Like most people, we use mixed-gender bathrooms all the time - in our homes. It
is not a big deal. There is a door, and privacy within that room with a locked
door. If we have equally private stalls, should it make a difference? I worry
about my son, who is 14, using a seedy men's room. I worry about
pedophiles hanging out there to prey upon him and other young boys, and this
"bathroom bill" stuff won't protect him whatsoever. Don't we
have better things to worry about?
President Trump just undid this Obama thing and the agencies involved with the
new direction said everything that Bountiful Guy advocated. States' rights
and cool heads with common sense prevailed. Title IX remains intact and local
governments, and all else can apply Title IX issues as they see best fits their
environment. Congratulations to President Trump for keeping another promise.
Our children are restored to better safety. Bullying is covered by Title IX and
should never be tolerated. We all support that.
@KevinSimYou are missing the point. You are the one who is
asserting that everyone has a right to choose which bathroom to use. We'll
have to disagree on that point. In the entire history of the world, that has
not been considered a right until this discussion taking place in America.
Suddenly, many think that because they want to do something, they should have
the nationally recognized right to do so. Historically, that assertion is not
automatically made. There is discussion where the issue exists, and decisions
are made. State's rights and religious rights were involved in the
discussion. Under Obama, no such discussions were held on this issue so states
had to sue and religions had to weigh in. The SCOTUS, when presented with
issues that belong to the states turned them back to the states. I hope this
same course is preserved.To the best of my knowledge, there is
nothing about the 'right-to-bathroom-of-choice' in Federal statue. I
hope the SCOTUS will recognize this and not legislate from their bench, as Obama
attempted to do. Was slavery abolished by a President or through legislation?
See the 13th Amendment.
Bountiful Guy posted:=So unless the Federal Government decides
everything unilaterally, narrowly, and=universally, we are in danger of
slavery?Didn't say that.=It has not been shown that
there is no alternative than mandated bathroom=selection by the Federal
Government.Agreed.=The discussions should be left to
those closest to the situation, not to the=White House.Why?Should all discussions about people's rights "be left to those
closest to the situation"? If not, then how do you know it's
appropriate for a discussion of this one right be left there?
nicholdraper said "l didn't think much about this until I had to ask
the man wearing a dress to leave, we didn't complain when he sat in church
or when he went to relief society, but when he didn't get a big enough
reaction he went to the women's bathroom.""Didn't
get a big enough reaction" --THIS is the whole point of many LGBT.But
thankfully, of the 3 gays, 1 Lesbian and 1 transgender I know, 4 for of them
have the intellectual honesty and propriety to realize being in people's
faces is offensive about it is unnecessary and unbecoming. They realize
being needy-for- attention and hijacking attention does not help their cause or
themselves.I am especially grateful that these 4 of the 5 (3 Gay, one
Transgender) have not ruined or lessened their reputation with the straight
community they know-- because they are unwilling to be ridiculous or demand
attention. Our esteem for them has grown. Unfortunately the same
can not be said for the 1 Lesbian. She has OVER-shared and OVER-hijacked the
Attention of not only her Relief Society, but then the whole Ward, and now her
whole Stake, seeking to extract an excessive amount of attention and special
I really wish the Church would stay out of these social issues. They never end
well. Prop 8 will haunt us a long time.
@KevinSimSo unless the Federal Government decides everything
unilaterally, narrowly, and universally, we are in danger of slavery?I don't buy it. I think that there's room for freedom to be
preserved, civil rights to be observed, and sensitivities to be closely guarded
while keeping the Federal Government out of private entities. It has not been
shown that there is no alternative than mandated bathroom selection by the
Federal Government. Policy is one thing and law is yet another. The
discussions should be left to those closest to the situation, not to the White
Bountiful Guy posted:=The issue is not what many have written about
in this forum. States ought to=decide for themselves. Private institutions
ought to decide for themselves. The=Federal Government can address Federal
Buildings and stay out of the rest.The problem with this is that
this kind of attitude is precisely what perpetuated slavery in the United States
for eighty years. If it can be shown that transgender children actually have a
need to use the bathroom they identify with (something that I don't think
has been shown yet), then all transgender children should get to use that
bathroom, regardless of which state they live in.
