Posted on 10/06/2015 6:11:53 AM PDT by massmike
As we’ve seen so many times before, Massachusetts is the current target for a nationwide LGBT push. This time it’s a bill for transgender "non-discrimination" rights in public accommodations. (Some refer to this as a “bathroom bill” but that is misleading, as we explain below.)
It’s not a secret that the next major goal of the homosexual movement is to use the force of law to force all of society to completely embrace the entire LGBT agenda in businesses, government, schools, and public places. This is done through draconian “anti-discrimination” laws that inflict onerous fines, lawsuits, and even jail time on those who don’t comply.
In Massachusetts, Bill H1577 (with an identical Senate version S735) would force transgenderism, cross-dressing, and similar behaviors on all businesses and other public accommodations. It was introduced this session by the LGBT lobby.
There will be a public hearing at the Massachusetts State House on Tuesday, Oct. 6, from 1-5 pm. It is critical that all good people be aware of this and be ready to help stop the bill from moving forward over the coming months.
As usual, they use the Civil Rights metaphor (and hijack the existing Civil Rights laws) to package their attack on society as achieving “equality.” This past weekend Apple CEO Tim Cook made it perfectly clear. Speaking before the national homosexual anti-family group Human Rights Campaign, he said that every state in America must have laws forcing all small businesses and others to comply, despite religious objections.
This is not an idle threat. Just last month the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that a Portland, Oregon bar owner must pay $400,000 to a group of cross-dressers because he asked them not to come back since their presence had been causing other customers to stay away. It’s the tip of the iceberg compared to what’s coming.
As with similar bills across the country, Bill H1577 uses statutes originally designed for legitimate Civil Rights purposes and extends them to cover politically-correct sexual perversions. Then it gives additional enforcement, punishment, and legislative power to aggressive tribunals.
Here’s what it does:
1. Gender identity. It references the absurd definition of “gender identity” [LINK] already in state law and adds the term “gender identity” to key Massachusetts statutes that deal with civil rights and public accommodations.
2. Anything can be a punishable violation. If a business owner, employer, or even another patron of any bar, restaurant, hotel, resort, store, health club, theater, or any other “public accommodation” simply “makes a distinction” (or even incites making one) between a normal person and a cross-dresser/transgender that is a violation of the law. That apparently even includes remarks or similar reaction of fright, fear, or disdain. Possibly even staring at someone would fall in that classification.
3. Specifically targets restrooms, locker rooms, etc. It adds a special new section in the General Law stating that restrooms, locker rooms, changing rooms, and other legal single-sex accommodations must be equally open to someone of that “gender identity” even if that person is biologically the opposite sex.
This means that if a six-foot man in a high-heel shoes and a mini-skirt wants to use a restroom, store changing room, or health club locker room as a “woman”, it would be illegal to deny it – or even complain about it!
4. Fines, jail time, lawsuits for damages. Punishment in the statute begins with a fine of up to $2500 fine and/or a year in jail. But also (and more frightening) the violator can be sued for additional “damages” by the aggrieved party, and have an additional civil penalty assessed against him.
5. Enforced by radical tribunal. The infamous (and radical) Massachusetts Commission against Discrimination tribunal is assigned the task to promulgate the regulations, rules, and policies to enforce this bill, as well as the ability to assess civil penalties. (Its members are appointed, not elected, and unaccountable to the general public.)
6. No religious exemption. There is no individual religious exemption for business owners, employees, or even patrons. (It is also not clear in the statute whether "public accommodation" includes churches.)
This is an extremely aggressive bill meant to push “transgenderism” in to the faces of the public with the force of law and onerous punishment.
As it stands now, some businesses or public accommodations (even health clubs) actually are willing to become “transgender.” Others find it immoral, disgusting, or simply too uncomfortable for them and their customers. This takes away that choice.
But there are larger issues that make these bills particularly destructive:
Psychological issues. It forces people to believe in and act upon a complete lie. Biologically speaking, no person can change his or her sex, no matter how much hormone treatment or mutilating surgery one has. Forcing these confusing visions on children is especially detrimental.
Moral and religious issues. It forces people under pain of the law to accept and act upon a monstrously pagan, atheistic view of life.
