Some School Districts Tell Obama & Justice Dept. Where They Can Shove Their Tranny Executive Order

[Silhouette]

Accommodating transsexuals in no way makes it legal for a man to dress up like a woman, go into a women's restroom, and rape a woman.

And your means for discerning which man may do so and which man may not are what again exactly? Do you plan to issue ID cards signed by doctors to "real trannies" or shall women have to use intuition to decide which man she has thrown out is legitimate to do so and which can turn around and sue her into destitution for daring to do so?

And if that woman is one of the 17 million women who has been raped, imagine the double difficulty for her making that decision on the fly as she reels with PTSD at the confrontation?

A man with evil intent who can with cosmetics and dress pass as a woman can get himself into a ladies room NOW.

Accommodating genuine persons who identify as female doesn't change that.

Yes but giving all men (how will you discern the difference when it's self-diagnosed?) a carte blanche to enter women's restrooms and showers removes women's ability to police their chambers for fear of a lawsuit for doing so. It's sheer madness. There's no continuity, no clarity. Just "come on in guys". How will you police or control that? And remember we're talking about males pretending to be women. They don't have protected "rights' to do that and insist others indulge their delusions to such an extent.

Game over. You lost this one already. Women's rights will prevail.

 

[Jack4jill]

Women's rights will prevail.

Womens' rights are why transsexuals are being granted theirs.

 

[Silhouette]

Women's rights will prevail.

Womens' rights are why transsexuals are being granted theirs.

Not when they impinge directly upon women's rights, which were there first. There is a conflict of interest. And women will prevail. Just as there was a conflict in interest between an adult's right to free speech and a child's right to not be harmed mentally or physically in New York vs Ferber (USSC 1982). Children prevailed there.

 

[Jack4jill]

Women's rights will prevail.

Womens' rights are why transsexuals are being granted theirs.

Not when they impinge directly upon women's rights, which were there first. There is a conflict of interest. And women will prevail. Just as there was a conflict in interest between an adult's right to free speech and a child's right to not be harmed mentally or physically in New York vs Ferber (USSC 1982). Children prevailed there.

Kiddie porn and transsexuals using the bathrooms that fit their gender are unrelated. One is harmful, and illegal, and one is not.

 

[Silhouette]

Kiddie porn and transsexuals using the bathrooms that fit their gender are unrelated. One is harmful, and illegal, and one is not.

Tell that to one of the 17 million woman rape victims when she encounters a male in her bathroom or shower and shifts instantly in fear into PTSD. That's real, tangible harm and the basis of a quick and easy lawsuit.

 

[Jack4jill]

Kiddie porn and transsexuals using the bathrooms that fit their gender are unrelated. One is harmful, and illegal, and one is not.

Tell that to one of the 17 million woman rape victims when she encounters a male in her bathroom or shower and shifts instantly in fear into PTSD. That's real, tangible harm and the basis of a quick and easy lawsuit.

Fear mongering. Transsexuals already use her bathroom, and aren't about to rape her. Rape victims fear rape, not men, in most cases. They wouldn't be able to get on with their lives otherwise.

 

[Silhouette]

Fear mongering. Transsexuals already use her bathroom, and aren't about to rape her. Rape victims fear rape, not men, in most cases. They wouldn't be able to get on with their lives otherwise.

What ID do they carry to set them apart from other men self-diagnosed in varying stages of "realizing the women they were really born to be"? Again, these are MEN. Just in case you forgot. And they have no legal basis no matter what stage of their delusions to be behind a door marked "women". They have NO civil rights to impinge upon women's privacy to complete a delusion.

 

[Jack4jill]

Fear mongering. Transsexuals already use her bathroom, and aren't about to rape her. Rape victims fear rape, not men, in most cases. They wouldn't be able to get on with their lives otherwise.

What ID do they carry to set them apart from other men self-diagnosed in varying stages of "realizing the women they were really born to be"? Again, these are MEN. Just in case you forgot. And they have no legal basis no matter what stage of their delusions to be behind a door marked "women". They have NO civil rights to impinge upon women's privacy to complete a delusion.

There's no privacy, male or female, when taking you clothes off. And you aren't going to bump into a pre-op transsexual with their clothes off.

You treat grown women like children, in fear if they see a penis, even if not having been raped. That's insulting.

 

[Silhouette]

There's no privacy, male or female, when taking you clothes off. And you aren't going to bump into a pre-op transsexual with their clothes off.

You treat grown women like children, in fear if they see a penis, even after being raped. That's insulting.

Your argument is dead. There is no universe in which you will win a legal battle of a man's "right" to force others to enable his delusions vs women's expectations of segregation from men behind doors marked "women". Especially when 17 million of them have been raped by trusting men in their intimate space.

You lost. Game over. This one's in the bag.

 

[Jack4jill]

There's no privacy, male or female, when taking you clothes off. And you aren't going to bump into a pre-op transsexual with their clothes off.