It's interesting how few have even read or tried to understand the issue
that government is attempting impose it's all-knowing will on everyone,
including states, religions, businesses, schools, and every other private or
public entity. the opposition simply wants the right to remain with the
individual entity.The issue is not what many have written about in
this forum. States ought to decide for themselves. Private institutions ought
to decide for themselves. The Federal Government can address Federal Buildings
and stay out of the rest.
People claim that this is not a crime and that no one is harmed when a six foot
man wears a dress and goes into a women restroom and looks over the stalls at
women and girls. Well the women and girls do feel violated and do have a voice.
l didn't think much about this until I had to ask the man wearing a dress
to leave, we didn't complain when he sat in church or when he went to
relief society, but when he didn't get a big enough reaction he went to the
women's bathroom. According to the left this is perfectly normal and the
man identifies as a woman and should be allowed access to to woman's
bathroom. They say this is about his rights. Well, what about my rights? And
what about the rights of my daughters?
I have read people saying that there have been no cases of predator men entering
women's restrooms, and I have read people saying there have been such
cases. I don't know who to believe. I think someone should do a thorough
study, with no preconceived ideas, and see if there's a problem with this
or not. One thing that has been running through my head is, why are we
considering letting a trans person go to the bathroom of her/his choice alone?
If the trans person really needs to have access to a restroom that's the
opposite of her/his birth gender, shouldn't s/he have a medical
professional who is providing some guidance? Maybe the law should require a
medical professional's approval before granting access to the trans person.
Lone Eagle posted:=In the case of transgender who goes through sex
reassignment surgery, by church=policy, that person cannot be a member of
the church. They may participate; but=they cannot be members.How long has this been the case? I'm pretty sure that it hasn't
always been the case. I had an Institute teacher who was a bishop that
encountered a trans-gender person back in the 1980s. He contacted LDS Church
headquarters to find out what he should do. He was told that the trans-gender
person couldn't hold the priesthood, but didn't say anything about
keeping her/him from joining the Church. (I don't remember if it was a man
transitioning to a woman or vice versa.)
My religious freedom begins where yours ends. My God wants me to practice
nudism. As He intended when ALL of us were born. Do you see where your beliefs
trample upon mine?
I'm reminded of the old saying "your right to swing your fist ends
where my nose begins."In contrast, the modern concept of
"religious liberty" includes(1) The right to determine marriage
law for everyone (the cries of "religious liberty" following every
marriage decision were pretty loud)(2) The right to determine how other
people have sex (see the response to Lawrence v. Texas)(3) The right to
not be refused service because you're a Christian (see inclusion in CRA
(1964)(4) The right to refuse service to others because you're a
Christian (see opposition to new non-discrimination laws)(5) The right to
not do your job (See Kim Davis)(6) The right to not obey contract
conditions (See the fight over whether government-contractors can violate
non-discrimination law)(7) The right to set job requirements for other
people (See the fight over DADT)And now(8) The right to tell other
people what bathroom they can use because your religion objects to them.Seeing as you've already bloodied my nose with your "religious
liberty" fist, why should I give you another inch?
There is a very informative piece .... Katie Couric Transgender TV Special if
you want to by more informed. I learned a lot.
The science and knowledge about gender identity is not subject to bias,
religious assumptions, or fear. Transgendered Americans are absolutely no
threat to children or society. In fact, transgendered people, in their
natural gender identity, have been using public bathrooms with no problems, for
decades. Are we proposing to have a checkpoint for genitals at rest room
doors?Ask yourself, would you want your daughter to use a bathroom with
Chaz Bono?How about your son at the urinal next to Kaitlin Jenner, in a
Dior gown?Neither Chaz Bono or Kaitlin Jenner are confused about their
gender. Why should we be?
I am glad that the Church has added their voice to this issue. Though many present this as a bathroom issue, it is not that simple. What
about lockerooms? Usually those are open spaces where people robe and disrobe.
