PayPal bails on North Carolina

[homersapien 11,393]

Sorry, but you can't support a claim of "it does" with pure speculation.

It's not pure speculation. It's basic logic. There's a correlation between assaults and opportunity. There is also a correlation between access and opportunity. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that making access easier increases opportunity which will then increase actions.

And the law simply addresses discrimination based on sexual orientation. There is no reason to think it will do what you imagine it will, as there is no evidence it will. This is one of the exact same arguments made against integration - it will subject our women to sexual advances by black men.

No, it's not the exact same thing. Were I proposing that doing this would subject our women to sexual advances by transgenders, your analogy would work. But I'm not, so this analogy is lazy.

"It's not pure speculation. It's basic logic. There's a correlation between assaults and opportunity. There is also a correlation between access and opportunity. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that making access easier increases opportunity which will then increase actions."

I cannot figure out why this is not getting through to some people. It's like I say something similar and then the other side says something completely irrelevant like "transsexuals are not aggressive."

http://mediamatters....r-bathro/198533

15 Experts Debunk Right-Wing Transgender Bathroom Myth

Experts in 12 states -- including law enforcement officials, government employees, and advocates for victims of sexual assault -- have debunked the right-wing myth that sexual predators will exploit transgender non-discrimination laws to sneak into women's restrooms, calling the myth baseless and "beyond specious."

Media Outlets Have Promoted "Urban Myth" About Restroom Sexual Assault In Trans-Inclusive Jurisdictions. According to Gay Star News' Jane Fae, transphobic bathroom myths have been promoted by news outlets that fail to fact-check unsubstantiated stories about alleged sexual assaults:

Have you heard the one about the trans woman who went into a female changing room and exposed herself to all and sundry?

No: that's not joke, so much as persistent urban myth. However, thanks to an unhappy combination of reactionary and transphobic groups in the United States, and newspapers with a less than whole-hearted commitment to fact-checking, this is one trope that looks set to run and run.

[...]

Early opposition, primarily from religious groups in bizarre alliance with some radical feminists, led to the circulation of scary video clips: one depicted the supposed nightmare scenario of a young girl entering a toilet, to be followed moments later by a mustachioed man in a dress. Since, however, this was mostly preaching to the converted, the campaign appears to have gone mainstream, with an increasingly regular drip-feed of stories of the kind highlighted above.

The transphobic tendency is often aided and abetted by journalists who don't check the stories. [Gay Star News,

1/9/14

]

DC Trans Coalition: Conservatives Use "Bathroom Panic" To Defeat Transgender Non-Discrimination Laws. According to the DC Trans Coalition:

All over the world, anti-trans bigots try to convince the public that trans people are somehow a "threat" in public bathrooms. We've seen it in New Hampshire, in Gainesville, Fl and close to home in Montgomery County, Md: Our opponents stereotype trans people as sexual predators and try to use "bathroom panic" to defeat legislation that would protect our ability to gain employment and live safe lives. [DC Trans Coalition, accessed

3/18/14

]

Fox News Has Promoted Harassment Fears About Transgender Access To Restrooms. Fox News has repeatedly invoked fears of sexual assault and misbehavior in restrooms to attack equal access to public accommodations for transgender people, including a fake story about a transgender student harassing females in her school's restroom. [Equality Matters, 6/5/13, 2/27/13, 8/14/13, 10/15/13]

Conservative Media Outlets Have Promoted Bogus Bathroom Stories. Numerous conservative media outlets, including The Daily Caller, WND, and the Media Research Center, have similarly promoted the myth that sexual predators will exploit trans-inclusive restrooms to prey upon women. [Equality Matters, 8/19/13, 8/22/13, 2/3/14]

Experts From 12 States Debunk, Condemn Transgender Bathroom Myths

Colorado

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2008. In 2008, Colorado expanded its Anti-Discrimination Act, which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations, to include sexual orientation and gender identity as a protected class. [The Denver Post, 5/29/08]

Coalition Against Sexual Assault: Opponents Of Protections Are Creating "Unsubstantiated Fear." Alexa M. Priddy, director of training and communications at the Colorado Coalition Against Sexual Assault, reported no problems as a result of her state's non-discrimination law. In an email to Media Matters, she wrote:

Denying equal rights is yet another form of discrimination against transgender individuals, which is pervasive within our society and institutions. Such criticisms of this law and ads [that] invoke what we see as "trans panic," an attempt to create fear of transgender people and a false label of trans individuals as sexual predators.

