South Dakota passes nation’s first bill restricting bathrooms to biological sex

LifeSiteNews ^ | 2/18/16 | Dustin Siggins

[ROCKLOBSTER]

making the circumstances of public health safe for everyone.

So, what's wrong with telling these freaks to keep their sexual psychosis to themselves, and to gravitate to the proper bathroom intended for people of similar genitalia?

[WhiskeyX]

“So, what’s wrong with telling these freaks to keep their sexual psychosis to themselves, and to gravitate to the proper bathroom intended for people of similar genitalia?”

Your argument erroneously assumes there are only two classes of persons who have “similar genitalia”, when in fact something on the order of perhaps more than one-half million inter-sexed Americans have genitalia that are dissimilar in form and function when born and at puberty. This number does not include the people who claim to be transgendered and do not exhibit physical manifestations of being inter-sexed. Although there are many good reasons to argue that certain people who claim to be transgendered can represent a threat to women in women’s restrooms, that does nothing to change the fact there are many other good reasons why providing public restrooms offering privacy for everyone is good common sense. Completely aside from any issues related to the transgendered, such privacy enhances everyone’s privacy and security, makes it easier for parents to attend to the needs of infants and other children, distributes facilities between genders, provides the inter-sexed with the privacy they formerly had when outhouses and thunder mugs were in use, and more. A side benefit would be the way in which doing so in new construction would eventually result in the transgendered restroom dispute becoming non issue.

The you have to deal with the problem of common showers. Isn’t it interesting how adults are supposed to be entitled to their privacy when showering, but young people are not?