Posted on 05/16/2016 3:39:32 PM PDT by Pinkbell
Donald Trump vowed Monday that if elected president he would rescind the Obama administration's new directives aimed at protecting transgender people against discrimination in schools and health-care coverage.
But even as Trump accused the administration of federal overreach and argued that such matters should be addressed by the states, the Republican Party's presumptive nominee also sounded a more compassionate tone and offered a more nuanced outlook than many of his party's elected leaders.
Trump said in an interview with The Washington Post that the government must act "to protect all people" and that he was eager to learn more about the movement for transgender rights.
"It is a very, very small portion of the population, but as I said, you have to protect everybody, including small portions of the population," Trump said during the interview at his 26th-floor office at Trump Tower here in Manhattan.
(Snip)
But Trump, in a lengthy discussion on the issue Monday, spoke in a markedly different manner. He repeatedly said transgender people should be protected under the law and said he believed most states would "make the right decisions."
Asked if he thought the issue had been overblown, Trump said, "I don't think so, because you've got to protect all people, even though it's a tiny percentage of 1 percent. I think from that standpoint, [states] should come up with a policy that’s going to work for everybody and protect people."
Obama sees transgender rights as a modern civil rights issue, but Trump offered a different characterization: "I think it's a people thing."
"I think we have to help people," Trump said. "I don’t view it as civil rights or not civil rights. I think it’s something where we have to help people -- and hopefully the states will make the right decisions.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
"It's actually a very interesting subject to me," Trump said. "It's certainly an issue that's getting a lot of play and it's an issue that I'm studying very closely."
Note to Donald: These people have been peeing somewhere for a long time and not much of a problem...It’s not the business of the feds to do anything here...let states or municipalities get involved.
They are protected under the civil rights act.You can’t discriminate on account of “sex” I assume that includes orientation...like i said I have a hunch these people have been peeing somewhere the 69 years I have been on the planet and not a disturbance...so if it ain’t broke...Don’t try to fix it.
Freegards
LEX
Just say it's a local/state issue. Any questions on abortion, homo marriage, transgendered whatever rights - just say the states should decide, and focus on jobs, national security, and immigration.
Note to everyone here, he repeatedly said he will rescind it and hopefully the STATES will do the right thing.
Is that not what we want?
Freaks are now interesting people?
There was a time when they were neither seen nor heard.
I don’t get the fetish with cross-dressing and pretending to be someone other than yourself.
Then again, I’m old-fashioned.
Trump has given a Constitution based answer. It is a states rights issue, not a federal issue.
Next item on the LGBT agenda will be separate drinking fountains?
:-/
It is not about sexual orientation but rather gender identity. There is a big difference. Civil rights pertains to sex or gender and not gender identity.
To furious screwed-over young Berniebots watching Hillary steal the Rat nomination and looking for someone else to vote for besides Hillary, yes, they are interesting people.
Capiche?
Nobody is "discriminating" against transgendered people, who need both psychiatric and spiritual counseling rather than group hugs and shout-outs from Hollywood and Washington elites.
I wish Trump would simply say that transgendered people are mentally-ill morons who need to get help. Sure, it would create a tsunami of outrage but in the long run it would defuse the Left of an issue and further unite the country. I'm just angry that no one on our side is seizing the narrative on this issue and really shoving it back up the Left's ass.
I like how Trump says, “I’ll be looking at it.”
This avoids being harsh and communicates openness - regardless of the final decision he makes.
It’s like saying, “you might be right,” and then moves on.
I think it’s almost a given that Trump will govern as a socially liberal POTUS. I expect things like the LGTB agenda, abortion agenda, Planned Parenthood, etc to continue full steam ahead if Trump is elected. Not too many social differences between him and HRC. Economic issues are vast though. I’ll have to vote on that.
While it is good that Trump plans to rescind Obama’s politically correct transgender directives after he becomes president, constitutionally low-information Trump probably doesn’t understand the following.
The states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect LGBT agenda issues, corrupt Congress wrongly letting the lawless Obama Administration interfere with state sovereignty concerning this issue.
In fact, it can be argued that both federal and state governments are wrongly effectively making LGBT people a protected / privileged class which the Founding States had prohibited federal and state governments from doing.
Article I, Section 9, Clause 8: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States [emphasis added]: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Article I, Section 10, Clause 1: No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility [emphases added].
Remember in November !
When patriots elect Trump, they need to support Trump by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to not only support Trump, but also put a stop to federal government interference with state sovereignty.
Also, such a Congress would probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
I’m only counting on the pro-life justices. I agree, though, he’s largely not a social conservative. If only he was as outspoken about socially conservative issues as he is about the other, he’d a perfect candidate.
That’s right, it has not been a problem for as long as I can remember. Where did these people pee before? My daughter worked in a dept. store as a manager for years. If a transgender went into a changing room, she also went in there to be sure everything was ok but, didn’t cause the transgender any problems. Just commmon sense behavior.
Several years ago, my husband and I went to an event where a transgender guy appeared in a bright red dress, high heels, black stockings a beard and a black wig. Nobody paid him any attention so that he was made uncomfortable. Didn’t notice if he went to the ladies room or not during intermission. But, if he did, it was so crowded that I’m sure nobody would have said anything and would have left him a lot of space. These issues have been presented to the public in the past and the public dealt with them.
I don’t think Trump’s answer was socially liberal. He said that we should be sensitive to individuals, and that it’s not an issue for the federal government to be involved in. There was NOTHING in Trump’s answer that would have pervs putting on skirts and going into the Women’s Rest Room.
Trump essentially has the same view as Obama on this.
On the same side.
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.