CCASA would love to see the real focus be on the realities that transgender people are far too often targeted for sexual violence, and if they seek support through victim services or the criminal justice system in the aftermath, they often face continued discrimination from the very people who are there to help. Sexual assault is already an under-reported crime, and we see this increase with marginalized communities. We want to focus on creating safety for transgender survivors and not on creating unsubstantiated fear.

Connecticut

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2011. In 2011, Connecticut Gov. Dannel Malloy signed into law legislation prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations based on gender identity or expression. [Bay Windows, 7/6/11]

State Commission On Human Rights: "Unaware Of Any Sexual Assault." In an email to Media Matters, Jim O'Neill, legislative liaison and spokesman for the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights in Opportunities, reported no problems as a result of the state's non-discrimination law:

I am unaware of any sexual assault as the result of the CT gender identity or exp

ression law. I'm pretty sure it would have come to our attention.

Hawaii

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2006. In 2006, Hawaii expanded its non-discrimination laws to prohibit discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. [Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, accessed 3/12/14]

State Civil Rights Commission: Non-Discrimination Law "Has Not Resulted In Increase[d] Sexual Assault Or Rape." William Hoshijo, executive director of the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission, told Media Matters in an email:

In Hawai`i, the protection against discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sex, including gender identity or exp

ression, has not resulted in increase sexual assault or rape in women's restrooms. The HCRC is not aware of any incidents of sexual assault or rape causally related or attributed to the prohibition against discrimination on the basis of gender identity or exp

ression. (In contrast to anecdotal reports of transgender students being harassed and bullied in school restrooms when forced to use an assigned restroom inconsistent with their gender identity.)

Iowa

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2007. In 2007, the Iowa Civil Rights Act was expanded to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in public accommodations. [iowa Civil Rights Commission, accessed 3/14/14]

Des Moines Police Department: "We Have Not Seen That." In an interview with Media Matters, Des Moines Police Department spokesman Jason Halifax stated that he hadn't seen cases of sexual assault related to the state's non-discrimination ordinance:

We have not seen that. I doubt that's gonna encourage the behavior. If the behavior's there, [sexual predators are] gonna behave as they're gonna behave no matter what the laws are. [Phone interview, 3/13/14]

Maine

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2005. In 2005, Maine adopted legislation prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of gender identity and sexual orientation. [GLAD, 2/25/14]

State Human Rights Commission: "No Factual Basis" For Sexual Assault Fears. In an email to Media Matters, Executive Director Amy Sneirson of the Maine Human Rights Commission said that the state's non-discrimination law hadn't led to increased sexual assault or rape:

I know that this concern persists but I personally have not seen any factual basis for it.

I am not aware of any increased sexual assault or rape in women's restrooms as a result of Maine's 2005 adoption of protections in the Maine Human Rights Act for sexual orientation (which, in Maine, includes "a person's actual or perceived heterosexuality, bisexuality, homosexuality or gender identity or exp

ression").

