North Carolina GOP Block Gay Anti-Discrimintion Law

[B-Man]

It’s Not About Bathrooms Anymore

 

by Alexander Guin

Original Article

 

 

By now, most Americans have heard about North Carolina House Bill 2. The new law has dominated the media landscape for several weeks, but only in the past few days has the real issue come into focus.

 

In almost every article, news report, and blog post covering the new law, the officially named “Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act” is referred to as North Carolina’s “controversial bathroom bill.”

 

Let me assure you that, among everyday North Carolinians, there is no controversy. Recent Civitas Institute polling indicates most people are aware of the law (85 percent) and an overwhelming majority (69 percent) believe that the Charlotte City Council ordinance HB2 overturned was unreasonable and unsafe.

 

The media have sparked a firestorm and fed the flames with stories about bathroom assaults against transgendered individuals and about tearful students claiming oppression, but only a handful of politicians and public policy organizations give the law even a second thought. Yet despite such widespread public support of HB2, groups such as the Human Rights Campaign and North Carolina’s Attorney General, Roy Cooper, have successfully pressured multi-national corporations and the federal government to try to coerce, shame, and bully North Carolina into repealing the bill.

 

All that aside, as of May 3, some high-minded libertarians and centrist Republicans bemoaning the prolonged discussion of something as banal as where people can relieve themselves and change clothes were able to breathe their own sighs of relief.

 

The moment Loretta Lynch threatened to withhold Title VII and Title IX funding from North Carolina unless Gov. Pat McCrory and the legislature agreed to cry “uncle” and publicly declare that HB2 is discriminatory, the discussion ceased to be about bathrooms.

 

 

We now find ourselves not in a debate about bathrooms but in one about the relationship between the federal government and the states.

 

The question is: How far are McCrory and legislators willing to go to stand up for North Carolina’s sovereignty? How hard are they willing to fight in order to maintain control over a state-level question with a state-level answer? Transgender rights are not mentioned even in the “emanations of the penumbra” of the U.S. Constitution and are thus left to the states, the laboratories of democracy, to decide.

 

The hitch is that North Carolina depends on the federal government for nearly half of its annual budget. The $22 billion sum that the feds are threatening is part of an overall state budget closer to $55 billion. This new threat just brings to the forefront a danger that has always lurked in money Washington sends to the states.

 

Every dollar North Carolina receives from the federal government comes with strings attached. We’ll leave the cost of compliance aside for the time being, but the policy outcomes of accepting federal grants can be devastating. To pick just one example, in 2009, when North Carolina was flat on its back during the recession, bureaucrats in the NC Department of Public Instruction accepted $400 million in federal Race to the Top Grants. The stipulation for accepting the grants, however, was that North Carolina must implement the Common Core curriculum. The results have been disastrous.

 

The results of backing down from this fight would also be disastrous. This time, however, the physical safety and emotional comfort of vulnerable people is at stake.

 

Loretta Lynch has perpetrated an unadulterated abuse of federal power, pure and simple. Now it’s time for North Carolina to stand up and defend our sovereignty and protect women and children.

 

 

 

 

 

.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

And now, our dictator dictates to schools: Play our game, or lose our funds.

 

USA USA USA

[B-Man]

And now, our dictator dictates to schools: Play our game, or lose our funds.

 

USA USA USA

 

What Joe is referring to

 

 

Obama administration to issue decree on bathroom access for Transgender students

 

The Hill (DC), by Jessie Hellmann

 

 

Original Article

 

 

The Obama administration will issue a decree Friday to all public school districts in the U.S. telling them to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity, according to the New York Times. While the decree doesn´t have the force of law, it does carry a threat: Schools that don’t comply could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid. It is signed by officials at the Justice Department and Department of Education

 

 

 

 

It's not about Bathroom rights anymore...................

[IDBillzFan]

And now, our dictator dictates to schools: Play our game, or lose our funds.

 

USA USA USA

 

Helluva time to own a private school.

[B-Man]

North Carolina School District to Allow Students to Carry Pepper Spray, to Ward Off Bathroom Attacks

http://www.redstate.com/sweetie15/2016/05/13/north-carolina-school-district-allow-students-carry-pepper-spray-ward-bathroom-attacks/

 

 

 

A Teacher’s Perspective: Transgender Bathrooms In Schools

 

http://www.redstate.com/joesquire/2016/05/13/teachers-perspective-transgender-bathrooms-schools/

 

 

‘Straight into the paper shredder:’ Texans decry Obama schools directive about transgender bathrooms

‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2016‎

 

The Washington Post ^

.

