Posted on 01/24/2005 6:50:52 AM PST by missyme
An anti-discrimination proposal before the Alameda County (Calif.) Board of Supervisors would allow men to go into women's bathrooms, a conservative group is warning.
The Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), a pro-family group, is urging concerned citizens to attend Tuesday morning's hearing, where the five supervisors are scheduled to vote on a resolution that says that transsexuals "shall have full and equal enjoyment of....dressing and bathroom facilities, consistent with the person's gender identity."
CCF calls the resolution an invasion of privacy and an effort to "punish people who disagree with transsexuality, or sex change operations, or men wearing women's dresses."
The group is urging Californians to "oppose this very wrong-headed idea" by calling, faxing, or emailing the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, or by showing up at the Tuesday morning meeting and signing up to speak.
According to CCF, the resolution promotes homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality on government property by defining "gender identity" as a "person's sex or gender-related identity, appearance, and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth."
"In other words, there are no standards and anything goes," CCF warned its supporters.
According to CCF, subjectively defining "gender" as "behavior" would allow some people to disturb and invade the privacy of girls and women in bathrooms and dressing rooms."
The Campaign for Children and Families describes itself as a leading West Coast pro-family organization empowering citizens to live out their values.
And so the reverse would also be true, i.e., women in men's? OK, Bd of Supervisors: You all go first.
"... Golden State girls aren't necessarily girls anymore, nor men men, since the State Board of Education (SBOE) shoehorned into California's legal code a new definition of gender. According to Title 5 of the state code, "gender" no longer means male or female, but instead "a person's actual sex or perceived sex and includes a person's perceived identity, appearance, or behavior, whether or not that identity, appearance, or behavior is different from that traditionally associated with the person's sex at birth."
As of June 2000, at least 18 jurisdictions-including Atlanta, Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, Mich., New Orleans, Seattle, Washington, D.C., and the states of Minnesota and Missouri-had legally enshrined self-determined gender in their nondiscrimination codes using language similar to California's new definition. In all those locales, a person's gender is what he or she says it is, regardless of biology. And employers, including schools, may not take punitive action if, for example, a man wears a dress to work..."
I always suspected that women had better, cleaner bathrooms than men. I guess they just don't want our rotten selves to stink up their bathrooms. I just think that fairness requires them to demand that our bathroom be upgraded to the same standards as theirs.
speaking from personal experience?
All Public Bathrooms are pretty nasty IMHO... I will wait if I can frankly I would rather use the side road field....
Two days later, send someone in to tell the owner and manager that they were told of the unisex bathroom, but couldn't believe the store/restaurant could be so stupid, and now that they've seen for themselves, they're never returning and taking with them any and all friends, family and neighbors.
And so on...
No, from knowledge in books and on the web.
Imagine a picture of a tongue in a cheek......
Was you said in post 15 of this thread was at best in bad taste
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.