Should an anotomically female or male be forced to share that space with the
opposite gender just because the other person claims to feel like a
man/woman--even though their anatomy clearly states otherwise? What about
sharing the very private space of a dorm room? Why is it that the
only feelings that count are the transgenders? It's not society's
obligation to validate feelings which are not consistent with reality. The best
that should be expected is to allow for the respect of privacy and separate
accommodations as needed to ensure that privacy. If trans men or
trans women really understood what it means to be the sex they claim to identify
with they'd respect that there are many men/women that only want to share
the spaces where they are most vulnerable with those of the same sex.
50 or 100 years ago this wasn't a problem. People in search of a cause or
lawsuit made this an issue. Sad under the previous administration there was an
open door to accept any and all beliefs as long as it promoted social justice.
Our country is well down the path of a slippery slope.
Someday we will recognize that the dark ages haven't quite ended yet. Any
caring person would realize the dilemma and find ways to solve the problem for
everyone and not just for themselves. Do you think people you don't agree
about gender with are using your bathroom now? Are you peeking to see?
That's disturbing. The churches on the other hand only care about their
unelected power over state policy.
@RG "I would personally be uncomfortable using one if someone who
wasn't a biological male walked into the room. I'm sure many other men
would also be uncomfortable. Don't we have rights too? Please don't
say I have to use a toilet in a stall. That's taking away my
rights."I'm a straight cis-gendered male, and I only say
that to make it clear I'm in the same position as you except... I'm
uncomfortable with anyone being around, regardless of gender, if I'm using
a urinal, so I don't, I just use the stalls. That's not an imposition
on my rights.
I have been to sporting events at older venues and seen women enter the
men's restroom because of a long line to use the women's room. No one
was hurt by this.Also, I had a family member with Alzhiemers. His
wife would occasionally accompany him into the ladies restroom. Again no harm
done.When my daughter was a toddler I would sometimes take her to
the men's restroom. No harm was done to anyone. People anyone making an
issue out of nothing.
Tolstoy:You said that the issue is to block transgender people from
using the bathroom. I responded that they are not being prevented from using
the bathroom. You claim that my argument is false. Well, if they are being
prevented from using the bathroom then present some documentation that this is
correct. You can prove me wrong.“Drawing the line at outward
gender traits seems random.” It is not random. It is objective.
Blocking or allowing access based on feelings is unenforceable and subjective.
Is there not a difference between being transgendered and identifying as a male
when you are female or vice versa. If an individual has had surgery then they
should use the restroom corresponding to the sex they are now are. I am ok with
that. However if someone is female and just want to use mens restroom because
because they identify as a male that raises issues. If a women walked into the
mens restroom I have no clue as to why they are there. Did they just make a
mistake. There have been times when the male restroom has been occupied, the
door being locked. If the female restroom is unlocked I go there and lock the
door. Who cares. The solution appears to be to provide private restrooms
where the door can be locked anybody can use them regardless.
God is Perfect and He does not make mistakes.
Feelings are important but they are NOT synonymous with truthSimply
because I feel like the emperor of the planet does not make it trueIt is
therefore ironic that the "tolerant people" who claim to be devoted to
science are also devoted to bullying people to accept something that is
scientifically NOT true as being the truth merely because they "feel"
@1aggie,It occurred to me that not everyone knows (for example, many women
may not know) that in men's bathrooms, urinals are often not very private.
They are not in stalls, and sometimes have dividers between them and sometimes
not. In any case, everyone using one can be seen from across the room. I would
personally be uncomfortable using one if someone who wasn't a biological
male walked into the room. I'm sure many other men would also be
uncomfortable. Don't we have rights too? Please don't say I have to
use a toilet in a stall. That's taking away my rights.
Not only is this about common sense and common decency, it is also about safety.
Sexual predators have used and will continue to use transgender friendly
restrooms to assault others. Anyone willing to do some "googling" will
find many reported incidents to support this fact.
To GingerMarshall:re: "And, by experience I also know that, at
times, "body" and "spirit" do not match."Transgender identity is not a mis-match between "spirit and body" as
you suggest. It is far more complex than this meshing of religion and
quasi-science. Gender identity is a complex mix of genetics (X and Y
chromosomes, and many other combinations of various genes that influence
perception and response to physical and other stimuli), environmental and social
factors. We need to be really careful, whatever side of various current debates
we may fall on, that we don't assume we know more than we really do.
