North Carolina to Limit Bathroom Use by Birth Gender

[JonNC]

I was wondering if someone would bring that up. That being the case, Justice Roberts should have IMMEDIATELY declared it unconstitutional.

The Constitution clearly states that ALL TAXES MUST ORIGINATE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. The reason being that Representatives represented the interests of the people, while Senators originally represented the interests of the individual states. (This was why senators were originally elected by the state legislatures. This role went away when the 17th Amendment was passed in 1914, which provided for the direct election of senators by the people.)

The role of the House of Representatives remained, though, as Representatives are supposed to be closer to the people and thus more in tune with what taxes the people would be willing to pay. No taxation without representation, and all that.

Obamacare, however, originated in the Senate. If it is a tax, as the Supreme Court has declared, then it is an unconstitutional tax. Why a lawsuit asking to have the issue decided has not been brought up, or not allowed to proceed to the Supreme Court, is one reason why many Americans are losing faith in our judicial system. This loss of faith in the independence and fairness of the judicial system was one of the factors that led to the American Revolution.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Civil courts have done less damage than Title IX of the Department of Education, which issues rules about sexual harassment at colleges and universities. The Foundation fo Individual Rights in Education has noted that their rules essentially overturn students’ rights to free speech and to due process in many cases. See here for example.

It’s what progressives in power do.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Laws against sex discrimination would apply equally to showers and changing rooms as well. I suppose a man would be entitled to try on clothing at the women’s changing room at Victoria’s Secret.

Has to. I can’t see how a small fraction of males can receive an extra protection, while prohibiting all the rest. Its the same as saying only white men can use a certain restroom

Jon

 

[NM505StKate]

Seems to me these laws are less to do with “saving women/children” and more on transphobia.

 

[JonNC]

Seems to me these laws are less to do with “saving women/children” and more on transphobia.

So, you’re able to read the motives.

Trans isn’t mentioned in the bill. It applies to everyone. It was the Charlotte ordinance that discriminated, by setting up a certain privilege for a select few.

Jon

 

[rae317]

Transgender people experience high levels of discrimination and harassment. How does trying to protect them from that discriminate against others Jon?

Trans may not be mentioned in the bill but it is clear that is the group that is affected by it. You know that.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Do cities with a lot of unisex bathrooms (ex:NYC) have a lot of the problems that have been expressed concerns here?

 

[exnihilo]

I have expectations too. Not being harassed or arrested for going to the bathroom. Re privacy - I’ve never seen a naked woman in the womens room. Even in locker rooms women are very modest around each other (I do use those too).

Whether you think it is madness or not, Transgender people are here and have been for a long time. Generally not treated very well. I don’t want to force you to do anything except just let me live my life in the way that I think is best without being subject to your prejudice and without you interfering or trying to make my life more difficult. Believe whatever you want otherwise.

Law and politics is all about forcing people to do something. The liberal plea to be just left alone is a deception. If it was true I wouldn’t have a problem with it. There is a push to force people to allow men into women’s bathrooms and women into men’s bathrooms. Again, if we do away with sex segregated bathrooms that is fine. But if people put up signs limiting a place to a sex then the signs need to be respected.

 

[JonNC]

Transgender people experience high levels of discrimination and harassment. How does trying to protect them from that discriminate against others Jon?

Trans may not be mentioned in the bill but it is clear that is the group that is affected by it. You know that.

One doesn’t protect one part of the population by discriminating against all the others. There was nothing in the Charlotte ordinance that protected anyone. In fact, if anything, it drew attention to the very people you claim they were trying to protect. In fact, it was the Charlotte ordinance that most negatively affects transgenders.

HB2, OTOH, makes it clear that all people have equal access, and that businesses and private firms can set policies commensurate with the needs of the clientele and employees, and the moral principles of its owners.

Jon

 

[pensmama87]

Do cities with a lot of unisex bathrooms (ex:NYC) have a lot of the problems that have been expressed concerns here?

I really think that’s the solution (provided they are family bathrooms or single-user).

I don’t live in NYC but we have a lot of single bathrooms in businesses, or in places large enough for multiple bathrooms there are additional family bathrooms. Seems to work well enough.

For me, the big bathroom gender issue is changing tables in men’s rooms. Although I feel that’s gotten better even since my first was born five years ago.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I
I don’t live in NYC but we have a lot of single bathrooms in businesses, or in places large enough for multiple bathrooms there are additional family bathrooms. Seems to work well enough.

The ones I encounter in NYC are typically not single bathrooms. It’s one big bathroom with multiple stalls and a common wash area.

 

[Muzhik]

I really think that’s the solution (provided they are family bathrooms or single-user).

Per the federal government, no, that is not acceptable. The school in Illinois had proposed that for the male student who identified as female, but the government stated that having a separate bathroom/changing area/shower was equivalent to “separate but equal” and thus unacceptable.

IOW, those who do not accept the government’s doctrine that biology and/or physiology are irrelevant will be punished until they do accept the doctrine.

 

[JonNC]

Per the federal government, no, that is not acceptable. The school in Illinois had proposed that for the male student who identified as female, but the government stated that having a separate bathroom/changing area/shower was equivalent to “separate but equal” and thus unacceptable.

IOW, those who do not accept the government’s doctrine that biology and/or physiology are irrelevant will be punished until they do accept the doctrine.

States need to get themselves in a position where they can forego federal money, and therefore federal extortion tactics such as this, if they want to regain control of the schools and state sovereignty

Jon

 

[gracepoole]

Law and politics is all about forcing people to do something.

No, laws are often about stopping people from doing something, like discriminating against those who are part of a protected class. Like it or not, I don’t have any doubt that we’ll see a revisiting of the Civil Rights Act to expand those classes identified by it.

 

[pensmama87]

The ones I encounter in NYC are typically not single bathrooms. It’s one big bathroom with multiple stalls and a common wash area.

Ah.

Yeah, although I could see a positive application considering I’m a mom of boys, I would not feel comfortable or safe using a bathroom where strange men are present.

 

[JonNC]

No, laws are often about stopping people from doing something, like discriminating against those who are part of a protected class. Like it or not, I don’t have any doubt that we’ll see a revisiting of the Civil Rights Act to expand those classes identified by it.

Just thinking of the language of progressives: a protected class. The term itself drips with bigotry and discrimination. Every American is a member of the protected class: we are protected from government by the rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Jon

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Just thinking of the language of progressives: a protected class. The term itself drips with bigotry and discrimination. Every American is a member of the protected class: we are protected from government by the rights enumerated in the Constitution.

Jon

“Protected Class” is a bit of an old term. It’s been around since 1964 (52 years). What has changed over time is what characteristics have been added to those for which there is some protectionsort against unfair treatment based on the characteristic. Unfair treatment based on some other characteristic might not fall under protected class status.

 

[JimG]

It’s rather amazing that having separate restrooms for males and females can be sex discrimination under Title IX.

thepublicdiscourse.com/2016/04/16826/

 

[edwest2]

Bathrooms should be used by birth gender, not surgical manipulation.

Ed

 

[JonNC]

“Protected Class” is a bit of an old term. It’s been around since 1964 (52 years). What has changed over time is what characteristics have been added to those for which there is some protectionsort against unfair treatment based on the characteristic. Unfair treatment based on some other characteristic might not fall under protected class status.

I know the origin of the term, but I was talking about how its usage is being abused to push an agenda of oppression by the progressive movement

Jon