http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article67845317.html
If you have a dick, use the mens room.
If you have a dick, use the mens room.
NC General Assembly overrules City transgender law
- Thread starter MAGA MAN
- Start date
You know, I've been thinking about this law, and I was at one time firmly in the camp of "If you still have the bits, use the restroom appropriate to those bits," but now I kind of wonder whether or not that's moot.
Let's say there's a transgender woman (I really hope I'm not switching things around, here - I believe a transgender woman is physiologically male and a transgender male is physiologically female - if I've got that backwards I'm sure someone will tell me), and she is dressed as a woman, lives her life as a woman, but has a penis and (presumably) testes.
Now, I'm going to guess that the person in question is not going to go into the ladies room and stand there, using a urinal, for two reasons.
The first is that while I do not actually have extensive experience of a woman's bathroom except for when I was a very small child and my mother would take me to the bathroom in a restaurant or such, I am relatively certain that women's rooms do not in fact have urinals to stand in front of. That means that this person is going to go into a stall.
Stalls have doors. If this person is using the bathroom to go to the bathroom behind a closed stall door, I'm not sure that there is any danger of someone seeing their genitalia, thus mooting one cause for concern (that the human body is a shameful, terrible thing that is in fact so shocking that simply viewing a penis can cause death).
And again, despite my lack of experience in the ladies', I'm pretty sure that they are not running around nude in there, or lifting their dresses so everyone can see the vagina that (as with a penis) can cause death by the expedient of simply being seen.
By the same token, if a transgender man (based on my possibly-erroneous definition) goes into a men's room, I can't imagine that he will stand in front of a urinal and spray from their urethra.
So if you're transgender and going to the bathroom behind a stall door, what's the big deal?
Let's say there's a transgender woman (I really hope I'm not switching things around, here - I believe a transgender woman is physiologically male and a transgender male is physiologically female - if I've got that backwards I'm sure someone will tell me), and she is dressed as a woman, lives her life as a woman, but has a penis and (presumably) testes.
Now, I'm going to guess that the person in question is not going to go into the ladies room and stand there, using a urinal, for two reasons.
The first is that while I do not actually have extensive experience of a woman's bathroom except for when I was a very small child and my mother would take me to the bathroom in a restaurant or such, I am relatively certain that women's rooms do not in fact have urinals to stand in front of. That means that this person is going to go into a stall.
Stalls have doors. If this person is using the bathroom to go to the bathroom behind a closed stall door, I'm not sure that there is any danger of someone seeing their genitalia, thus mooting one cause for concern (that the human body is a shameful, terrible thing that is in fact so shocking that simply viewing a penis can cause death).
And again, despite my lack of experience in the ladies', I'm pretty sure that they are not running around nude in there, or lifting their dresses so everyone can see the vagina that (as with a penis) can cause death by the expedient of simply being seen.
By the same token, if a transgender man (based on my possibly-erroneous definition) goes into a men's room, I can't imagine that he will stand in front of a urinal and spray from their urethra.
So if you're transgender and going to the bathroom behind a stall door, what's the big deal?
There is no big deal in either scenario, but you described what some would describe as "traditional" transgender folks, going about their business in relative private, for example, a man made up to look like, dressing/ behaving like a woman going into woman's rest room and quietly using a stall to pee. Guys can sit down to pee, after all.
Charlotte's law, however, wasn't written that way. It allowed any guy to use a woman rest room without the associated trappings of a transvestite. So some slob in his man pants could open up a stall in the women's' room and let out a standing stream. If confronted all he would have to say is 'hey man, I feel like being a chick today'.
Opponents of the overriding state law ask how is this new law supposed to be policed? Are we going to check birth certificates at the doors of public rest rooms? Obviously, no. I ask them, how would you propose to police the Charlotte law? In the above example, a guy obviously taking advantage of a poorly written law, how do you deal with that?
Charlotte's law, however, wasn't written that way. It allowed any guy to use a woman rest room without the associated trappings of a transvestite. So some slob in his man pants could open up a stall in the women's' room and let out a standing stream. If confronted all he would have to say is 'hey man, I feel like being a chick today'.
Opponents of the overriding state law ask how is this new law supposed to be policed? Are we going to check birth certificates at the doors of public rest rooms? Obviously, no. I ask them, how would you propose to police the Charlotte law? In the above example, a guy obviously taking advantage of a poorly written law, how do you deal with that?
christiefan915
Catalyst
At least there's one principled person in NC state government.