The “transgenders” themselves. Transgenderism is a symptom of very destructive and tragic mental health problems in an individual. There is overwhelming medical evidence that pandering to these behaviors and perversions, instead of encouraging the person to get help, is extremely detrimental. The longer the person is involved with these delusional behaviors, the greater the risk of suicide and other tragic outcomes. (Transgenders and transsexuals are thought to have a suicide rate of nearly 40%.)
We are troubled that many of our conservative friends are portraying this primarily as a bill that will allow heterosexual men to use “gender identity” to sneak into women’s restrooms to prey on them. It’s possible but very unlikely. (Using “gender identity” for an “improper purpose” is illegal according to this statute. ) It’s an easy sales pitch and avoids directly confronting the “transgender” issue, just as many conservatives avoided confronting homosexuality during the marriage issue.
This is much bigger than a guy lurking in a women’s restroom. This is about forcing the public acceptance of transgender behavior on everyone, which just a few years ago was considered so fringe and perverted that it wasn’t even talked about in any political circles.
In other words, the main problem isn’t a peeping Tom getting into the women’s restrooms. It’s about a “Caitlyn” Jenner or some other six-foot man in a dress who delusionally thinks he’s a woman, and actual women have no way to avoid him. Women and girls of all ages will be forced to stand alongside him at the lavatory sink and pretend nothing is amiss. Women we’ve talked to who have experienced that are often emotionally distraught, or just downright disgusted. Or for anyone, for example, being at a restaurant with men walking around in women’s clothes, it can be similarly distressing and frightening.
Men will eventually have to face the issue, too. There are plenty of women attempting to be men making their way into men's restrooms. Although men may not feel threatened physically by them it can still be very disturbing.
Back in 2009, MassResistance reported how a restaurant in Peabody, MA was being targeted by a group of cross-dressing men. It was extremely upsetting to the customers. The restaurant threw them out. The men tried to get the restaurant punished, including loss of its operating license, by the State and the various “anti-discrimination” tribunals. There was no law then to punish the restaurant owners, and they were able to go back to normal business. Let’s hope it stays that way.
Last session the LGBT lobby tried passing this bill, but MassResistance and others lobbied hard and stopped it. So it’s not impossible to beat. But that was then and this is now.
The LGBT movement has determined that they will do whatever it takes to “take” Massachusetts with this horrific law. They have businesses and politicians on board. The public hearing is Tuesday. We will let you know how the fight develops.
With all that’s wrong in the world, they’re arguing about restroom privileges for perverts.
Why is it that the Democrats have a lock on every freak-show constituency out there?
The left can't call it what it is, Men in girls restrooms.
They have to be deceitful and call it an anti-decrimination bill.
This stuff is going to eventually result in a tremendous backlash. And it won’t be pretty.
So I was in the bathroom at work and there was a guy washing his hands in the sink. I’m thinking he just didn’t see the sign outside the door. So I tell him “this is the ladies room” and he says “I know” and then leaves. Still don’t know if it was a girl wanting to be a guy or vice versa but it was so awkward. And I spent hours being scared of getting fired because I tried to be polite
Let’s mandate stand-up urinals in the Ladies’ Room for transgendered freaks.
Your experience will be repeated over and over, if these succeed in mainstreaming all this “trans” gender identity stuff. If challenged, any man in the situation you were in would claim to be a “transgendered” person who identifies as female.
Would anyone ever have dreamed, just a few years ago, that we would be talking about the mens room/ladies room set up as being discriminatory somehow????
This whole LGBTQ....goes WAY beyond tolerance. Its forced acceptance.
Seriously, I thought that this had already passed in Queerlandia.
Your story is interesting because I though of doing JUST this at our city hall during council meetings since they passed a “transgender/expression/cross-dressing” ordinance. There is absolutely NO test for determining a person’s “status” in this regard other than accepting the declaration of the person (on pains of a violation,) so I thought if I could get enough fellow men involved, we could push the logical point to a debate.
No, Houston is voting whether to keep the lesbian mayor’s allowing-transgenders-to-use-whichever-bathroom-and-locker-room-they-want.
OMG! Luckily, I haven’t encountered that yet.
Yes, forced acceptance. Now, they’ve defined “homophobia” as unacceptable: you must love us, and accept all our actions, or else.
I thought there was an injunction to stop the implementation until voted on?
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.