"The Obama administration is planning to issue a sweeping directive telling every public school district in the country to allow transgender students to use the bathrooms that match their gender identity

The NYT reports.

It does not have the force of law, but it contains an implicit threat: Schools that do not abide by the Obama administration’s interpretation of the law could face lawsuits or a loss of federal aid....

“A school may not require transgender students to use facilities inconsistent with their gender identity or to use individual-user facilities when other students are not required to do so,” according to the letter, a copy of which was provided to The New York Times....

As soon as a child’s parent or legal guardian asserts a gender identity for the student that “differs from previous representations or records,” the letter says, the child is to be treated accordingly — without any requirement for a medical diagnosis or birth certificate to be produced.

 

Here's the key.

 

And how long do we think that "parent or legal guardian" part will stay in there?

.

Edited May 13, 2016 by B-Man

[CommonCents]

Such a **** show. As i have said before a few of my buddies are unionized custodians for the Boston Public school system, they already have a few trans kids using the girls bathrooms. I have yet to hear of the female to male scenario. They are getting bombarded with the PC paperwork reassuring them to treat everyone equally and avoid talking about the controversial topics. All is common place for any work environment but it's ironic that their workplace is full of the left's agenda. They now have signs up " I support undocumented students" which came from the admin. Power is limitless when you can silence your critics and influence the pliable adolescents all under the same roof.

[What a Tuel]

Curious if Obama would care if his daughters felt violated changing in a bathroom with a anatomical male present. Not sure it would matter to his daughters what the anatomical male identifies as - he/she is still an anatomical male in the wrong lockerroom.

 

I'm sure he raised them better than to be concerned for their privacy though.

[birdog1960]

 

Which States Are Givers and Which Are Takers?

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-givers-and-which-are-takers/361668/

very informative graph which states are most dependent on Federal gov funding

''On the other side of this group, folks in 14 states, including Delaware, Minnesota, Illinois, Nebraska, and Ohio, get back less than $1 for each $1 they spend in taxes.''

Florida is #3 getting back $4.50 for every $1. No state income tax umm

 

yup. all those damn Yankees supporting all those independent minded, statist southerners. just what you'd expect.

It’s Not About Bathrooms Anymore

 

by Alexander Guin

Original Article

 

 

By now, most Americans have heard about North Carolina House Bill 2. The new law has dominated the media landscape for several weeks, but only in the past few days has the real issue come into focus.

 

In almost every article, news report, and blog post covering the new law, the officially named “Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act” is referred to as North Carolina’s “controversial bathroom bill.”

 

Let me assure you that, among everyday North Carolinians, there is no controversy. Recent Civitas Institute polling indicates most people are aware of the law (85 percent) and an overwhelming majority (69 percent) believe that the Charlotte City Council ordinance HB2 overturned was unreasonable and unsafe.

 

The media have sparked a firestorm and fed the flames with stories about bathroom assaults against transgendered individuals and about tearful students claiming oppression, but only a handful of politicians and public policy organizations give the law even a second thought. Yet despite such widespread public support of HB2, groups such as the Human Rights Campaign and North Carolina’s Attorney General, Roy Cooper, have successfully pressured multi-national corporations and the federal government to try to coerce, shame, and bully North Carolina into repealing the bill.

 

All that aside, as of May 3, some high-minded libertarians and centrist Republicans bemoaning the prolonged discussion of something as banal as where people can relieve themselves and change clothes were able to breathe their own sighs of relief.

 

The moment Loretta Lynch threatened to withhold Title VII and Title IX funding from North Carolina unless Gov. Pat McCrory and the legislature agreed to cry “uncle” and publicly declare that HB2 is discriminatory, the discussion ceased to be about bathrooms.

 

 

We now find ourselves not in a debate about bathrooms but in one about the relationship between the federal government and the states.

 

The question is: How far are McCrory and legislators willing to go to stand up for North Carolina’s sovereignty? How hard are they willing to fight in order to maintain control over a state-level question with a state-level answer? Transgender rights are not mentioned even in the “emanations of the penumbra” of the U.S. Constitution and are thus left to the states, the laboratories of democracy, to decide.

 

The hitch is that North Carolina depends on the federal government for nearly half of its annual budget. The $22 billion sum that the feds are threatening is part of an overall state budget closer to $55 billion. This new threat just brings to the forefront a danger that has always lurked in money Washington sends to the states.

