Skip to comments.Ginsburg In 1975: Separate Bathrooms Are ‘In Some Situations Required
Posted on 05/10/2016 8:36:05 PM PDT by ameribbean expat
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Let there be three bathrooms: one for men who know they are men, one for women who know they are women, and one for those who are confused.
Single stall bathrooms are the solution. Absolutely no reason to do harm to innocents (mind or body) in the name of LGBTL...or whatever they are.
The men and women who claim to be the other don’t want a 3rd choice, and would fight to not have to use it just like they are fighting to use the wrong bathroom now. I suspect that all public bathrooms being converted to single use and have one urinal and one toilet with a lockable door won’t be good enough. They would probably try to stop that too.
Ginsberg probably doesn’t now agree with her earlier statements - because leftists have no bedrock principles. They are always prepared to be swayed by the times they live in, and do whatever is politically necessary.
Again, women are the losers. Just go to any nightclub on a Friday night and view the cleanliness and order of the mens vs. the women's bathrooms.
I’m not sure about that.
Men (dressed as women) have been using the ladies’ rooms for decades. No one minded. Half of the women never knew the other half didn’t care. This is all being pushed by the pervs and the far left loonies.
This mess all started when a liberal mayor and an activist decided to push the issue. It turns out this ‘activist’ is a registered sex offender although that information took months to come out.
Unfortunately the men (dressed as women) are the ones who are suffering. They can’t use the men’t room for fear of being assaulted and they can’t use the ladies room.
And now women and children are being put in an unsafe position. Who in their right mind would want their wife or daughter to be forced to share a locker room or a shower with a man??
Nothing worse than seeing hairy legs through the bottom of the stall, whew some other woman.
“Unfortunately the men (dressed as women) are the ones who are suffering. They cant use the ment room for fear of being assaulted and they cant use the ladies room.”
The better speak up and attest that they don’t want the state to force private businesses to let men use their women’s bathrooms then.
“And now women and children are being put in an unsafe position. Who in their right mind would want their wife or daughter to be forced to share a locker room or a shower with a man??”
I’m not sure women really care enough to stop any business from having this policy. It doesn’t say too much for us, if that is true.
I’m not sure those men want to draw attention to themselves. It’s the activists and the pervs who are doing all the yapping.
I don’t know if the Target boycott is gaining any traction. I know I won’t be going into any Target stores, staying at any Marriott hotels, or using Paypal. How many others are doing that? I have no idea.
I agree! I’m not crazy about the thought of some homo walking up to a urinal and hiking up his/her dress to pee!
I’d buy tickets to watch a lesbian slither up to a men’s room urinal and pee standing through her/his zipper.
“Im not sure those men want to draw attention to themselves. Its the activists and the pervs who are doing all the yapping.”
Absolutely, the ones that took pains to be legit where never the problem. But it’s not like I would tell a woman she is nuts for not digging a known man, no matter how legit looking or attempting to be legit looking, using the bathroom either.
I might buy Target doing this for social justice dog squeeze. But I don’t buy that from Trump. He seems like he is pretty down with business stuff, anyhow. So he doesn’t know if his women customers care enough or not? I don’t buy it. It’s a pretty grim indicator if women don’t really care, in my opinion.
.... What if my Dog has to go to the bathroom? Wouldn’t it be cruel and inhumane to make her go outside with everybody watching her? I’m getting a lawyer!
Trough urinals, bring it back. Ends this lunacy.
I miss pissing at the bar. Of course, I’ve missed while pissing AT the bar, too.
Are patriots aware that the failure of the ERA basically nullifies PC, pro-gay interpretations of the 14th Amendments (14A) Equal Protections Clause (EPC) imo, state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices now using PC interpretations of EPC to justify gay marriage."
In other words, if 14As EPC was intended to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex as activist justices have now argued concerning gay marriage for example, then there would have been no need for the EPA imo.
Insights, corrections welcome.
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.