Massachusetts

Cambridge Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 1997. In 1997, the city of Cambridge expanded its non-discrimination ordinance to prohibit discrimination against transgender people in public accommodations. [National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, July 2008]

Cambridge Police Superintendent: "No Incidents" Of Transgender Protections Being Abused. Police Superintendent Christopher Burke told Media Matters in an email:

Back in 1984 Cambridge enacted an ordinance that established the Human Rights Commission. The purpose of the ordinance was to protect the human rights of all citizens of the City. In 1997 this ordinance was amended to specifically include gender identity and exp

ression. Much like the Transgender Equal Rights Bill proposal, the City of Cambridge sought to offer protection to transgender individuals from being harassed, fired from a job, denied access to a public place, or denied or evicted from housing. Since this 1997 amendment there have been no incidents or issues regarding persons abusing this ordinance or using them as a defense to commit crimes. Specifically, as was raised as a concern if the bill were to be passed, there have been no incidents of men dressing up as women to commit crimes in female bathrooms and using the city ordinance as a defense.

State Victims' Advocacy Group: Fears About Transgender Protections Are "Beyond Specious." Toni Troop, spokeswoman for the statewide sexual assault victims organization Jane Doe Inc., told Media Matters in an email:

The argument that providing transgender rights will result in an increase of sexual violence against women or men in public bathrooms is beyond specious. The only people at risk are the transgender men and women whose rights to self-determination, dignity and freedom of violence are too often denied. We have not heard of any problems since the passage of the law in Massachusetts in 2011, nor do we expect this to be a problem. While cases of stranger rape and sexual violence occur, sexual violence is most often perpetrated by someone known to the victim and not a stranger in the bush or the bathroom.

Minnesota

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 1993. In 1993, Minnesota amended its Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination against transgender people in public accommodations. [OutFront Minnesota, accessed 3/13/14]

Minneapolis Police Department: Fears About Sexual Assault "Not Even Remotely" A Problem. Minneapolis police spokesman John Elder told Media Matters in an interview that sexual assaults stemming from Minnesota's 1993 transgender non-discrimination law have been "not even remotely" a problem. Based on his experience, the notion of men posing as transgender women to enter women's restrooms to commit sex crimes "sounds a little silly," Elder said. According to Elder, a police department inquiry found "nothing" in the way of such crimes in the city. [Phone interview, 3/11/14]

Nevada

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2011. In 2011, Nevada enacted three transgender non-discrimination laws, including a law explicitly prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations. [National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 6/2/11]

Las Vegas Police Department: No Problems Since Passage Of Non-Discrimination Law. Asked whether Nevada's 2011 gender identity law had fueled a rise in sex crimes, Las Vegas Police Department spokesman Jesse Roybal told Media Matters, "the answer would be no." After the department's lieutenant for sexual assault ran a check of crimes since 2011, Roybal told Media Matters that the department had not "had any incidents involving transgender suspects." [Phone interview, 3/6/14, 3/11/14]

New Mexico

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2003. In 2003, New Mexico amended its Human Rights Act to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in public accommodations. [The Williams Institute, September 2009]

Albuquerque Police Department: "Unaware Of Any Cases Of Assault" Due To Non-Discrimination Law. Officer Tasia Martinez, Public Information Officer for the Albuquerque Police Department, told Media Matters in an email:

We are unaware of any cases of assault in our city as a result of transgendered [sic] accommodations.

Oregon

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2007. In 2007, Oregon enacted the Oregon Equality Act, which prohibits discrimination in public accommodations on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. [Lambda Legal, accessed 3/13/14]

Bureau of Labor And Industries: "Zero Allegations" Of Assault Due To 2007 Law. Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries spokesman Charlie Burr told Media Matters in an email:

The Oregon Equality Act protects the rights of LGBT Oregonians in employment, housing and public places and has done so without any incidents of LGBT assaults on women in public restrooms that we're aware of. Our agency has encountered zero allegations of LGBT assault related to this public accommodation protection.

Portland Police Department: "I Have Never Heard Of Any Issues Like This." Portland Police Department spokesman Peter Simpson wrote in an email to Media Matters:

I have never heard of any issues like this in Portland. We have a very low rate of sexual assault/rape crimes here overall.

