Posted on 05/26/2016 4:27:15 AM PDT by Kaslin
That’s what I’m saying, just restore/re-affirm the right of private businesses everywhere in the state to choose. Maybe something to cut off state funds, if any, that go to publically owned sex-exclusive facilities if they let men use the women’s.
Freegards
That's what the state law did, as well as requiring government facilities to keep men out of the ladies'.
I know, maybe they should have let part of Charlotte’s ordinance stand, but only the part about Charlotte’s own publically owned sex-exclusive areas, not the part about forcing private businesses to do it.
Freegards
I think the state government had to apply something evenly across the state.
Anyway, this sure is bringing the rabid squirrels out of everyone’s attics, isn’t it?
“I think the state government had to apply something evenly across the state.”
For private businesses, I agree. But for a bunch of voters who are happy about men in the women’s areas? I’m not sure. Why not a law that says state money for publicly owned facilities will be pulled if a jurisdiction within the state goes nuts and mandate’s men in the women’s within publically owned facilities in their jurisdiction? Seems like that would apply evenly across the state.
Freegards
Yeah, maybe ... probably too complex for the great minds in Raleigh, though.
The Charlotte voters elected those City Council members to keep the handouts coming, not to get men into the girls’ bathroom. They turned out some strong opposition, but the molesters’ lobby up there is pretty powerful.
At some point you have to throw your hands up in the air. That’s why I don’t think their should be laws that mandate who a business allows in their private facilities. If we are at the point where we have to have laws to protect those women who freely choose to use these places, we are done anyhow I figure. Like I said, I’m not sure either.
The dem voters of Charlotte can stew in it as far as I’m concerned. As long as they let private business alone and are themselves responsible for any lawsuits, and don’t get state tax money for these facilities. Maybe.
Freegards
Well, it’s like saying, “I don’t care if people (fill in the blank) as long as I’m not paying for it.” You are ... in the sense that some entity supported by your taxes is paying for it.
I tell myself that all my taxes support functions I like, such as state parks and my daughter’s CG salary.
Yeah, it’s pretty crazy to think things we hate like planned parenthood have been getting fed tax money for decades. At least you have some things you like getting funding too.
Freegards
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.