 

Every dollar North Carolina receives from the federal government comes with strings attached. We’ll leave the cost of compliance aside for the time being, but the policy outcomes of accepting federal grants can be devastating. To pick just one example, in 2009, when North Carolina was flat on its back during the recession, bureaucrats in the NC Department of Public Instruction accepted $400 million in federal Race to the Top Grants. The stipulation for accepting the grants, however, was that North Carolina must implement the Common Core curriculum. The results have been disastrous.

 

The results of backing down from this fight would also be disastrous. This time, however, the physical safety and emotional comfort of vulnerable people is at stake.

 

Loretta Lynch has perpetrated an unadulterated abuse of federal power, pure and simple. Now it’s time for North Carolina to stand up and defend our sovereignty and protect women and children.

 

 

 

 

 

.

if this works out maybe we can tackle states refusal to expand Medicaid next.

[ALF]

I wonder if this rule applies to private and charter schools ? I can see more home schooling.

 

I would favor funding for private bathrooms and showers for transgender who have not had the surgical transition. JMO

[birdog1960]

I wonder if this rule applies to private and charter schools ? I can see more home schooling.

 

I would favor funding for private bathrooms and showers for transgender who have not had the surgical transition. JMO

just how prevalent are transgender students? 1/500. 1/1000? honestly don't know but there would seem to be a reasonable threshold in order to justify the cost of that. wouldn't surprise me if some home schoolers tried to cash in however and get a bathroom remodel out of it.

 

edit: hmmm, prevalence is still an open question but looks like it's in the 1/15000-20,000 range for both sexes combined. https://tgmentalhealth.com/2010/03/31/the-prevalence-of-transgenderism/ sending them, if agreeable, to the same school, and having a separate transgender locker room with toilets in these schools would seem the better solution. bottom line however is that this is seldom going to be a practical proble. how many students does the avg hs have? given these numbers there's prob 1 student for every 5 school or more.

Edited May 13, 2016 by birdog1960

[ALF]

Just provide private bathrooms and showers for transgender who have not had surgery and want to cross the line. There cannot be that many.

 

Respect the privacy of 99% , this is just common sense.

[birdog1960]

Just provide private bathrooms and showers for transgender who have not had surgery and want to cross the line. There cannot be that many.

 

Respect the privacy of 99% , this is just common sense.

give em access to the faculty bathroom. problem solved.

[DC Tom]

just how prevalent are transgender students? 1/500. 1/1000? honestly don't know but there would seem to be a reasonable threshold in order to justify the cost of that. wouldn't surprise me if some home schoolers tried to cash in however and get a bathroom remodel out of it.

 

edit: hmmm, prevalence is still an open question but looks like it's in the 1/15000-20,000 range for both sexes combined. https://tgmentalhealth.com/2010/03/31/the-prevalence-of-transgenderism/ sending them, if agreeable, to the same school, and having a separate transgender locker room with toilets in these schools would seem the better solution. bottom line however is that this is seldom going to be a practical proble. how many students does the avg hs have? given these numbers there's prob 1 student for every 5 school or more.

 

Actually, that link basically says that all the estimates are garbage, for various reasons. But given that those studies uniformly use as a measure of "transgendered" "someone who has undergone preparation for surgical or hormonal gender reassignment," the estimates are probably very low (since that definition requires both a willingness to "self-report," essentially, and means to pursue gender reassignment; and since the number of people who undergo gender reassignment is undoubtedly a subset of the number of people with GID.)

 

And they're not applicable in this case, since the administration's position is that "transgendered" isn't determined by "pursuing gender reassignment therapy," but determined by whatever the person happens to claim. That's the true stupidity of the administration's position, and the true strength of North Carolina's: NC's law specifies a legal basis for determination which, while impractical (no one's checking birth certificates at the bathroom door), is at least theoretically verifiable and objective. Whereas the administration's touchy-feely position of "whatever the person claims to feel" is a legal nightmare waiting to happen - and doubly so in a high school environment where people are immature, !@#$s, and more likely to "experiment" or be "gender fluid."

[B-Man]

Just provide private bathrooms and showers for transgender who have not had surgery and want to cross the line. There cannot be that many.

 

Respect the privacy of 99% , this is just common sense.

 

 

But, they won't accept that "common sense"

 

it is still discrimination (to the left) if the person is not allowed full access like the other sex they identify with......

 

Now what ?

 

 

 

 

 

.

