Posted on 05/09/2016 2:06:48 PM PDT by COUNTrecount
I’m Ohio. I don’t know NY’s law. I would imagine, though, that they have to have public use restrooms marked in some manner, even if they are marked unisex or whatever.
Target’s, the last time I shopped there, were marked in the traditional way. I won’t be shopping there again since I signed the petition.
If we give in there, then how are we going to deal with boys insisting on showering and changing in the girls' High School Gyms?
We don't need to accommodate these freaks. We need to either tell them to conform or force them into mental hospitals.
As I noted earlier, context is everything.
And one had absolutely nothing to do with the other
Houston tried pushing that as well, but a vote was forced and it was defeated at the polls, and Houston is a liberal city.
Making a State law over the issue is idiotic.
OK. I’m for not letting any level of government take the choice away from a business. The state stepped in to give the choice back to businesses, and lets them choose to let men use their women’s bathrooms if they wanted, like Trump and Target. And to stop men from using the women’s exclusive areas in publicly owned facilities. If you disagree, fine.
Freegards
Having been an observer over the years of the direction of public schools, the military, and other public type agencies, I don’t WANT any of my grandchildren in group locker rooms, showers, etc. The gays lust after them just as much as do the transgendies and faux transgendies.
So, I consider separate facilities a VICTORY and a serious injury to their cause across the board.
The State stepping in to prevent the ordnance from effecting private business is not the problem, it is how they did it.
If you want the Charlotte ordinance restored so private businesses are forced to let men use women’s exclusive areas, I reckon we disagree.
I also think businesses should have the right to say who goes into their dumb bathrooms. Their customers should have the right to not use those businesses if it is a big enough deal to them.
Freegards
I don't believe government should have any say in how a business should operate, so stop sending me posts that implies that I do.
Of course. A horse, er, colt of a different color. (Not an adult, hairy, weird guy--but me or you at a much younger age!)
I remember being vocally outraged at the age of 7, not because I couldn't go into the dept. store bathroom with my mom--I hadn't done that in a few years--but just seeing signs that only females could go into a certain room. Why should I be excluded? My father explained, not that I knew what the word meant till years later: "Men have dangerous powers, and that's what you are. Men can impregnate women."
It was a gesture of serious respect that even at 7, I represented a hazard to womankind.
I think the weirdos didn't have this (or anything else) explained to them in a bracing way by their dads.
I thought you got my context: People don't know whether Trump is conservative or not, on many issues. Especially this one, since his first comment seemed to mock N Carolina for defending normal people and smacking down one of their crazy Lefty cities. The State was doing its job, as opposed to the Feds, who are overreaching as usual.
None of us can afford to have conservatives stay home this time. They're mad as hell, and it's a perfect opportunity for Trump to be the little boy pointing out that the Emperor is naked (and needs to stay out of the Ladies' room).
Trump wasn’t mocking anyone. He is a pragmatic man and he said that the laws on the books allowed for the protection of women/men. He argued that it was wrong to insist that add’l bathrooms be built since it would impose a financial burden on small businesses. My impression is that he thought the law was an over reaction and would not accomplish its purpose, would cause government intrusion into the bathroom and have unintended consequences. Our country is so screwed up right now its hard to know what fire to put out first sometimes.
Perhaps I’m cowardly but I think immigration, the military & economic issues have a broad based appeal and would get Trump into office.
Trump is for traditional marriage, is against abortion and believes in the work ethic, devolution of power to the states and limiting Gov’t by eliminating Departments etc. Some people will never be convinced no matter what he says or how often he says it.
The Dems are waiting for issues they can hijack and they know how to spin a sob story. I personally would prefer if Trump stayed on the issues they will find the hardest to spin. I think Title IX needs to go. It has decimated Men’s Gymnastics and other less popular mens sports because there aren’t enough women participating in sports to balance them. It is perverting our society where women are being urged to compete in table tennis so that the men’s hockey team can continue.
Its Title IX that is being used to shoehorn the LGBT agenda into our schools to the detriment of all involved. Is that a life you would chose for a child? Those advocates are branding & confusing normal kids in developmental stages that everyone passes through that they are actually LGBT.
Being pragmatic Trump picks the battles he can win and sets the stage so that he can win the other battles later. I think the pc/special interest battles will be more easily won when he has more leverage and when the hubbub will not derail the election.
He also said Bruce Jenner could use any bathroom he wanted in his buildings. It’s his business, fine. But I don’t think that was too great for culture. I agree that he also came off as not wanting the mandate anything either, which was good.