Recent genomics and other studies have shown these issues to be extremely
complex. While the past 30 years has seen incredible steps in understanding the
science of sex, gender and gender identity, we still have a very long way to go
in understanding how genetics and other factors influence these key human
attributes and behaviors.
To mightymite-'00:re: "There are many more pressing issues
the church can and should address with as much vigor as it does against the
gays."Transgender identity has nothing directly to do with being
gay. The friend of the court brief referenced here has nothing to do with the
church's view on homosexuality. This is about the definition of
gender/sex, and that of gender identity, and the role of gender identity in our
social structure. This issue has arose in the context of a court case involving
transgender identity (not homosexuality).
A couple of years ago Elder Oaks said the church leaders have a lot to learn
about what it means to be transgender. This is evidence they haven't spent
the intervening time to learn anything.
Stalwart from San Jose, CAYou said, "As a Mormon, the Church
would do well to focus it's attention on religion and perfecting the
saints."---I'm a Mormon. I also recognize that
I'm imperfect, know next to nothing compared to the infinite eternities of
knowledge and wisdom there is to know. I trust God. I trust God's prophet.
Let's remember our place in the line of knowledge and wisdom and follow the
wonderful guidance our divinely called leadership.Men will never
erode God's foundation. But history has proven time and time again that
they will erode the freedoms of other men to build their lives, their families,
and their teachings on that foundation.Unique religious expression
(yes, unique) is a critical building block of freedom. Without it, we
aren't free. If my religion wants to build a chapel that doesn't allow
Alaskans wearing blue shirts in it, then that is a basic human right. The moment
you take away our individuality (yes, even the unique things you don't like
about others) then you rob us of what wasn't yours to take.Let's act like Mormons. Respect the church and defend freedom. Not the
The notion of equal protection under the law has been stretched to absurdity.It is Exhibit A in a discussion against Critical Legal Theory.Just when you think they cannot possibly come up with another protected class,
they surprise you. Can special accommodations for Caesareans be far behind?
Ranch - Here, UT,Sorry, but you're the one who doesn't
understand. Somethings are right, and wrong, with no in between. You can't
spin it.If a person thinks he's a dog, it doesn't make it
right to urinate in public.
Poor choice in associating your name on this one. There are many more pressing
issues the church can and should address with as much vigor as it does against
the gays. Very sad.
When I use an out-house / honey-bucket...There is either a red or
green on the handle.Occupied vs. Un-occupied.Honey-buckets are
already "transgendered"....I do not see the crisis.
@GingerMarshall:"Women recognize the threat is from predatory men, not
from transwomen."I think the church recognizes a threat....probably
from greedy amoral people and attorneys primarily. Clearly allowing
"same-sex marriages" has affected those in and out of the church who
believe this is an immoral lifestyle and principle.So the libs need to
amend their "THIS DOESN'T AFFECT YOU" to "this doesn't
affect you...as long as you agree with me."
>>I say, if my Church wants to impose it's will on the whole of the
Nation...Filling a "friend of the Court" is hardly trying to
impose one's will on the nation. All it does is say, essentially, "as
you make a ruling in this case, here are some points that we think you should
consider." The court is under no obligation to pay any attention to the
brief or the issues raised therein. It's literally the legal
equivalent of "please think about the following..." It can't even
properly be called lobbying.
Clearly, stalwart? sentinel is not a member of the LDS church as he claims. Who
would advocate for the loss of religious freedom of his church if he really
belonged to it/believed in it. I certainly don't claim to understand this
transgender issue despite my greatest efforts. I do applaud the LDS church and
the many other faiths who have signed the amicus brief in this case. It's
really sad how the radical LGBT groups want to force others to not only accept
their basic human rights, which is good, but they also want to force others to
embrace and almost worship them for their decisions to live their lifestyle.
That militant approach will only backfire.
I believe the Church absolutely has the right to stand up with other Churches
and determine what happens within their buildings. Now with that
said.... I was majorly sexually abused as a child beginning at a very early age.