"One day after civil liberties groups filed suit to fight a controversial “bathroom bill” in North Carolina that they say discriminates against the LGBT community, state Attorney General Roy Cooper announced that he would not defend its constitutionality.
“We should not even be here today, but we are. We’re here because the governor has signed statewide legislation that puts discrimination into the law,” Cooper told reporters in Raleigh Tuesday.
According to Cooper, House Bill 2 (HB2) is in direct conflict with nondiscrimination policies at North Carolina’s justice department and treasurer’s office, as well as many of the state’s businesses. Though the LGBT community is targeted, he said, it could ultimately result in the discrimination of other groups as well.
“House Bill 2 is unconstitutional,” he said. “Therefore, our office will not represent the defendants in this lawsuit, nor future lawsuits involving the constitutionality of House Bill 2.”
Cooper called the new law a “national embarrassment” that will hurt North Carolina’s economy if not repealed. And there are already signs that he might be right. San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee banned nonessential publicly funded travel there in a show of opposition to the law on Friday. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Seattle Mayor Ed Murray followed suit on Monday."
(Continued)
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/ny-gov-cuomo-bans-travel-to-north-carolina-in-184327168.html
"One day after civil liberties groups filed suit to fight a controversial “bathroom bill” in North Carolina that they say discriminates against the LGBT community, state Attorney General Roy Cooper announced that he would not defend its constitutionality.
“We should not even be here today, but we are. We’re here because the governor has signed statewide legislation that puts discrimination into the law,” Cooper told reporters in Raleigh Tuesday.
According to Cooper, House Bill 2 (HB2) is in direct conflict with nondiscrimination policies at North Carolina’s justice department and treasurer’s office, as well as many of the state’s businesses. Though the LGBT community is targeted, he said, it could ultimately result in the discrimination of other groups as well.
“House Bill 2 is unconstitutional,” he said. “Therefore, our office will not represent the defendants in this lawsuit, nor future lawsuits involving the constitutionality of House Bill 2.”
Cooper called the new law a “national embarrassment” that will hurt North Carolina’s economy if not repealed. And there are already signs that he might be right. San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee banned nonessential publicly funded travel there in a show of opposition to the law on Friday. New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Seattle Mayor Ed Murray followed suit on Monday."
(Continued)
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/ny-gov-cuomo-bans-travel-to-north-carolina-in-184327168.html
The problem is that they do not need to be dressed up or mutalated (not just drag queens involved here) to pop into the wrong bathroom.
It's his JOB as AG to do what he says he won't do.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
He can be fired and he should be fired. Funny when someone refused to do their job certifying immoral queers you shit your granny panties. Now you are all for government officials not doing their job in protest.
I wish I could say I was surprised by your hypocrisy.
Those saying Kim Davis should have been fired for not doing her job are the same ones defending the NC Attorney General refusing to do his.
He should or should be fired. I'm not setting the standard just applying the one Liberals did toward Kim Davis. Funny thing is they'll run from that now when it involves something they believe a government official should be able to determine whether or not they should do.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Ironic isn't it?
It is amazing how low the libtards will go to debase society.
As if all of a sudden the most pressing issue is where people with mental disorders go take a pee.
When the muslimes finally force the libtards to submit all of their queer fantasies will be ended
The best way to end muslime immigration is for conservatives to come out in favor of it as a way to vote down the queers.
If you have Y chromosomes
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
Well exactly like B. Hussein Yobabymama deciding to not enforce immigration laws. That they had no problem with
What is really shocking to me is the depths that liberals hate America when they willingly import hundreds of thousands of people who steadfastly oppose everything liberals stand for.
Do liberals like KKKhristiefan have a death wish?
Robo
Verified User
Politicians that are elected into office swear an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, including State Constitutions. If they refuse to obey the laws for any reason including personal, moral and religious principles, they should resign their job or be removed from office for violating their oath of office by appropriate proceedings. If they don't like the law, they have no business remaining in a job sworn to uphold the law.
It ain't rocket science folks!
It ain't rocket science folks!
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
So you think Obama should enforce existing immigration laws?
Cooper's catering to the Gay Mafia instead of his constituency. Oh, and he's running for governor against the incumbent who signed the new law.
We will have to see how he fares in Nov
More like bending over and taking one from them.
christiefan915
Catalyst
So when Kim Davis wouldn't do her job you say fine, she's upholding her religious principles, but when Cooper said he wouldn't defend an unconstitutional law, you're all hissy about it.
Wish I could say I was surprised by your hypocrisy.