If you’d told people 20 years ago — with a straight face — that lawmakers would be discussing whether men pretending to be women should be allowed to use women’s restrooms and changing rooms, they’d have given you a head-shake, an eye-roll, or a “Yeah, right.”
Today, elected officials actually discuss such absurd ideas. Privacy, safety, modesty — these things appear to be outdated concepts. Unless they suit liberals.
The Houston city council passed a so-called non-discrimination ordinance, which opponents said violated the city charter, the Texas Defense of Marriage Act, and the state constitution. Although the city’s lesbian mayor removed the “restroom” provision of the bill, the issue remains. A court ordered the city to either repeal the ordinance or allow people to vote on it in November. The city opted for the latter.
The ordinance is back in the news. The Washington Times reported that the group supporting the insane measure is “firing back” at a former Houston Astros baseball player who put out an ad against it. Lance Berkman said the measure would “allow troubled men who claim to be women to enter women’s bathrooms, showers and locker rooms.”
This is a true statement. “Transgenderism” is a disorder.
Another plus for supporters is that the ballot language never mentions public restrooms, but rather asks voters whether they are in favor of the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, “which prohibits discrimination in city employment and city services, city contracts, public accommodations, private employment, and housing” based on the 15 characteristics.
No recent polling on the issue has been released, but Mr. Carlbom said, “When people look at the question as it is on the ballot and are asked the question, ‘Do they support an equal rights ordinance?’ we do very, very well.”
As long as voters understand the connection between Proposition 1 and the public restroom issue, however, Mr. Woodfill is confident the nays will prevail.
“Once folks are educated about what this ordinance means to them in terms of public safety and males being able to enter female restrooms, they overwhelmingly reject it,” Mr. Woodfill said.
The measure’s supporters resorted to semantics to refute opponents. They claimed the definition of “men” in this context excludes men pretending to be women. But that’s circular. This is precisely what opponents don’t want. No biological male, regardless of how he feels or dresses, should be using women’s restrooms.