This marked me for every pedophile that crossed my path. I believe that opening
the restrooms up, also opens up the restrooms for pedophiles who can then
say....... "HEY!!! I identify as...."
so they can go in and
abuse children! NOTHING anyone can ever say will change how I feel. So I am very thankful that the Church is taking the stand they are! (I have known, and still know transgender people who I care a great deal
for. And I know they are NOT child abusers.)
What is wrong with people? If they can't see any problems with all of
this, they are ignorant and foolish. People like me want things simple,
"men's room" makes it easy for me to enter a bathroom. I am not a
bigot in search of a problem. I want clear picture where I can go use the
bathroom. I do not want to confuse the issue. If someone else is confused, it
only exacerbates a simple issue. If I have someone next to me that doesn't
have the same parts as me, it will bother me. No one is creating a 'safe
space' for my discomfort. In fact, I automatically become a bigot just
because I am now uncomfortable. Serious, folks, why would you want to make
things so 'in your face' that it repels my desire to accept you?
Where is the sense of privacy? dignity? I only wish Ghandi were here to weigh
in on this issue. Everybody has to make adaptations to get along in life. To
ask someone confused about their gender to go to their 'assigned'
birth gender bathroom is not putting an undue burden on them.
Having double (XX), chromosomes don't lie.Having an (XY) doesn't
lie either. This is not rocket science, just simple fact.End of
Didn't "the church" learn anything from Prop 8? Lately, they seem
to find themselves on the wrong side of court decisions.
I cannot help but wonder if many of these LGBTs are what we used to call tomboys
and sissies, simply because of behavior and interests that do not fall into the
stereotyped gender roles. It is sad to think that so many are
making dubious lifestyle and permanent medical transformation decisions based on
agenda-driven PC stuff.
Mr. Obama loves law suit nation and chaos; anyone forget that he threatened to
take money from any school in nation with no transgender bathrooms? Crazy.
It is true, that in his first term, there were many lies told of Mr. Obama, by
those with conspiracy theories in red states, and then in second term, all of
those lies became reality, self fulfilling prophecy. Mr. Trump is normal
compared to law suit frenzy out there.
The courts have created this monster in the first place by deliberately staying
out of matters of administrative law.And Congress delights in
staying away from this toxic issue by leaving things up to the DOEd.It is all very convenient for the liberals, don't you think?
I don't really like to get into arguments based on religion. People are
free to believe in what they wish, even if it entails a flying spaghetti
monster. Placing that prejudice into law applying to believer and non-believer
alike is tyranny.I am pretty sure we know that some people are born
with the wrong body parts. Call this "Gods' mistake",
inappropriate rebellion or whatever. However, we know it happens. Demanding
that a person will to go through the hell of gender reassignment because
"God does not make mistakes" is about the silliest rationale that I have
heard lately. You don't even have to be an atheist to figure out that bad
things happen that ought not to occur. Call it a mistake or whatever you wish,
but that is the human condition. To deny our ability to rectify a bad thing is
one of the cruelest things I have heard.It would be more saintly to
support a considered choice to put oneself through gender change, and make that
tortured life a little easier. Isn't is not said that we should not judge,
lest we be judged?
@Lone Eagle: "Does God make mistakes..."Cleft Palate.
Hydrocephalus. Congenital Heart Defects. Downs. 3 of every 100 kids is born with
a birth defect. Are those "mistakes"? On purpose? If the defect can be
corrected medically or surgically should it be done? Why would
transgender - a condition that is increasingly recognized and diagnosed using
objective measures - not be included in correctable problems? @Hemlock: "In this case religious organizations are advocating science
instead of emotional whims."Except... every professional medical
association recognizes transgender as an objective reality and treatable
condition, research in neuroscience and genetics is providing evidence, medical
schools are teaching care of transgender patients, major medical institutions
from Johns Hopkins to Cleveland Clinic to UCLA Medical Center provide
transgender medical and surgical care. Science, not religion, is
doing the research and providing the appropriate care.
@lonestar The only person here that seems to assume God would be making a
mistake by creating transgender people to s you. Why would you assume to know
Gods plans for transgendered people.
