Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bathroom Wars
Breakpoint ^ | June 6, 2008 | Chuck Colson

Posted on 06/11/2008 10:54:22 AM PDT by Fichori

Bathroom Wars

By Chuck Colson
6/6/2008
Related Audio/Video Downloads
Real Media
Windows Media
MP3 Media

Potty Politics

Three months ago, I told you about a new law in Montgomery County, Maryland, that demands co-ed locker rooms and restrooms in all public accommodations. The law was intended to accommodate “transgendered people”—that is, men who say they perceive themselves to be women, and women who claim they consider themselves men. I said, at the time, that we would see extremists in other jurisdictions attempting to pass similar laws. And that is exactly what is happening.

Last week, Colorado’s legislature passed—and Gov. Bill Ritter signed—a law that will open all public accommodations, including public restrooms, to anyone who wants to use them. That means men may use a women’s restroom, and women may enter men’s rooms. The rationale for Senate Bill 200 is that transgenders should be able to use the restroom they feel most comfortable using. Apparently, it is not important if others feel uncomfortable having their privacy violated every time they use public facilities.

The lack of privacy is not the only problem. Nobody is going to ask a man if he is trangendered before allowing him into the ladies’ room. This means any man—including a child molester—could simply follow a little girl into the privacy of a public restroom. And, if a man decided to expose himself to a young girl there, who is she going to complain to? After all, restrooms, by definition, are places where one exposes the private parts of one’s body.

Men will have even less privacy, because they often do not use stalls.

Appalling as this law is, it gets worse. Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family points out, in the Denver Post, that the law also threatens religious liberty: Colorado’s “public accommodations” law includes not only hotels and restaurants, but also any small or home-based business that offers “goods or services” to the public.

And, as we have seen before, radicals go out of their way to target Christian businesses. As Minnery notes, in Albuquerque, a Christian couple who operate a photography studio politely declined, on religious grounds, to photograph a lesbian “commitment ceremony.” For this exercise of their First Amendment rights, the couple were forced to appear before New Mexico’s human rights commission and fined more than $6,600. Now, if you dare to deny a transgendered “man” access to the women’s room, you can be prosecuted under criminal laws and spend up to a year in jail. It is an outrage.

The American people are not asking for new bathroom laws. The truth is, this is an effort—by a small but radical minority—to use the force of law to punish anyone backward enough to believe there are only two sexes: male and female. The true goal behind the law is the radical remaking of our society—one in which faithful Christians, Muslims, and Jews will be punished for their beliefs.

Are you disgusted enough? Good. If you live in Colorado, get to work putting an initiative on the November ballot. That is what citizens of Montgomery County, Maryland, did. And the rest of us better stay on our guard, keeping an eye on our own lawmakers.

In a free country, nobody has the right to tell us what to believe—or to punish us for putting our First Amendment rights into practice. And, yes, there are men and women who deserve privacy, no matter who tells us there are no differences between the sexes.

Today's BreakPoint Offer

BreakPoint WorldView magazine is now available for FREE online. Sign up today!

For Further Reading and Information

Tom Minnery, “Proposed Anti-Bias Law would open a Pandora’s Box,” Denver Post, 23 May 2008.

BreakPoint Commentary No. 080305, “Not My Shower: Breaking Biological Barriers.”

Bob Unruh, “Pass the Towels! Plans for Coed Locker Rooms,” Worldnetdaily.com, 2 November 2007.

Bob Unruh, “Coed Locker Rooms given Green Light,” Worldnetdaily.com, 14 November 2007.

Bob Unruh, “ ‘Coed Locker Rooms’ Spark Citizen Backlash,” Worldnetdaily.com, 11 December 2007.

Anne Morse, “Social Chastity Belts,” The Point, 9 April 2008.

John Ingold, “Ritter Signs Controversial Anti-Discrimination Bill,” Denver Post, 29 May 2008.

Ross Kaminsky, “Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter Signs Transgender Bill,” Human Events, 3 June 2008.

Urge Colorado governor to veto Senate Bill 200: “Take Action on Colorado Senate Bill 200.”



TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Colorado; US: Maryland
KEYWORDS: billritter; celebrateperversity; colson; culturewar; heshes; homosexualagenda; montgomerycounty; unisex
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last
To: TASMANIANRED

I don’t know much about the French.

What was their good idea?


41 posted on 06/11/2008 5:18:07 PM PDT by Fichori (I'm always getting spam advertising drugs and replica watches; Who do they think I am, a gangster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

Politicians...guillotine.

You have to fill in the elipsis..Don’t want to be accused of threatening any one..


42 posted on 06/11/2008 5:28:36 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (TAZ:Untamed, Unpredictable, Uninhibited.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
I read thought the bill from a link posted above,

Senate Bill 08-200

but if was difficult to figure out which section allows trans-gendered men access to womens restrooms.

Anyone?

43 posted on 06/11/2008 5:55:30 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
The bold is original.
ALL CAPS is [I think] the text that has been amended in, and the struck out is what has been removed.
The red is what I have highlighted for emphasis.
SECTION 6. 24-34-601 (1) and (2), Colorado Revised Statutes, are amended to read:
24-34-601. Discrimination in places of public accommodation.
PAGE 5-SENATE BILL 08-200

(1) As used in this part 6, "place of public accommodation" means any place of business engaged in any sales to the public and any place offering services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to the public, including but not limited to any business offering wholesale or retail sales to the public; any place to eat, drink, sleep, or rest, or any combination thereof; any sporting or recreational area and facility; any public transportation facility; a barber shop, bathhouse, swimming pool, bath, steam or massage parlor, gymnasium, or other establishment conducted to serve the health, appearance, or physical condition of a person; a campsite or trailer camp; a dispensary, clinic, hospital, convalescent home, or other institution for the sick, ailing, aged, or infirm; a mortuary, undertaking parlor, or cemetery; an educational institution; or any public building, park, arena, theater, hall, auditorium, museum, library, exhibit, or public facility of any kind whether indoor or outdoor. "PLACE OF PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION" SHALL NOT INCLUDE A CHURCH, SYNAGOGUE, MOSQUE, OR OTHER PLACE THAT IS PRINCIPALLY USED FOR RELIGIOUS PURPOSES.

