Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[/b]
Look at the hatred on many of these forums. This online hatred will and does translate into physical violence toward the transgender community. So, I agree, that this was just to keep the LGBT community from being protected.
I suppose a proposed law, even with good intentions, could be so poorly written that it's a bad proposed law. Is that what happened here?
For example, a statement of "anybody can use a restroom of a gender of their choosing" would be extraordinarily bad policy. But I think way too many people just want transgender people to go away and are opposed to looking for some way to make things reasonable for them and everybody else. I'm not sure what can really be done.
As a woman, I don't want any penises in any public womens bathrooms. Just have a unisex/handicap bathroom available for the transgender people to use if they want to avoid using the mens restrooms. And that would be a very simple solution to a rare occurrence.
As a woman, I don't want any penises in any public womens bathrooms. Just have a unisex/handicap bathroom available for the transgender people to use if they want to avoid using the mens restrooms. And that would be a very simple solution to a rare occurrence.
This isn't about your rights or their rights. It's about a display of power. They will not accept unisex bathrooms. They want to use YOURS.
If it's too dangerous to allow people with penises into women's restrooms because they might sexually assault girls, then why allow them into men's rooms with boys? There are tons of pedophiles out there who want to rape or otherwise abuse boys. If the argument of the opponents of the Houston ordinance makes logical sense, then it seems that they should be advocating for only allowing one person (or one parent and his/her child) into a bathroom at a time. If allowing a predator into a bathroom with a potential victim is such a big problem when it's a male predator and a female victim, then it should also be a problem when it's a male predator and a male victim (or female predator and female victim, for that matter). The fact that no one is advocating that tells me that the opposition to the ordinance isn't about protecting people from sexual assault. It's about something else.
Accompany your child into the bathroom.
Any fruit loop with or without a weenie tries to diddle with your child, give them a complete beat down.
I don't think the religious right was ever truly worried about the restroom ordeal. Other states and cities who have similar laws have not experienced any issues from it. That was just something they could exploit in order to turn the public against the law. They have succeeded in repealing this ordinance which protects the broader LGBT community from discrimination, which was their goal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