I agree with other's experiences.My spouse works for a large
private corporation. One day HR convened a meeting to inform the emplyees one
of his co-workers--"Josephine"--would now be know as "Joe" and
would be using the men's restroom. "Joe" would simply use a
stall in the men's restroom. No big deal.What is way worse is
to require transwomen and transmen to use the restroom not corresponding with
their identity. I especially worry about the safety of transwomen be required
to use men's restrooms. Why not treat people with the respect
and dignity they deserve and let our Creator sort this out?Sadly,
once again, I believe the church is on the wrong side of this issue.
@TMR;Your church is wrong; it's that simple. They don't
understand the situation, nor, it seems, do they really care about the people.
It's just another way of trying to maintain their relevance; and
they're failing miserably. Just ask the younger generation how out of
touch the leadership appears.@Baccus0902;You are
correct. The very fact that there are fish and amphibians that switch gender
should indicate to them that gender is *not* eternal. And it would be hilarious
for one of the leaders to reincarnate as the opposite gender; karma is so
delicious!@Ophelia;I think your heart is in the right
place, but you really ought to refer to her as "she", not
"he/she". It's disrespectful.
Those who ignore biological reality are bound to arrive at fallacious
conclusions. The Obama directive places the psychology of gender preferences
ahead of human anatomy. In this case religious organizations are advocating
science instead of emotional whims. Placing a biological female who prefers to
be considered a male in a male locker room is a rather bad joke.
Let's talk about the female born 17 year old in this article.Regardless of ANY other thing--are some of you saying she should shower
with the teen boys at the high school???
Stalwart Sentinel: "Do we have a deal?" No. You compromise your ideals
and we will get along just fine. Why do you expect me to compromise mine?Ginger: Does God make mistakes is a question that has some significant
import. Putting a male spirit in a female body or vice versa seems to be a
mistake of immense proportions. (And IF God makes mistakes, it is impossible to
have any firm reliance on his word; thus faith in God is impossible.) At the
same time, I have no explanation for hermaphrodites. Does nature get involved
and a male spirit ends up in a body with female DNA? That's a question for
which I have no answer.As I understand it, a person is free to take
any action. But actions have consequences. And if one understands the
consequence, one chooses it by action. In the case of transgender who goes
through sex reassignment surgery, by church policy, that person cannot be a
member of the church. They may participate; but they cannot be members.As for the bathroom: most churches (and malls) have single-occupant restrooms
I am so glad that I belong to a church that is more concerned with following God
than following what is currently popular. Kudos to President Monson and the rest
of the General Authorities.
If there is a TRUE transgender person, they will be grateful and happy to use a
unisex bathroom or private shower.If there is seeking for attention,
seeking to be acknowledged, and seeking to be noticed, there is something much
more than possible transgender going on.
State and church, separate but not much. This isn't about bathrooms.
I've never in my life seen someone enforcing who goes into which loo. This is about control. It's about people having to conform to
others' demands of who they are. It's why a church is involved at all.
There's a transgender girl in our neighborhood. He/she is so talented
artistically, has the kindest personality, and is just trying to live a
fulfilling life like any of us, but in this crazy culture of ours, he/she
continues to be targeted and mocked by others. Now the Church? Really?
Someone needs to enlighten me.As I understand things, if people are
born male but dress and identify as female, when they use a womens restroom,
they always use a private stall, because there are no urinals.If
people are born female but dress and identify as male, when they use a mens
restroom, their body parts would dictate that they, too, would always use a
private stall and never a urinal.In other words, I don't see a
" "a restatement of our belief — with many other faith traditions
— that gender is an eternal characteristic."Well, right
there we have a problem. The court or the church cannot prove anything that is
eternal. Second, many other religions Buddhism, Hinduism and others, believe in
reincarnation. In one life you can be male in another female, I wouldn't be
surprise that you could reincarnate as a fish with two sexes or a fish where you
are born male and switch to female.Eternity is such a long time that
many things can happen and complicate our picture perfect ideal.
Unfortunately, the LDS church's attempt here to thread a needle invites
confusion. The church seeks to preserve state's rights as a vehicle to
preserve religious freedom without advocating active discrimination against
transgendered folk. However, at the same time, the religious predicate for its
position is the gender is eternal. The problem is that these pieces don't
fit into a coherent narrative and it is fuzzy as to what the church is trying to
accomplish, let alone say. I agree with a previous post that as a principle,
gender is eternal, but as a practical matter, there are biological exceptions.
