The “Battle of the Bathrooms” moves to North Carolina
posted at 6:21 pm on February 22, 2016 by Jazz Shaw
The city of Charlotte, North Carolina seems to be heading toward a showdown with the Governor and the state legislator this year and we’re once again dragged back into the battle over “transgender bathroom access” issues. The city is taking a second run at passing an ordinance which would force businesses and other public facilities to allow anyone “self-identifying” as transgender to use whichever bathroom, locker room or shower they wish. As usual, many of the locals are up in arms, but this time it comes with a twist. While it’s a city ordinance, Governor Pat McCrory has come out and said that such a move would likely trigger an immediate response from the state. (Charlotte Observer)
Gov. Pat McCrory warned two Charlotte City Council members Sunday that if the city approves new legal protections for gay, lesbian and transgender people on Monday, the vote would “most likely cause immediate state legislative intervention.”
McCrory is concerned about a provision in the proposed expanded ordinance that would allow transgender residents to use either a men’s or a women’s bathroom. That part of the ordinance has also caused a furor in Charlotte and led to the ordinance being defeated 6-5 last year.
“It is not only the citizens of Charlotte that will be impacted by changing basic restroom and locker room norms but also citizens from across our state and nation who visit and work in Charlotte,” McCrory said in an email to the council’s two Republicans, Ed Driggs and Kenny Smith. “This shift in policy could also create major public safety issues by putting citizens in possible danger from deviant actions by individuals taking improper advantage of a bad policy.”
McCrory, a Republican, continued: “Also, this action of allowing a person with male anatomy, for example, to use a female restroom or locker room will most likely cause immediate State legislative intervention which I would support as governor.”
The exact wording isn’t provided, but this looks to be an even more dodgy attempt at forcing SJW values on the public. Rather than mandates requiring businesses to provide separate, single person, unisex facilities, this bill simply opens the doors (literally) for anyone claiming to be either gender to use whichever facilities they choose. They don’t just have the Governor up in arms either. The local churches are on the warpath and making their voices heard.
While the legislation failed last year, they’ve since elected two new council members who are planning to vote in favor of it this time around. What the Governor has in mind isn’t clear, though. They obviously can’t be considering state legislation which only applies to one city, so it would need to be some sort of state-wide ban on citizens using public facilities designated for the opposite of their biological gender. (Side note: having to even bother typing the phrase “biological gender” is giving me a headache. Science has been pretty clear on gender since the beginning of time. If you’re seriously having trouble figuring out yours, contact the folks at 23andMe and they will set you up with a DNA test to clear it up for you.)
Here’s another kicker just to make this case even more bizarre. The city ordinance in question is really worried about protecting the LGBT community from having to use a different bathroom stall than the one they wish, but they don’t seem to be too worried about whether or not they have jobs. (Emphasis added)
The proposal would give LGBT residents some legal protections in places of public accommodation, including bars, hotels, stores and restaurants. It would also give transgender residents the ability to use either a men’s or women’s restroom.
The ordinance wouldn’t affect employment. A business could refuse to hire someone for being gay. If that same person were denied service because of sexual orientation, it would be a violation of the proposed ordinance.
If you’re actually worried about fighting discrimination, how about dealing with an actual case of it? Secular employers in the private sector aren’t supposed to be discriminating in the hiring of anyone on any basis other than the resume and abilities of the applicant. Put forward a proposal like that and I imagine you’ll get some significantly broad support. Meanwhile, let’s keep the men out of the women’s bathroom, please.