[birdog1960]

 

Actually, that link basically says that all the estimates are garbage, for various reasons. But given that those studies uniformly use as a measure of "transgendered" "someone who has undergone preparation for surgical or hormonal gender reassignment," the estimates are probably very low (since that definition requires both a willingness to "self-report," essentially, and means to pursue gender reassignment; and since the number of people who undergo gender reassignment is undoubtedly a subset of the number of people with GID.)

 

And they're not applicable in this case, since the administration's position is that "transgendered" isn't determined by "pursuing gender reassignment therapy," but determined by whatever the person happens to claim. That's the true stupidity of the administration's position, and the true strength of North Carolina's: NC's law specifies a legal basis for determination which, while impractical (no one's checking birth certificates at the bathroom door), is at least theoretically verifiable and objective. Whereas the administration's touchy-feely position of "whatever the person claims to feel" is a legal nightmare waiting to happen - and doubly so in a high school environment where people are immature, !@#$s, and more likely to "experiment" or be "gender fluid."

not so. there were 6 studies cited. one used gender dysphoria as an inclusion criteria for transgenderism. the other studies varied. they were all pretty large ratios. it's not even a meta analysis spo it's not great science but it looks like the prevalence is not all that high even with the definition being "gender dysphoria".

[DC Tom]

not so. there were 6 studies cited. one used gender dysphoria as an inclusion criteria for transgenderism. the other studies varied. they were all pretty large ratios. it's not even a meta analysis spo it's not great science but it looks like the prevalence is not all that high even with the definition being "gender dysphoria".

 

That one used gender dysphoria as an inclusion criteria, but excluded transvestism. Based on a survey of 800 doctors, Many of whom reported that they knew nothing about it. And the study includes the caveat that transsexuals are unlikely to present such to their doctor. There's a reason that "study" is a "brief note" in the back of the BJGP.

 

The other studies can be similarly demolished on methodological flaws. The actual prevalence seems much higher (1:300 according to Conway, as high as 2% in some studies of high school students, which would seem relevant to the current discussion.) Unfortunately I only have links to research papers, and not a link to a half-assed blog post that you would doubtlessly require.

[IDBillzFan]

Just provide private bathrooms and showers for transgender who have not had surgery and want to cross the line. There cannot be that many.

 

Respect the privacy of 99% , this is just common sense.

Progressives have no use for your otherwise obvious and simple solution because they bring up ridiculous topics like this for one of two reasons: to either (a) create strife so the world is arguing about something stupid to distract them from the misery of the past seven years, or (b) to create a way to launder money to the DNC.

 

With something like Black Lives Matter, they rile up people to form a group that the local governments can fund it so much of that money can get laundered into election campaigns for local progressives.

 

With something like this, you're not going to get the bathroom lobby to launder money for you, so it's better to use the topic to create strife...particularly in an election year, when people should be discussing the future of the country, not the bathroom habits of about a dozen people.

 

'Intellectuals' like birdog miss this point because they're simply not smart enough to understand what this is really all about.

[DC Tom]

With something like this, you're not going to get the bathroom lobby to launder money for you, so it's better to use the topic to create strife...particularly in an election year, when people should be discussing the future of the country, not the bathroom habits of about a dozen people.

 

You really think you can't turn "transgendered bathrooms" into a money laundering opportunity?

 

Ultimately, it's the same lobby. All these movements go back to the same ten or twenty groups.

[birdog1960]

Progressives have no use for your otherwise obvious and simple solution because they bring up ridiculous topics like this for one of two reasons: to either (a) create strife so the world is arguing about something stupid to distract them from the misery of the past seven years, or (b) to create a way to launder money to the DNC.

 

With something like Black Lives Matter, they rile up people to form a group that the local governments can fund it so much of that money can get laundered into election campaigns for local progressives.

 

With something like this, you're not going to get the bathroom lobby to launder money for you, so it's better to use the topic to create strife...particularly in an election year, when people should be discussing the future of the country, not the bathroom habits of about a dozen people.

 

'Intellectuals' like birdog miss this point because they're simply not smart enough to understand what this is really all about.

it's a fight the nc repugs should have avoided. they are the ones trying to win a symbolic victory over an opponent that can hold their allowance. we'll see how strong their convictions are.

[DC Tom]

it's a fight the nc repugs should have avoided. they are the ones trying to win a symbolic victory over an opponent that can hold their allowance. we'll see how strong their convictions are.

 

I don't doubt NC's convictions can be bought for the amount of money the federal government is withholding.

 

I also don't doubt that the feds will withhold the money no matter how many lawsuits NC might win.