How we treat these folks is a measure of how we live our religion. Perhaps it
would behoove the church to recognize this piece as well: it would make the
narrative not only more clear, but it would add charity and compassion to a
position that otherwise comes across as pretty cold.
@TekakaromatagiI am happy you recognize this is not a religious
rights issue. however I cannot believe you are seriously going to retread the
same failed argument that was discredited from the same sex marriage debate,
"no one is telling gay people they can't get married they can marry
someone of the opposite sex just like the rest of us," sound familiar? I am
not sure what happens in your bathrooms but I do my business behind a closed
stall door and then wash my hands in front of complete strangers. Drawing the
line at outward gender traits seems random.
Wait till individulas start to file law suits against the church for not
allowing gay leaders or transgender girls in the scouts. The church need
to break ties with BSA ASAP.
I'm not sure what this has to do religion in any way- this is a civil
rights issue, much the same as gay marriage- I'd like to know what everyone
is so afraid of? I couldn't care less who is using the stall next to me in
a public restroom- I go in and do my thing and leave- same as 99.99999% of
people who use public restrooms. This is just another way for intolerant,
bigoted people to flex their muscles and let fear rule them. So sad and so
When I ask for a restroom I am, without question, directed to the Women's,
not the Men's. Nobody lifts my skirt or asks for a birth certificate or
demands to know about my private parts. The same is true for about
80% of the transwomen I know and about 90% of the trans men using the Men's
room. When I do reveal my transgender status men are far more likely
to be uncomfortable or hostile; women are almost always accepting and supportive
and have routinely and comfortably welcomed me into "women only" spaces
and conversations. Most of the "protect women &
children" rhetoric is from men, not women. Women recognize the threat is
from predatory men, not from transwomen.
@ Stalwart SentinelEveryone in the US has freedom of speech, and freedom
to make their opinions known. This includes organizations such as churches as
well as individuals. It is absolutely appropriate that the Church make its
opinion known. This in no way violates "separation of church and state."
In fact, lawmakers must use their best judgement at all times, even if their
judgement is informed by religious convictions. This also in no way violates
"separation of church and state."
dni don't get it.you block my response to ginger,
referring only to comments he/she made in this thread and in the past, trying to
understand/ clarify what he/she said, and yet you allow an attack on your owner
by stalwart sentinel.
"Fairness for all" has replaced "State's Rights" as a
buzzword for being legally able to treat badly people who are different from
you. Our church has two trans women members. They use the
women's bathroom. Another member has a 27 year old nephew who is trans.
He uses the men's bathroom.It's not a problem. Where did
you get the idea that it would be?
This is an issue that has been so blown out of proportion by both sides.How many people have been personally affected by this? Don't our
politicians have real issues to deal with?
There is a greater chance of being molested by a GOP politician than by any
transgender individual. There have been more than several cases where
Republican leaders have been arrested in airport bathrooms, and even here in
Salt Lake propositioning people in gyms and areas known for male prostitution .
There is yet to be a single arrest of a transgender person molesting anyone in a
bathroom. Nationwide. Leave them alone. They have enough problems
without the judgements of a Church that fails to understand this issue, and the
people who seem to judge and make a bigger deal of this.If you are
so worried about someone else's bathroom usage, then I think the problem is
In my opinion, this is just plain silly.In the real world, let us
imagine these scenarios.A transgendered born biologically male, is
forced to use the male bathroom. This person looks like a woman, and perhaps
has had reconstructive surgery. How is that this person who looks and dresses
as a women is going to be able to go to the men's washroom and do their
business without prejudice, taunts or physical violence? Take the reverse. How
is a trangendered person born female, but presenting as male for all the world
to see (like a beard or mustache), going to be treated going into the designated
women's facility? And not only the pratical side of this real
world event, where is the foul now? How many straight heterosexual men have
dressed up as women to go to the women's room in order to perpetrate an
illegal and violent act against women? And how many women have dressed up as
men to go gawk at men's anatomy? How would that even work at the standing
facility anyway?I understand people are uncomfortable with the
notion of transgendered folks. However, this is a solution in search of a
problem. And a faith community discriminating? Tsk Tsk.
