Posted on 10/07/2017 9:38:42 AM PDT by Enlightened1
California can now start jailing people that refuse to use the preferred gender pronouns of nursing home residents after Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill Thursday.
The law’s effect is limited to nursing homes and other long-term care facilities, but mandates that those who “willfully and repeatedly” refuse “to use a transgender resident’s preferred name or pronouns” can be slapped with a $1,000 fine and up to one year in prison, according to the California Heath and Safety code.
Known as the “LGBT Senior Bill Of Rights,” the legislation also requires nursing homes and care facilities to allow residents to use the bathroom of their choice, regardless of biological sex. The bill’s author, state Sen. Scott Weiner, argues that religious views don’t hold weight in public areas.
“Everyone is entitled to their religious view,” Wiener said. “But when you enter the public space, when you are running an institution, you are in a workplace, you are in a civil setting, and you have to follow the law.”
Wiener also released a statement thanking Brown for signing the bill.
“Our LGBT seniors built the modern LGBT community and led the fight for so many of the rights our community takes for granted today. It is our duty to make sure they can age with the dignity and respect they deserve,” Wiener wrote. “I want to thank Governor Brown for joining our coalition in supporting this bill, which will make a real difference in people’s lives. The LGBT Senior Bill of Rights is an important step in our fight to ensure all people are treated equally regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Are they imposing the death penalty on those who us “they” or “their” when referring to one person, rather than a group?
Watch Dem Words
So, to avoid being incarcerated in Kalifornia, you would always use the word, “it,” to be safe.
Right?
5.56mm
I believe it must be the pronoun of that persons choosing. I'm not an "it" I'm an attack helicopter I'm notifying the authorities.
LOL.
You’re probably right.
5.56mm
Kind of fun to think up ridiculous names and titles that would be impossible to pronounce, then sue.
"My name is Marquis K-pax- gamma, emphasis on the octothorpe, and you called me mar-kee, it's mar-quiz!"
More proof that California’s liberal lunatic lawmakers are a bunch of fags, pimps, whores, queers, dykes and chimps. Did I get all the “approved” lingo right?
“What are you in for, bro?”
“Misuse of gender pronouns.”
Henceforth, my chosen pronoun is “His Exhaled and Esteemed Royal Majesty”
They may be billions and billions in debt, but doggonnit they’re going to make sure the pervs vegging in care centers get some respect.
Walking in darkness.
You must call a tail a leg now. Or jail for you says the Queen of Hearts.
Time for the Queen to lose HER head.
No No No - the “e” is the beginning of “expialidocious”....
No k - and that’s why your spell check doesn’t like it....
or looked at another way:
Supercalifragilistic-expialidocious
supercalifragilistickexpialidocious
Hey you
And
Would you please get it a drink of water
Solved.
“It’s not free speech when you’re in a contractual situation, which it is in this case, since you are in a licensed institution as an employee. As stupid as the law is it will probably hold up under judicial review.”
Oh yes it is free speech. The employer can fire them in a contractual situation, but the government may not arrest and imprison them for violating that contract.
The People’s Republic of California is f-—ed up beyond recognition.
.
>> “It’s not free speech when you’re in a contractual situation, which it is in this case, since you are in a licensed institution as an employee. As stupid as the law is it will probably hold up under judicial review.” <<
Bullshit!
Wishful thinking on your part.
.
A business license does not magically mean the employer can have the employee arrested for saying something like “he” instead of “she”. At most it means they can fire them.
In all actuality, holding a license probably makes you MORE liable not to violate civil rights.
GMTA, your post makes a point brought up many times, and further exposes the hypocrisy of the patchwork Left.
That would be nice, but it’s something I’d believe when I see given rulings over the last few years.
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.