Quote (EndlessSky @ Apr 5 2018 11:16am)
Its not a right.
Which means a public or private institution can disallow anyone they want from the bathrooms
And Obama has no business sticking his narcissistic control freak nose in it
you're presenting a more black-white case than is reality. In reality discrimination of people based on gender is against the law. Also in reality that legal distinction, and whether or not legal protection of transgender people is valid under gender protections, is up to the courts. I agree Obama overreached, i also agreed with his overreach due to pragmatism. The reality is we're going to spend billions fleshing this situation out and his move would have mitigated those costs.
we're going to first have a big scotus case, and one main point of contention will be selective enforcement of this law. You've likely walked past about 20 trannies this year you didn't know were not cis. If you owned a business you'd have the same issue, selective enforcement by the government based on profiling doesnt ever end well. So it would eventually come down that those who legally change their gender would be allowed to use the bathroom the assign with. then eventually that would cause stupid issues and the process to do so would need to be more stringent with potential medical backing. eventually agender people are going to get upset and we'll see unisex bathrooms be more common and slowly over time because fairly common in public places.
its all a waste of our money litigating this on the state and federal level all so that people can feel safe from a hypothetical situation (fake tranny pervs) that hasnt been documented to happen and would still be largely illegal. all so that armchair lawyer biologist hybrids can have a good red faced rant on what gender is and is not, from both sides. you're all pathetic idiots who are all costing us money based on irrational fear, or intersectional politics vote buying, take your pick.