Rhode Island

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2001. In 2001, Rhode Island explicitly prohibited discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression in public accommodations. [GLAD, 2/25/14]

State Commission for Human Rights: No Increase In Sex Crimes Due To Non-Discrimination Law. Rhode Island Commission for Human Rights Executive Director Michael D. Evora told Media Matters in an email:

The Commission for Human Rights has not taken in any cases alleging gender identity discrimination in respect to bathroom usage in public facilities since the law was amended to prohibit such discrimination. In addition, we are not aware of any affect the passage of the law has had on incidents of assault in public restrooms.

Vermont

State Law Has Prohibited Discrimination In Public Accommodations Since 2007. In 2007, Vermont explicitly prohibited discrimination on the basis of gender identity in public accommodations. [GLAD, 3/4/14]

State Human Rights Commission: "We Are Not Aware" Of Any Problems From Non-Discrimination Law. In an email to Media Matters, the Vermont Human Rights Commission's Karen Richards said:

I have only been here a short time so was checking with my staff to find out if they were aware of any issues. ... We are not aware of any other issues or problems similar to this caused by prohibiting discrimination against those who are transgendered.

Montpelier Police Department: No Complaints. Montpelier Police Chief Tony Facos responded to an email inquiry about whether the state's non-discrimination law had led to incidents of rape or sexual assault in women's restrooms, stating, "We do not have any complaints related to this issue."

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Wow some folks who support this law based on some such far fetched low frequency of occurrences of perversion will go batshit flipping crazy when a law is proposed to prevent mentally ill people from accessing guns.

Wrong. I think we must find a way to prevent mentally ill people from having access to guns.

Why on earth would you think that someone that just put forth an argument that "access begets opportunity which begets action" wouldn't want to decrease access to guns for the mentally ill?

[alexava 6,973]

Wow some folks who support this law based on some such far fetched low frequency of occurrences of perversion will go batshit flipping crazy when a law is proposed to prevent mentally ill people from accessing guns.

Wrong. I think we must find a way to prevent mentally ill people from having access to guns.

Why on earth would you think that someone that just put forth an argument that "access begets opportunity which begets action" wouldn't want to decrease access to guns for the mentally ill?

you are the exception TT. Or one of the few.

[Barnacle 9,064]

Food for thought. Thanks Homer.

[Barnacle 9,064]

Wow some folks who support this law based on some such far fetched low frequency of occurrences of perversion will go batshit flipping crazy when a law is proposed to prevent mentally ill people from accessing guns.

Wrong. I think we must find a way to prevent mentally ill people from having access to guns.

Why on earth would you think that someone that just put forth an argument that "access begets opportunity which begets action" wouldn't want to decrease access to guns for the mentally ill?

you are the exception TT. Or one of the few.

I honestly don't know anyone, liberal conservative or otherwise who thinks it's a good idea for mentally ill people to have access to guns.

Edit: my entire point haha

[MDM4AU 332]

Wow some folks who support this law based on some such far fetched low frequency of occurrences of perversion will go batshit flipping crazy when a law is proposed to prevent mentally ill people from accessing guns.

Wrong. I think we must find a way to prevent mentally ill people from having access to guns.

Why on earth would you think that someone that just put forth an argument that "access begets opportunity which begets action" wouldn't want to decrease access to guns for the mentally ill?

you are the exception TT. Or one of the few.

I honestly don't know anyone, liberal conservative or otherwise who thinks it's a good idea for mentally ill people to have access to guns.

Edit: my entire point haha

Yeah, I think he is over estimating the number of outraged people here.

[channonc 466]

Interesting perspective from a fellow Christian.

When he became a she.

[japantiger 4,051]

........"I'm pointing out unintended consequences of a blanket law that is literally based on someone's declared feelings."

This is the pivotal issue for me. I do not understand why it is incumbent upon me to accept anyone's beliefs and/or feelings that can be immediately proven false. There was a time when democrats claimed to be the party of science. Well, I guess science doesn't apply to chromosomal sexual determination. Anybody with a package that claims to be a woman has that prerogative but I sure as hell don't have to believe it and don't. People are getting crazier and crazier but I'm not sure whose the craziest of all....the transgenders or the ones who insist that these men are "really" women and consequently have to have access women's bathrooms and showers. Its utterly ridiculous on its face!