(2) It is a discriminatory practice and unlawful for a person, directly or indirectly, to refuse, withhold from, or deny to an individual or a group, because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, marital status, national origin, or ancestry, the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation or, directly or indirectly, to publish, circulate, issue, display, post, or mail any written, ELECTRONIC, or printed communication, notice, or advertisement which THAT indicates that the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a place of public accommodation will be refused, withheld from, or denied an individual or that an individual's patronage or presence at a place of public accommodation is unwelcome, objectionable, unacceptable, or undesirable because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, SEXUAL ORIENTATION, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.
[Red emphasis mine]

In paragraph 1, we see what is covered by this amendment, including facilities.
(What kind of facilities does Macdonald's have?)

In paragraph 2, we learn that it is "a discriminatory practice and unlawful" to "publish, circulate, issue, display, post" anything that indicates the "full and equal enjoyment" of the "accommodations of a place of public accommodation will be refused" based on their "SEXUAL ORIENTATION".

In other words, the little sign on the ladies restroom is discriminatory against men who think they are women.(But don't look like the picture on the door)

Or, saying a room is for women only is discriminatory.(I think that will cover dressing rooms in malls also)

Now, I'm not a lawyer, but thats the way it looks to me.

44 posted on 06/11/2008 6:46:35 PM PDT by Fichori (I'm always getting spam advertising drugs and replica watches; Who do they think I am, a gangster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
In other words, the little sign on the ladies restroom is discriminatory against men who think they are women.

I don't agree that's what the law says, nor is that the intent.

45 posted on 06/11/2008 7:10:17 PM PDT by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Doe Eyes
"I don't agree that's what the law says, nor is that the intent."

I think the gays would disagree with you, and I think the activist judges would back them up.
46 posted on 06/11/2008 7:19:42 PM PDT by Fichori (I'm always getting spam advertising drugs and replica watches; Who do they think I am, a gangster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Fichori; Abundy; Albion Wilde; AlwaysFree; AnnaSASsyFR; bayliving; BFM; cindy-true-supporter; ...

Maryland “Freak State” PING!


47 posted on 06/13/2008 5:58:51 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (To the liberal, there's no sacrifice too big for somebody else to make. --FReeper popdonnelly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
Go to any sporting event in the country and you will see women using mens restrooms.

Yes, this is due to the age-old problem of building the same-sized restrooms for men and for women, when in fact women do need bigger restrooms with more stalls. Although I hear that in Europe they are trying to do away with urinals in men's rooms as well, because the very fact that they exist offends feminists.

Even if they mandated all stalls for both genders, women would still need more toilets than men because they have to go more frequently due to their unique plumbing and reproductive functions.

What's that old saying? — "We can put a man on the moon but"... we can't build women's restrooms that move the line along equally with men's.

48 posted on 06/13/2008 7:00:22 AM PDT by Albion Wilde (Poor people been voting for Democrats for the last 50 years, and they still poor. --Charles Barkley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Fichori

In a free country, nobody has the right to tell us what to believe—or to punish us for putting our First Amendment rights into practice.”

We do not have a free country any more.


49 posted on 06/13/2008 2:57:38 PM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philetus
We are on that slippery and evil slope.

Front row seats to the American Finale: Free.

Getting to see the look on the liberals faces when they find out what American patriots are really like: Priceless.
50 posted on 06/13/2008 6:12:00 PM PDT by Fichori (I'm always getting spam advertising drugs and replica watches; Who do they think I am, a gangster?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj

Wow, I’ve not heard anyone complain (or otherwise comment) on the racing board I frequent. You were at THE Belmont, too!

Incidentally, it’s a bit different when it’s known that another “facility” is broken.


51 posted on 06/14/2008 8:43:51 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde

“trying to do away with urinals in men’s rooms as well, because the very fact that they exist offends feminists.”

It offends people with modicums of modesty. It disgusts me that men pull it out in front of everyone, especially when supposedly they are so insecure that they won’t be as “big” as some other guy. It’s actually undoubtedly an accomodation for their laziness, wherein men hate to take time to do anything, such as close and lock a door.

“Even if they mandated all stalls for both genders, women would still need more toilets than men because they have to go more frequently due to their unique plumbing and reproductive functions.”

You think women have problems with plumbing compared to men? Why? As for the reproductive, little happens except changing sanitary items during a normal plumbing routine. Rarely does 1 go in just to change said item.


52 posted on 06/14/2008 8:53:55 AM PDT by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Major Matt Mason
We are rapidly turning into Europe.

I don't want to be like Europe. I like my own country. It is not perfect, but I love it, not Europe

53 posted on 06/14/2008 9:14:23 AM PDT by ncpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
I’ve not heard anyone complain (or otherwise comment) on the racing board I frequent.

There were several comments on Steve Crist's blog.

ML/NJ

54 posted on 06/14/2008 9:19:22 AM PDT by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Russ

Quite correct - some parts of this country going mad faster than others....


55 posted on 06/14/2008 9:35:08 AM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt (communism killed 100 milion people in 20th century.only cause USA did not give it chance to succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson