Posted on 02/18/2016 1:00:31 PM PST by wagglebee
PIERRE, South Dakota, February 18, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – In a first for the U.S., a state legislature has passed a bill that bans transgender students from using a bathroom of the opposite sex and requires schools to have "reasonable accommodation" for transgender students through single-person bathrooms and locker rooms, among other methods.
The bill now goes to the desk of Governor Dennis Daugaard, who the Argus Leader reports has indicated support for the bill even as he has declined to take a formal position. Daugaard expressed theoretical support in January but has more recently said he needs to better understand arguments on both sides.
The bill passed the state Senate 20-15 this week. While opponents say it would promote and legalize discrimination, supporters have argued that it is protection against the Obama administration's efforts to blackmail school districts into opening up sex-specific bathrooms, locker rooms, and other facilities to people of the opposite sex.
It is also seen as protection against causing damage to young people, with state Senator David Omdahl, a Republican, encouraging his colleagues to back the bill to "preserve the innocence of our young people."
Bathroom bills have been debated in numerous states, usually in response to lawsuits threatened by students who say their actual sex is not the one into which they were born.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
Agreed
ban trannies to an outhouse in the back 40
What’s a transsexual’s favorite holiday ?
Halloween !
It is odd to even question this, when you consider that bathrooms were not invented to serve social justice but instead to deal with a biological function (excretion). Why do liberals hate science? LOL!
Pretty much verbatim my reaction to the headline.
a bill that bans transgender students from using a bathroom of the opposite sex
__________________________________________________
but as these mentally ill people think they are the opposite sex I do hope the wording expresses that they cannot use the bathrooms of the opposite biological sex...opposite the sex they were born as, not the sex they imagine they are now...
(you know that moment when the doctor smacked his butt and said to Mom “You have a boy, a girl...”)
oh the wording would have to be so exact...
YES! Thank you!
The part about requiring schools to have “single person” rules for “transgenders” sounds like a ridiculous burden. They need to stick to the first part the headline describes.
” has more recently said he needs to better understand arguments on both sides.”
what the hell is there to understand besides:
XX
XY
pandering to the sick and should be infirmed
“It is odd to even question this, when you consider that bathrooms were not invented to serve social justice but instead to deal with a biological function (excretion). Why do liberals hate science? LOL!”
Setting aside the question of Liberals, your comment and those other comments preceding it makes it doubtful any of you understand or know the science, much less respect it. For example, if you omit anyone claiming special status on the basis of a mental condition, you still have something on the order of 1 out of 100 people having some form of physical intersex condition.
“Total number of people whose bodies differ from standard male or female one in 100 births.”
“Klinefelter (XXY) one in 1,000 births”
http://www.isna.org/faq/frequency
Based upon just the physical requirements of science, how do you propose to equitably enforce such laws without causing just as much harm or worse as you do when subjecting persons who are not intersexed to similar invasions of their privacy? In the past, the objective was accomplished by providing private facilities.
Agreed.
However, if it were simply a question of bathrooms, I wouldn’t care. I have been in many places where public toilets have been unisex, and it’s fine. For one thing, it cuts down on the gay cruising that infests men’s rooms and also makes it safer for women because the likelihood of running into a normal, harmless man in the bathroom makes it less likely for some creep to be hiding in the stalls waiting to catch a woman.
The big problem is that this has nothing to do with practical things and is all about making people accept something so crazy (”transgender”) that they have to be forced to accept it by any means possible.
Transgenderism and the whole smorgasbord of other sexual -isms used to be relegated to aberrant psychological issues, but we’ve normalized them to the point that we have to legislate normality. This world is messed up.
I have been at hockey games in the old civic area in Pittsburgh. The women’s room lines were always huge so the women started using the men’s room. I nearly freaked standing at the urinal and a line of women were waiting for the stalls.
Agreed, but good for SD for having to do this in order to protect kids who do not have mental issues.
Actually I have read up on such issues before, be it genetic or hormonal/environmental. It is still a marginal number of people.
A rare flash of sanity in a sick nation where most have lost the ability to reason and exercise rational judgement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.