“My impression is that he thought the law was an over reaction and would not accomplish its purpose, would cause government intrusion into the bathroom and have unintended consequences.”
The laws purpose was to restore the ability of private businesses to choose who to let into their bathrooms in Charlotte. It did that, to my understanding. It also required publicly owned bathrooms and other sex-exclusive areas to be used by their intended sex. It was just a reversal of the Charlotte law, so what is the matter?
Freegards
The matter as I see it is that having an unenforceable law encourages lawlessness. Its a corollary of the broken window theory.
If you mandate that people who are in a ladies bathroom must have a birth certificate that says male must we all have them on our persons or suffer inspection? If not than you have a law that is subject to abuse and arbitrary application. I do not want the threat of an inspection hanging over me. I cut down my air travel for just that reason.
There are already homosexuals using the same bathrooms as the heterosexual same sex cohort. There have been few incidents and those have been prosecuted as crimes. The laws exist to punish criminal behavior. There have undoubtedly been transvestites in bathrooms of the sex they appear for years as well, without incident.
I don’t believe that heterosexuals or transvestites are criminal by nature although there are criminals among their number as among the heterosexual group. I would favor targeting the criminal aspect rather than the genitalia.
The problem in my mind is the children at school who are forced to have individuals who they have known as the opposite sex suddenly appearing in their changing rooms and bathrooms. While I have compassion for the intersex child I have compassion for the other children as well.
The situation is awkward in any case and should be handled by the school & parents on individual basis without the intrusion of the State employees who have anti discrimination agendas. We are not allowing the local people the freedom to serve the children’s interests. The ability to sue to bring your same sex partner to the prom and to compete against opposite sex athletes is PC gone amuck.
People who are comfortable with societies norms are being targeted and attacked by people with an agenda. To me that is the real issue and a bathroom law just muddies the waters. The initial law would have backfired and the legislators would have been out of office. The American people are speaking out and the pendulum will swing.
“There are already homosexuals using the same bathrooms as the heterosexual same sex cohort. There have been few incidents and those have been prosecuted as crimes. The laws exist to punish criminal behavior. There have undoubtedly been transvestites in bathrooms of the sex they appear for years as well, without incident.”
If a woman comes up to a business owner, and complains about a man using the bathroom, the business owner should be able to make a business decision about who uses their women’s bathroom, right? I mean is the business owner supposed to tell her she is nuts for caring about it and she should just feel comfortable with a guy in the next stall?
“There are already homosexuals using the same bathrooms as the heterosexual same sex cohort. There have been few incidents and those have been prosecuted as crimes.”
Men who claim to be women are not lesbians. Men and women have different sexual attractions. Lesbians don’t have things like glory holes or wide stances or hang out in public parks at 3 in the morning for free anonymous guaranteed sex. Gay men do all those things, and it’s bad enough normal men have to deal with this nonsense in their bathrooms. But at least they are other men. Letting men who may or may not still be attracted to women in the women’s bathroom under the pretext that they will claim to be a woman is not a good idea culturally.
And yes, I feel bad for the actual folks who have this particular sickness, and doubt that real problems would come from those who take real pains to seem legit about it. Hopefully the legit ones can keep on going like they are as far as facilities go. But like I said, I am not going to tell a woman she is nuts for being uncomfortable about it. That’s nuts too, in my opinion.
Freegards
I think you may not be understanding that I agree with you. I just don’t think the law under discussion will fix the issue. I want the Government out of the bathrooms and for the bathrooms to be safe and comfortable for all which may limits the ability of the few to use communal ones. I signed the Target petition. That is how I think things will be fixed by individuals speaking up and Government being told to but out. The ordinance passed is out of line and should be protested.
Of course he was mocking. He also said people should be able to pee wherever they wanted. He was trying to score points off Cruz, and in the process, he undercut the sensible Constitutional case you make, and which I share. And which he may share as well. It was a reckless nod to the reigning insanity that no one believes.
Trump may have all the beliefs you credit him with, and I hope he does. If he does, to get the support we will need him to have, he needs to be consistent on principles. If he continues to be sloppy along these lines, his conservative support will be undercut by Democrat-created PACs with conservative-sounding names that will send direct mail and place TV ads attacking him from the right and urge conservatives to sit out the election to protect the country from this eeee-vil liberal.
They've done this for the past several elections, and it may have contributed to some important defeats.
The risk that some conservatives might be swayed by such ads only exists because Trump habitually opens himself up to it. Conservatives are used to being betrayed, and they are very wary of loose talk!
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.