. Then, even when slavery was abolished and the state recognized the severe discrimination around the Civil Rights Movement era, the laws governing the 50 states, especially in the south, were not able to change the feelings and sentiments in the Old South.