Blue, I'm feeling repressed by your words. I need a safe space .... but, come to think of it though, your use of words such as false or crazy or crazier or utter or "the ones" make me feel dead inside...as a result I "feel" like you committed homicide against me so I am instituting a civil murder case against you. You will be hearing from my lawyers...also, I will immediately form an advocacy group to represent undead/feel dead people like me; we're called the American Association of the Undead Who Really Feel Dead Because of Your Mean Words of America ( the AAUWRFDBYMWA) and petitioning the Justice Department Civil Rights Division to get involved in my denial of basic civil rights case against you. The more I type this I "feel" like I am dying again...so I will charge you with civil murder, twice.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

Interesting perspective from a fellow Christian.

When he became a she.

I don't have a problem with anything in that article. None whatsoever.

It's literally what many of us have been trying to explain to people who want to jump down our throats for not hopping on the cultural bandwagon on sexual morality and then equate that refusal with hatred - that you can love people deeply and truly even when you disagree with their views, with their choices, and their beliefs.

But when you set the stage where any dissent or desire not to join in = hate, it makes it rather difficult to have reasonable conversation.

[aujeff11 6,243]

"Now, you may think, Wait a second, Anna. The Bible says…"

This is the problem of the church. The Bible doesn't say "do not associate" or to be "highly judgemental." Why some Christians want the beat people's foreheads with a bible is baffling to me. Maybe I missed that instruction from the book of Thomas or something....

There is literally no reason to feel uncomfortable with a transgender person or with a homosexual. My roommate was homosexual and I was comfortable with living with him as long as he respected my own lifestyle. My other roommate smoked pot in his room and he was the most mature of us all but he too respected my own lifestyle by having humidifiers and fans. Its a mutual thing. It's the golden rule. I do not know if I've met any transgendered people yet but I will think the same of them as I do as everybody else.

[alexava 6,973]

"Now, you may think, Wait a second, Anna. The Bible says…"

This is the problem of the church. The Bible doesn't say "do not associate" or to be "highly judgemental." Why some Christians want the beat people's foreheads with a bible is baffling to me. Maybe I missed that instruction from the book of Thomas or something....

There is literally no reason to feel uncomfortable with a transgender person or with a homosexual. My roommate was homosexual and I was comfortable with living with him as long as he respected my own lifestyle. My other roommate smoked pot in his room and he was the most mature of us all but he too respected my own lifestyle by having humidifiers and fans. Its a mutual thing. It's the golden rule. I do not know if I've met any transgendered people yet but I will think the same of them as I do as everybody else.

i don't know either if i have met any transgendered. which means i may have pissed right next to several and didn't know it. they may have shared restroom in the next stall from my seven year old daughter or my 11 year old son. they never screamed or mentioned it to me. (when in public i might get arrested because when my daughter uses the rest room i stand at the door as she checks to see if anyone is in there if so i am right outside the door in close earshot. when she was smaller and needed help i tried to let the men's room empty then take her into a stall, then let the room empty again before we left the stall to wash hands. i will be forever amazed at how many people will notice this and wait till you are done and out of the restroom till they use the urinals.)now all these trans people(wherever they are) can be arrested for using the restroom and not bothering a soul because they look the part. to be honest i am not sticking up for trans. i still don't care either way. i just think the danger or risk of abuse is way overblown.

[TitanTiger 20,499]

This doesn't happen and certainly won't be made easier by any laws granting male bodies unquestioned access to women's private spaces.

[aujeff11 6,243]

This doesn't happen and certainly won't be made easier by any laws granting male bodies unquestioned access to women's private spaces.

"but there were laws against that before the change!" "What do you expect, a cop to stand in front of the mall bathroom?"