You treat grown women like children, in fear if they see a penis, even after being raped. That's insulting.

Your argument is dead. There is no universe in which you will win a legal battle of a man's "right" to force others to enable his delusions vs women's expectations of segregation from men behind doors marked "women". Especially when 17 million of them have been raped by trusting men in their intimate space.

You lost. Game over. This one's in the bag.

If it's in the bag how come the courts and the feds support the transsexuals?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Accommodating transsexuals in no way makes it legal for a man to dress up like a woman, go into a women's restroom, and rape a woman.

And your means for discerning which man may do so and which man may not are what again exactly? Do you plan to issue ID cards signed by doctors to "real trannies" or shall women have to use intuition to decide which man she has thrown out is legitimate to do so and which can turn around and sue her into destitution for daring to do so?

And if that woman is one of the 17 million women who has been raped, imagine the double difficulty for her making that decision on the fly as she reels with PTSD at the confrontation?

A man with evil intent who can with cosmetics and dress pass as a woman can get himself into a ladies room NOW.

Accommodating genuine persons who identify as female doesn't change that.

Yes but giving all men (how will you discern the difference when it's self-diagnosed?) a carte blanche to enter women's restrooms and showers removes women's ability to police their chambers for fear of a lawsuit for doing so. It's sheer madness. There's no continuity, no clarity. Just "come on in guys". How will you police or control that? And remember we're talking about males pretending to be women. They don't have protected "rights' to do that and insist others indulge their delusions to such an extent.

Game over. You lost this one already. Women's rights will prevail.

Shouldn't lesbians be banned from the ladies' rooms then as well?

 

[Camp]

Was an Executive Order ever issued or is this just another bullshit lie from the right? Can anyone provide a link to the EO or even an EO number? I thought a letter making recommendations was sent. Am I wrong?

 

[ScienceRocks]

The right just wants to control peoples lives. That is all this is about.

 

[amrchaos]

I just did some quick research

Turns out they maybe able to choose which bathroom they can use. To deny them might get you hit with a "discrimination based on sex" claim under title VII

I guess I owe Clayton an apology.

 

[amrchaos]

I just thought of something

What is the point in having male/female restrooms if a male or female can enter either one?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

"Some School Districts Tell Obama & Justice Dept. Where They Can Shove Their Tranny Executive Order"

This is a lie, there is no ‘EO.’

And any school district that discriminates against transgender students in violation of the law will be subject to the appropriate measures.

Violation of what law? There is no legal prescience established as it relates to transgenders, legislatively or by specified court case. This is government overreach by the administration in an effort to set new policy to meet a particular left wing group. Until such action is actually presented and challenged by in a superior or supreme court and specifically ruled by judicial determination,, it's just an administration moving to meet the power threats of the LGBT in what they prefer to see changed.

Yes there is. Title VII, and subsequent court decisions, have established that gender identity is the equivalent of gender.

Link?

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Yes there is. Title VII, and subsequent court decisions, have established that gender identity is the equivalent of gender.

But not biological sex. And that is the question of women rape victims and their private hygiene chambers marked "women" outside the door.

Accommodating transsexuals in no way makes it legal for a man to dress up like a woman, go into a women's restroom, and rape a woman.

We are so "self" involved in our own little world that we believe everyone else has to cater and must cater to our own personal wants, needs, desires that we could care less of how it may effect another's rights - just give us what "we" want. So literally, at a whim we blatantly just set new policies without a moments thought of any ramifications that could possibly open the door and result from it. When are the rights of how it may effect others going to be important enough and taken into consideration over simply satisfying the needs of "self"?

 

[Silhouette]

I just thought of something

What is the point in having male/female restrooms if a male or female can enter either one?

That's why when I advocate for the 17 million women rape victims baring themselves behind bathroom or shower doors marked "women", I always bring up the sign by the door and what it says; and what it MEANS...

 

[Stephanie]

folks need to get this right. It was not a EO but a Decree. and we need to defund this DOE IMMEDIATLY they are putting this off on our CHILDREN. speak out for crying loud

it is NOT THE LAW. Obama doesn't have that power though he would like to be Hugo Chavez.

ran across this off another site

US Goverment ^ | May 15, 2016 | U S GOVERNMENT

Posted on ‎5‎/‎15‎/‎2016‎ ‎8‎:‎00‎:‎30‎ ‎AM by knarf

Too much talk about a comment rather than the disclaimer ... IT IS NOT LAW
Overview Of Title IX Of The Education Amendments Of 1972, 20 U.S.C. A§ 1681 Et. Seq. | CRT | Department of Justice
Title IX: The Basics | Know Your IX


the LAW

the Decree
Overview Of Title IX Of The Education Amendments Of 1972, 20 U.S.C. A§ 1681 Et. Seq. | CRT | Department of Justice


from:
IT IS NOT LAW ! ! !

 

[Silhouette]

You're right. People should fight this.