A long time friend of this blog writes:
From David Schultz at Minnpost:
“One should not let false claims of privacy trump civil rights. Prejudice has no place in the bathroom.”
These people are insane.
Proof, on the off chance any were needed, that David Schultz comes from Planet Progressive.
I have removed women on two occasions from the men’s room at music concerts. It’s just trashy behavior.
But this is different. These so-called “transgender” people are demonstrably suffering from a mental illness. They have suicide rates far exceeding the general population, as do homosexuals.
Liberals refuse mentally ill people the treatment they desperately need to fulfill a self-serving agenda to demoralize and dehumanize the general population. Liberals cheat children out of educations to fulfill a financial arrangement with union thugs, as well as to carry out leftist socio-economic indoctrination from the earliest years.
Leftists are fundamentally evil people. They must be crushed at every opportunity, and crushed with extreme prejudice.
“One should not let false claims of privacy trump civil rights. Prejudice has no place in the bathroom.”
Uh, Mr. Shultz, are you seriously recommending that we remove the walls and stalls from restrooms because there is no right to privacy when you go to the bathroom? I know I would feel uncomfortable taking a dump in the middle of Target Field, but then again, I’m not a “progressive.”
The North Carolina law makes it illegal for dirty old men to lurk in the girls bathroom at public parks. Liberals insist that a little girl’s false claim of privacy shouldn’t prevent the peeper from looking at her panties, or more. Apparently, it’s a fundamental civil right, probably covered an emanation of the penumbra of licentiousness included in “pursuit of happiness.” How could I have missed it all these years?
Makes sense. Go to skid row in any liberal city, you’ll see a bunch of people doing their business in public. Why wouldn’t we all want to live that way…except for the obvious reasons?
Just a nightmare for anyone operating any facility that requires a bunch of bathrooms, really. The new grocery store here in town has about ten family bathrooms instead of the traditional mens’ and womens’ rooms, presumably for this reason. Time will tell if it’s easier, or more difficult, to police behavior in that set up than the current one, but what’s certain is that it’s a lot more expensive than the old way of doing things.
“One should not let false claims of privacy trump civil rights.”
DG
If this is true then not only should women not be granted privacy at their toilet but their false claim of privacy embeded in Roe V Wade should be eschewed in favor of the civil rights of both the unborn person and the father of that person. You would agree, yes?
I remember back in 1992ish or so, when they removed the doors from all the stalls in the men’s bathrooms in Coffmann Union at the U of MN, because too many gay men would give blowjobs in the stalls, and non-gay men started to complain about it.
By now, they’ve probably gotten rid of the stalls completely, and have everything out in the open, communally.
It would be a way of desensitizing people to any needed privacy and perceived loss thereof.
Oh, and Kel FTW.
And JD as well.
I am ashamed of the fact that I didn’t pick up on this earlier. Schultz’s argument is a torpedo below the waterline of Roe V. Wade. Think about it a minute. Privacy is the “penumbra” on which the prenatal infanticide industry is built.
Finally read the article, and it’s such a pile of fresh steaming…. Schultz that it’s just incredible. The argument for sex segregated bathrooms is not about privacy, it’s about avoiding victimization, including rape and voyeurism. Moreover, Dr. King did NOT stage is sit-ins in bathrooms. Holy Schultz, it’s really, really awful.
Some of the liberals who commented on the Schultz article believe that a transgender person must have had some kind of surgery or be taking hormones or even seen a therapist and been “declared’ transgender.
Oh, no. These people do not understand what they are dealing with. You can no more be ‘certified’ transgender than you can be ‘certified’ homosexual.
Bento’s comment reminds me of jokes we told back in college about the kind of shenanigans kids would practice if homosexuality ever became a protected category. And now here we are. Sigh.
If a person can be bisexual, why can’t they be bi-gendered? “Today I feel like a woman. Tomorrow who knows?”
Almost all human sexuality lingo, these days, refers to a gender ‘assigned at birth’, as though physical genital configuration, ability or inability to bear children, and the profound effect or absence of sex hormones on human physiology is is a ‘social construct’. Simple common sense will tell you that if a doctor makes a mistake when filling out a birth certificate, and checks “M” instead of “F”, you don’t magically have a little boy instead of a little girl.
Go to skid row in any liberal city, you’ll see a bunch of people doing their business in public.
Go to skid row in any city outside of US, you’ll see a bunch of people doing their business in public.
There, fixed it for ya. Just another way for libturd progressives to move US closer to their EU nirvana.
PS, okay, maybe not Canada, Australia, NZ, Japan and S. Korea, but all the rest.