[homersapien 11,393]

Food for thought. Thanks Homer.

You're welcome. Actual data/experience is always good fodder for thought.

[aujeff11 6,243]

http://m.annistonstar.com/news/oxford-council-rebukes-target-bathroom-policy-with-new-ordinance/article_e52d109e-0c13-11e6-b99a-135eb2794347.html?mode=jqm

Anniston gets it right.

[homersapien 11,393]

........"I'm pointing out unintended consequences of a blanket law that is literally based on someone's declared feelings."

This is the pivotal issue for me. I do not understand why it is incumbent upon me to accept anyone's beliefs and/or feelings that can be immediately proven false. There was a time when democrats claimed to be the party of science. Well, I guess science doesn't apply to chromosomal sexual determination. Anybody with a package that claims to be a woman has that prerogative but I sure as hell don't have to believe it and don't. People are getting crazier and crazier but I'm not sure whose the craziest of all....the transgenders or the ones who insist that these men are "really" women and consequently have to have access women's bathrooms and showers. Its utterly ridiculous on its face!

Blue, I'm feeling repressed by your words. I need a safe space .... but, come to think of it though, your use of words such as false or crazy or crazier or utter or "the ones" make me feel dead inside...as a result I "feel" like you committed homicide against me so I am instituting a civil murder case against you. You will be hearing from my lawyers...also, I will immediately form an advocacy group to represent undead/feel dead people like me; we're called the American Association of the Undead Who Really Feel Dead Because of Your Mean Words of America ( the AAUWRFDBYMWA) and petitioning the Justice Department Civil Rights Division to get involved in my denial of basic civil rights case against you. The more I type this I "feel" like I am dying again...so I will charge you with civil murder, twice.

Gee, that sounds like it was written by a complete jerk.

[Barnacle 9,064]

Clearly, this guy wanted a reaction, but nonetheless, I thought this was interesting.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=cbc_1461768631

[japantiger 4,051]

........"I'm pointing out unintended consequences of a blanket law that is literally based on someone's declared feelings."

This is the pivotal issue for me. I do not understand why it is incumbent upon me to accept anyone's beliefs and/or feelings that can be immediately proven false. There was a time when democrats claimed to be the party of science. Well, I guess science doesn't apply to chromosomal sexual determination. Anybody with a package that claims to be a woman has that prerogative but I sure as hell don't have to believe it and don't. People are getting crazier and crazier but I'm not sure whose the craziest of all....the transgenders or the ones who insist that these men are "really" women and consequently have to have access women's bathrooms and showers. Its utterly ridiculous on its face!

Blue, I'm feeling repressed by your words. I need a safe space .... but, come to think of it though, your use of words such as false or crazy or crazier or utter or "the ones" make me feel dead inside...as a result I "feel" like you committed homicide against me so I am instituting a civil murder case against you. You will be hearing from my lawyers...also, I will immediately form an advocacy group to represent undead/feel dead people like me; we're called the American Association of the Undead Who Really Feel Dead Because of Your Mean Words of America ( the AAUWRFDBYMWA) and petitioning the Justice Department Civil Rights Division to get involved in my denial of basic civil rights case against you. The more I type this I "feel" like I am dying again...so I will charge you with civil murder, twice.

Gee, that sounds like it was written by a complete jerk.

I may very well be Homey...but at least I know the difference between a dude and a chick. At least there's still hope for me...

[homersapien 11,393]

........"I'm pointing out unintended consequences of a blanket law that is literally based on someone's declared feelings."

This is the pivotal issue for me. I do not understand why it is incumbent upon me to accept anyone's beliefs and/or feelings that can be immediately proven false. There was a time when democrats claimed to be the party of science. Well, I guess science doesn't apply to chromosomal sexual determination. Anybody with a package that claims to be a woman has that prerogative but I sure as hell don't have to believe it and don't. People are getting crazier and crazier but I'm not sure whose the craziest of all....the transgenders or the ones who insist that these men are "really" women and consequently have to have access women's bathrooms and showers. Its utterly ridiculous on its face!

