NY Times Seems A Bit Upset Over Texas “Bathroom” Bill
The NY Times Editorial Board, which has so far refused to divulge its own policy for the use of bathrooms, showers, and changing rooms, along with hiring and HR policies, for the gender confused, is a bit upset
Given North Carolina’s self-defeating legislative efforts to restrict where transgender people can use public bathrooms, it’s mind-boggling that politicians in other states would be tempted to go down a similar path. Yet, Texas Republicans opened a new front in the nation’s debate about transgender rights on Thursday, when Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick announced a bill that would require transgender people to use public restrooms in schools, government buildings and public universities that align with their “biological sex.”
Oh, the horror! There are no actual penalties within the legislation, the actual idea here is limit Government from imposing requirements on both government and private entities that would force allowing TG people to use whichever bathroom, changing room, and shower (BCSR) they want. Which invades the privacy of citizens. Liberals always worry about women, well, what of when they are being exposed to penis in their historical safe spaces when they don’t want to be, because Government deems it?
Texas is not alone. Lawmakers in several states, including Alabama, South Carolina and Washington, have signaled their intention to introduce similar bills this year. Officials peddling these odious initiatives clearly don’t care that the measures are not only unconstitutional but unenforceable: Laws barring transgender people from using public restrooms that align with their gender identity could be enforced only if restroom users were subjected to intrusive inspections.
Do you know what’s odious? Forcing underage girls to have to share the BCSR with gender confused males, who shake their money makers and record them. Repeatedly. Let’s be honest, most will will respectful and just want to get on with their lives, causing no problems. It still doesn’t mean women should be forced to accept someone else’s life decision. Nor having to compete against men who are deluded to thinking they’re female, and doing better at sports than women.
Oh, and isn’t Washington a Democratic Party run state?
The Texas Association of Business last year commissioned a study about the impact a state law that discriminates against gay, bisexual and transgender people would have. Using the backlash from private industry set off by North Carolina’s law, known as HB2, as a gauge, the group concluded that Texas could lose as many as 185,000 jobs. A discriminatory law would also result in billions of dollars in lost tourism, canceled business investment and an almost certain decline in the state’s vibrant conventions business.
For all the caterwauling, how many businesses are willing to implement their own policies at their offices? To allow the gender confused in whatever bathroom they want? To spend the money to turn some bathrooms into multi-sex bathrooms? That’s the part of the debate that has been missing. There are plenty of smaller businesses here in NC which have their own policies. Many of them have single stall bathrooms which anyone can use. What of the big businesses? Is the NY Times Editorial Board good with men pretending they’re women so they can do things like attend women only classes at gyms and such? It’s easy to look at that “big picture”, not so easy when you look at the actual details.
When push comes to shove, people like their privacy. They do not want Social Justice Warriors forcing their wacky beliefs on them. Republicans do not want to have to pass these types of bills. If Leftists would stop pushing so hard, it wouldn’t even be an issue.