“Okay, since you refuse to say whether or not you support limiting restroom access as North Carolina did,”
Uh...I said that I didnt agree with Trump’s position.
Again some of you cant read.
I AM saying that the NC law would be ultimately unenforceable and would get tossed out in a court case the first moment some “trans person” that was not a “big burly” guy sued.
How would I do it? The first thing is that I would work back from the crimes that could be committed by pervs.
50 years minimum to life for offensives. Rape, recording people, harassment, and so on.
(And this applies to men and WOMEN. Not sure why all the examples cited are just keeping men out as if women going into the men’s room is a big old prize.)
The key is to make the price to big for them, and to isolate the activists from trying to make it about “persecuting trans people”.
From there it gets real hard. But I would like to see a set standard put down for these people (over 18) to be required to posses an ID that certifies that they have gone through a set number of procedures and examinations where they can be “cleared” to use the other restroom. That ID must be presented at the request of the establishment if they have reasonable cause.
You cannot merely “feel”. You will have to get a license after a certain number of strict criteria are met from your state. Failure to do so will result in a hefty fine short of any sexual crime being committed if you are caught. Those people that are “serious” about wanting to be the other gender, I would think, would jump at the chance to separate themselves from sexual predators.
And even this isnt perfect as you have numerous cases of real females, mad about the lines at the restrooms, going into the men’s room. How on earth would this be tackled?
The point is that the North Carolina law seemed to not even remotely try to address the real problem and instead just chucked this out there and hoped the left would simply not notice and react.
I'm not at all sure about that. According to the EEOC, yes. But I don't think the 4th Circuit has said anything on it, and I think the vast majority of states/jurisdictions still base male/female on birth certificates.
From there it gets real hard. But I would like to see a set standard put down for these people (over 18) to be required to posses an ID that certifies that they have gone through a set number of procedures and examinations where they can be “cleared” to use the other restroom. That ID must be presented at the request of the establishment if they have reasonable cause.
How does any of that address the Constitutional issue? And the determination of which "set number of procedures and examinations" is just a recipe for absolutely endless litigation.