Blue, I'm feeling repressed by your words. I need a safe space .... but, come to think of it though, your use of words such as false or crazy or crazier or utter or "the ones" make me feel dead inside...as a result I "feel" like you committed homicide against me so I am instituting a civil murder case against you. You will be hearing from my lawyers...also, I will immediately form an advocacy group to represent undead/feel dead people like me; we're called the American Association of the Undead Who Really Feel Dead Because of Your Mean Words of America ( the AAUWRFDBYMWA) and petitioning the Justice Department Civil Rights Division to get involved in my denial of basic civil rights case against you. The more I type this I "feel" like I am dying again...so I will charge you with civil murder, twice.

Gee, that sounds like it was written by a complete jerk.

I may very well be Homey...but at least I know the difference between a dude and a chick. At least there's still hope for me...

Good!

And you are right, accordingly, there's lots of hope for you - perhaps you can get a new job as a genital inspector at a large public restroom.

[Auburn4life 24]

Benjamin Watson

April 23 at 6:09pm ·

Fear is a powerful motivator. It has forced me to be silent when I would rather speak and to shout loudly when I would rather sit in silence. It seizes my heart and floods my mind with myriad scenarios of the possible aftermath to my comments or consequences of my actions.

I've contemplated North Carolina's House Bill 2 for some time now. I've read it in its entirety, in an attempt to understand its motive as well as the visceral contempt its detractors have so prominently displayed. I've watched as businesses have vacated the state, sports leagues have made threats and entertainers have refused to perform. Conversely, I've seen multitudes of citizens across the country stand in adamant support of this legislation. I've heard accusations of intolerance and discrimination and speculation about probability of future sexually motivated crimes or lack there of. I've listened to the passionate interviews from Americans, who identify as straight, gay, or transgendered, which illuminate the diverse views of not only this bill, but the overarching issue of gender and sexual identity. While the new law encompasses a few different issues the stipulations for use of single-sex multiple occupancy bathroom and changing facilities have become a lightning rod in what has emerged as another battlefield in America's increasingly prominent reevaluation of its definitions and ideals about sexuality, discrimination and "equal rights."

Since the announcement I really haven’t wanted to discuss the specifics and intricacies because today's politically correct environment is too toxic to have a discussion in. Such an effort appears futile. Many times conversation becomes mired in false, naive, and underdeveloped arguments such as claims that gender and race are analogous when that could not be further from the truth. Honestly I've been at a lost for words.

In today's climate, as shown by the speedy reactions of various entities, we are forced to pick a side. Many times, unfortunately, it's the side we hope is right. And by right I do not mean moral or logical, as it should. I mean the side that will protect us from public backlash and probable financial loss. The side that places us in the perceived majority, the middle of a strong current where we can ride the wave of "progress". We feel the tug to be on what some coin "the right side of history." The subsequent fear of conformity can feel like fire in our throats at times. Tolerance and inclusivity has somehow turned into the very thing it claims not to be and is quite often characterized by name-calling and accusations of bigotry and hatred. Although it sometimes does, fundamental disagreement does not NECESSARILY mean hate is involved. But the immense fear of being associated with these smartly and strategically used labels forces many choose to be silent at a time when it matters most.

What a precarious position we are in.

It is easy to offer personal anecdotes when digesting bills and laws like this. But my position has to be founded on a foundation more solid than my experience or my feelings.

It's not about MY daughters, MY sons, MY wife or even ME feeling violated, uncomfortable or threatened in the bathroom although these are definitely reasons enough. It's not about how obvious it is to ME that the privacy of men and women should be a given when using these types of facilities. It's not even about the many times I've "harmlessly" shared a bathroom facility with an individual who unbeknownst to me was transgendered or transitioning. Determining right and wrong is not about the depth of sincerity of those who desire their lifestyle be affirmed and legalized or what they hope that validation will provide their self-concept. As honest as these desires may be, self-fulfillment and public endorsement does not always determine the validity of an action.

