Although Rick, I didn’t understand your comment about the left creating genderless marriage.
Pam L Harrison
11

Considerations of gender are now no more relevant to access to marriage, or adoption for that matter, than considerations of skin or hair color. That has not been totally accomplished; there are still those who disagree. But it is now a matter of law.

These new gender laws are still a work in progress, but the goal is the same. The new version in New York City is revealing. NYC already has laws on the books granting access to whatever bathroom or locker/shower facilities a trans person wants; de Blasio’s newest Executive Order goes further, making it unlawful to demand any sort of verification of the person’s gender identification. Thus, access is disconnected from biology. Intimate facilities like restrooms and locker/shower rooms are genderless, under the law.

Here’s the consequence. In a test case in Washington state, an ordinary male walked into a female pool changing room and began undressing. The police were able to do nothing, because under the law, he had done nothing wrong. He swam, and returned to change in the presence of the girl’s swim team. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/18/man-undressing-womens-locker-room-fuels-drive-upen/?page=all

Gender activists say there is no civil right for others against feeling uncomfortable, while maintaining there is a civil right for trans people to not feel uncomfortable. That just doesn’t wash. It is an absolute certainty that some men and boys will take advantage of the opportunity to prey on women for voyeurism or worse. In effect, women’s privacy and safety rights have been swept away.

Surely there must be some way to accommodate the needs of trans people without throwing the baby out with the bath water.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.