Lance Berkman campaigns against allowing boys into girls' bathrooms

An openly gay woman that the city of Houston has elected to public office for almost 2 decades now.....of course all it takes is the city going against her one time for those on the extreme left to go crazy.

Anyway, the butt-hurt has been pretty funny to laugh about to this point, but it's starting to get old. A left leaning (fairly strongly left leaning in that they haven't had a Republican mayor in 34 years), gay friendly city didn't like the poorly thought out, poorly written ordinance, deal with it.

 

Indeed. There's nothing liberals like more than to call others bigoted and racist.

 

THIS IS TOO VAGUE. It gives the city far reaching powers to interpret as such...Are bouncers are clubs gonna be fined that they "discriminate" members who are allowed in? Would they be fined? What kind of services are businesses required to provide the general public in order NOT to discriminate?

In all of these private establishments, the bathroom is ONE such public accommodation that is suddenly opened to interpretation.

Finally in regards to your voter turnout argument...
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/election/local/article/Voter-turnout-highest-since-2003-6609254.php

That my friend is a significant change from the norm for our city.

 

Were people getting arrested before? And I mean, a lot?

Because those arguing that any man could go into the women's restroom now but it doesn't happen a lot...isn't this the other side of that argument?

Has it really become an issue where people who look like men (born with female parts) use the men's restrooms and people get freaked out? Has it been an issue for a women (born with male parts) using the women's restroom and people getting freaked out?

I could see if the woman was standing up to pee...but I'd think for the most part these women would still sit down, because they're a woman and that's what women do.

I guess I just never considered it an issue, because I generally use the bathroom to pee, and then get out of there. I don't do a lot of looking around. So I don't know how this even became a need for a law.

 

"To me, tolerance is the virtue that’s killing this country." - Lance Berkman

 

Be careful not to call him names, or else that would make you the intolerant one...

 

I think you're misunderstanding the implication of the Department of Education decision. The DoE says your preferred solution of segregating people by sex instead of gender is discrimination. And they are about to hit the school district with a $6m/year hammer. They aren't saying the school didn't let her call herself a girl; they said the school must treat her as a girl, with normal access to the ladies room and the girls' locker-room -- public accommodation on self-defined gender identity. Their ruling isn't the same as explicit legislation or clear court precedent, but I think it's a pretty clear indication about where this thing will go.

Or hover -- because they're afraid of germs on a public restroom seat -- and get pee on the seat to complete the self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

Difference between hovering and standing to pee. One you face the toilet, the other you don't.

After a google search, I did find an incident where transgenders were arrested for using the "wrong" bathroom (IE, the one they identified with). Primarily because people didn't feel comfortable with the situation. So, if there are people who aren't comfortable with it, I don't think it is definitely a open and shut deal where it should have been emphatically passed. Hard to say how many people are uncomfortable with it.

I wish more people would turn out to vote. Would be great if we knew that a larger portion of the city was voting.

 

I think it's clear where some are trying to take it, but I think they'll push it too far and the pendulum will swing back the other direction towards sanity.

 

Fair enough. If that's why you voted no, I can totally respect that.

Eh...not a big issue with me at all...agree to disagree...

26% of registered voters voted. I know that's historically better than average, but it also means that 3 our of every 4 registered voters didn't bother - which is pretty pathetic.

 

26% is not 100%, and I get that. But 26% is enough to think that even with 100% voted the FOR/AGAINST ratio would be the same. unless you think a huge (disproportionate) % FOR stayed home while 100% of AGAINST voted.

 

Conservative politics in a nutshell.

 

Again....you keep missing it, this was something voted on by a liberal voting bloc and that's who rejected it.....the same voters who have put Democrat mayors in office for more than 3 decades straight and have voted Annise Parker into public office for nearly the past 20 years. There's nothing conservative about those who vote in Houston elections.

 

Just like that gay marriage fad, right?

 

I'm not sure that analogy works

Gay people are/were denied access to benefits of marriage

no one is denying anyone of using the bathroom. Technically we are all denied the rights to use one or the other bathroom.

 

Gay marriage was a legitimate civil rights issue, this is not. I know those on the extreme left desperately want to pretend that it is, but it's not.

 

It works, you're just stuck on bathrooms.

 

Can't they just make a unisex bathroom and be done with it?

 

The only thing a majority of Houston know is man in girls bathroom or that their church leaders said don't vote for it.