What's disheartening is that we are buying the lie that feelings trump all else and that how one feels can only be accepted and celebrated instead of addressed and challenged.

As the fallout from North Carolina's House Bill 2 continues to billow out I contemplate how it fits in the larger picture of society.

If our only reason for determining our social norms is popular opinion, we will continue to reset them with each new generation. We simultaneously live in the past and the future. There will be generations after us as there have been before. There is nothing new under the sun. Civilizations rise and they set, their great cities turning to dust and their once fabulous new ideas relegated to a page in a high school history book. Logic, common sense, and morality that are not based on absolute truth will always at some point seem, antiquated, archaic even abhorrent. God's word is the only absolute truth given to mankind and any individual, community or nation that turns their back on it can expect to ultimately fail. Change IS good. But only that which upholds or institutes HIS prescription for life, freedom and equality. HB2 is not an isolated issue. It is one stop on the track, as we steamroll in our relativism. Many who support it are not malicious and many who oppose are not heathens.

But like paper currency, of little value without its collateral backing, morals without God eventually succumb to similar perils and are rendered useless. The logical conclusion of a land where we all do what is right in our own eyes, unchecked, is lawlessness, chaos and even death.

The simplest most basic form of decision making is basing them on how they do or don't affect "me." When we justify or condemn laws and creeds because of the level of anticipated effects on "my life" we miss the point. Whether in my own life or that of another's, sin always has macro and micro consequences and we all have a decision to continue living in it habitually or surrendering ourselves and turning to Him.

I do not claim to understand the confusion, isolation, distress, pride or any other emotion of those who struggle with gender dysphoria or those in their families who support them. Because of this, as easy as it may be to do, it is not my place to speculate about their motives and character, or insult them for their lifestyle choices. Like me, these individuals are loved and valued by their creator. Like me they deserve to earn a living, enjoy friendships, and live free from slurs, disparaging remarks, and bodily harm. And like me, they stand condemned and separated from a Holy God except for the covering of the atoning blood of his Son, applied on their behalf through repentance and faith. Like me, they were created for a purpose, male and female, to be an earthly depiction of the spiritual union between Christ and his bride, his body, the church. As important as genitalia are in determination, gender roles do not stop at anatomy. They were created as complimentary differences that should be celebrated, embraced and encouraged. They build strong families, healthy communities, and ordered nations. There is great beauty in masculinity and femininity that fully blooms in the sacrificial oneness of marriage. To accept the blurring there of is to deny and tacitly reject God's design and to condone what He has created as a reflection, albeit imperfect because of our humanity, of his immense love for us. This is the danger we face, not only with this issue but with any issue, when our feelings, genetic predispositions and desires take precedence over His principles.

This is the crux of the matter. If I believe I am my own God, I am within all rights to do, say and believe as I please. But if I believe I was created, then he who did so is God and I am not. And my duty is to obey him for he knows what is best for those to whom he gave life.

I'm not in favor of any legislation to spite or demean others. However, I am in favor of legislation that governs human activity in a way that would be pleasing to the Lord, while still understanding that a heart that seeks to live for Him is infinitely more desirable than forced submission.

Compassion is the gift of those who have been forgiven for they know the filth from which they continue to be rescued. Love is not love if it sacrifices truth. And that truth must not be held hostage by fear.

May we proceed in this arena and all others accordingly.

[alexava 6,973]

Impressive.

[Barnacle 9,064]

"Damn tranny in the bathroom"

[triangletiger 1,599]

"Damn tranny in the bathroom"

[Strychnine 1,802]

"Damn tranny in the bathroom"

You'd think they could have put an actual transmission in the bathroom for that pic.

[Barnacle 9,064]

"Damn tranny in the bathroom"

You'd think they could have put an actual transmission in the bathroom for that pic.

Ha, I didn't even notice