Posted on 10/04/2007 7:09:44 AM PDT by fromscratchmom
ADF attorney: Federal appeals court rejects demand of “transsexuals” for special rights Court says employers have legitimate concern over use of restrooms by employees with Gender Identity Disorder Wednesday, September 26, 2007, 11:11 AM (MST) | ADF Media Relations | 480-444-0020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
DENVER — A federal appeals court has issued a significant ruling saying that an employer’s concern over the use of restrooms by “transsexual” employees is legitimate, according to Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Brian Raum. Raum explained further that the court ruled that “transsexuals” do not qualify as a protected class under Title VII.
“The court delivered a significant legal punch to political special interest groups who are demanding that persons with Gender Identity Disorder be treated as though they were members of the opposite sex. The court correctly ruled that employers have a valid concern regarding their employees’ proper use of public restrooms,” said Raum.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruled Thursday that the Utah Transit Authority had a legitimate concern over a male employee’s restroom usage. Michael Etsitty, a male employee, had begun taking female hormone therapy and wearing women’s jewelry and makeup but still had male sex organs. UTA had liability concerns regarding the man’s use of women’s bathrooms.
http://www.alliancedefensefund.org/news/story.aspx?cid=4257
Good decision by the court.
And yet another Democrat constituency voter group goes down in flames...
This does not bode well for the lawsuit filed by the Transphibians.
I looked up this group on the internet today because I had recieved a mailing from them,or rather from an off-shoot group called National Campaign to Stop the ACLU. Just seeing the name on the back of the envelope was enough to pique my interest. My thoughts, by all means, lets stop the ACLU. lol.
It was pretty interesting just browsing the internet for them.
Apparently the off-shoot group has no official website and hardly any internet presence at all. But there were a hand-ful of wacko sites that carried personal blog type writing showing that the few wackos out there who were mistakenly targeted with the groups mailings are having hissy fits over them.
Court to transsexuals: “Go screw yourselves”
“I never understood why this was a problem... it isn’t like most people are looking at others while they are in the bathroom. Just pick one and use the stall, close the door and be done with it!”
You’re kidding right?
At least we won’t have to retrofit for gills/no gills.
Bathrooms ought to be co-ed everywhere. Put stalls in for everything, and everyone.
It is only a problem when one has a society has a certain expectation of privacy. If no one cares whether or not men are in the women’s bathroom, or vice versa, then I suppose the point it moot.
But when one uses a bathroom with stall doors that don’t properly close, then it is a problem - and that happens a LOT. Compound the problem adding in children, and then you can see why the expectation of privacy is difficult, especially when you are the person in charge of someone else’s safety.
Case in point: I have a nine-year-old son, and he’s big for his age. Back in the day, my parents would let us go to public restrooms by ourselves, with the idea that no one would bother us in the bathrooms, because people would respect our privacy. But I have never let either of my children go to multi-stall public restrooms by themselves, because of recent notorious cases where children have been assaulted in public restrooms, and the proliferation of cell phone cameras being used to peep at people.
I used to take him with me into the ladies room, but he’s so big now, I only take him to the men’s room when it’s single stall and I can check it first to make sure there’s no one in there - then I stand by the door and guard it. Call me paranoid, but I have no intention of leaving my child in a room full of strangers. I have an obligation to protect him.
WARNING: RANT FOLLOWS
/RANT ON
But then again, if certain groups have their way, no one will be able to say that anyone except “protected classes” have any protection under the law, not even children.
I assume that is what these groups are trying to do - to say that women and men, and even children are undefineable, and that have no reasonable expectation of protection or privacy under the law. However, a man who dresses like a woman shall receive full rights as a protected class.
Let’s see if we have this straight. As a woman, I am not to have any legal definition, nor am I to expect any protection under the law, nor any expectation of privacy even in the bathroom. But if I were a man dressed like a woman, I could be legally defined as a woman and be considered a protected class.
I also find it ironic that I - as a natural-born woman - have to fully pay for any cosmetic surgery I want - but if I were a man who wanted to look like a woman, I have it all fully funded by the taxpayers in many municipalities. No “free” cosmetic surgery for natural-born women - but all paid in full if you are a man who wants to say he is a woman...
So where are the feminists here? Where are they, protesting for the rights of women? Oh, silly me. They don’t really care about women - they care only about destroying women, or any men who truly care for women. Marriage, family, home - all the original societal and religious structures put in place to protect women - must be obliterated in favor of the worker bee who never reproduces. Men who cared for women must be re-educated, and women who believed men were important must be dismissed. Of course, ANYONE who believes children are a blessing must be punished, and those children must be destroyed in utero.
But a man dressed like a woman is a “protected class”?
/RANT OFF
Thank God at least one judge sees the hypocrisy of it all.
Because these people demand that everybody recognize and celebrate them as a female. Its all about them and their needs and being the center of attention.
I lived through this in the workplace and its no picnic when 10 agree females march into your office and demand that the idiot not use their restroom. If you agree you get an EEO complaint from the trans if you don’t you get an EEO complaint from the female employees.
Okay, that’s it. I want you in for mandatory drug screening.
They never had a flipper to stand on.
Words of wisdom here.......Paging Senator Craig
None of the guys on my football team ever looked like that.
Okay, that’s it. I want you in for mandatory drug screening.
(laugh) Ummmmmm...brownies....
None of the guys on my football team ever looked like that.
(laugh) It's a puzzlement, indeed!
Trannies are only mutilated queers. What are they seeking to have treated specially, the homosexuality or the mutilation?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