We visited Europe last year and noticed many gender neutral bathrooms. They had
a row of stalls with doors that came to the ground. Some had a sink inside the
stall, but others had communal sinks for washing after. Could bathrooms not be
changed so that it doesn't matter what gender you are? I think this would
be helpful for families with children who are just learning to use the restroom
and for primary teachers!
This is all ridicules to start with. What I enjoy about the offices my company
has in Eruope is there are no male nor female bathrooms. They are all
individual restrooms that are gender neutral. Nobody wants to do "their
business" in front of other people... period. Their should be reasonable
privacy regardless. Add to that when mothers bring their sons into the women
restrooms, or fathers their daughters.... it's not ideal. Private restrooms takes away all these issue.. no need to worry about which
one is for males, or females, or transgender what ever. A few of the new
restaurants I have gone to recently have moved this direction. It completely
removes this as an issue. Yes, it may cost some money for business to retrofit
their restrooms to be gender neutral, but it would put an end to this silly
debate how people feel about themselves and which restroom they use.
In college, there was a transvestite man in some of my classes. He had to make a
choice of going where he fit in (the ladies' room) or where he was an
anomaly (the men's room). For trans people, there's more involved than
a change of clothes. If I go to a ball game or a school function, and there is
a trans person in the ladies' room, what do I care? That person can go into
the stall and answer the call of nature just as I can. If a person born female
but identifying as a man and dressed as a man goes into the women's room, I
think that's more awkward than if [she, transitioning to he] would just use
the men's room, probably in a stall. In some venues, a man transitioning
to female will be in danger in a men's room. The solution is compassion,
understanding, and not letting our kids go to public restrooms unaccompanied.
That was a good idea almost 50 years ago when I was accosted by a man in a
woman's room at the beach. He said he was lost, but I was uncomfortable.
The LGBTQ presence in our current society is not going away. We need to deal
with it compassionately.
As a Mormon, the Church would do well to focus it's attention on religion
and perfecting the saints. I say, if my Church wants to impose it's will
on the whole of the Nation by sticking its nose in federal rulings, then the
rest of the nation ought to be able to dictate how we worship, who is admitted
to the Temple, etc....There's a reason the SCOTUS concluded
that, "[t]he First Amendment has erected a wall between church and state.
That wall must be kept high and impregnable. We could not approve the slightest
breach." Sadly, my Church is trying to erode that wall but, if
our leaders want religion in government then we must let government in religion;
it is a two-way street. Do we have a deal, conservatives?
The trans bathroom issue is solved with a very simple solution: single-stall
bathrooms to use if you choose.Shower rooms and locker rooms are
different altogether. Shut them down and kids change at home before the sports
game and shower at home.
@Tolstoy:"Blocking transgender people access to bathrooms is now a
religious rights issue?"No. It is not. No one is blocking
access of transgender people from bathrooms. They are only confirming that they
should have the same thing the rest of us have: access to bathrooms
corresponding to their biological gender.I don't consider this
to be a religious rights issue, but more of a privacy and public safety issue.
But I applaud these churches for taking this bold stand.
Title 9 sure has been turned on its head from the original intent.... too long
to list here
Keep it simple. The need to go to the bathroom has nothing to do with religion,
politics, etc.... It is a biological function. If you have the plumbing for a
male, go to the men's bathroom. If you have the plumbing for a female, go
to the women's bathroom. Why make this into something that it is not? Keep
it is simple.
Seriously? Blocking transgender people access to bathrooms is now a religious
Transgendered persons can and should be accommodated respectfully while also
respecting the privacy, morals, and mores of the rest of society.I
applaud these churches for encouraging legislative solutions rather than
judicial fiat in areas where the constitution was never intended to allow
I fully endorse the idea that gender is eternal. And, by experience I also know
that, at times, "body" and "spirit" do not match. This is not a new phenomenon, people who identified and lived as the gender
opposite their body have been known in every society through history. The
difference today is that modern medicine can actually help the person instead of
leaving them to suffer. The treatment - and mistreatment - of
transgender people, including transgender kids, has a powerful impact. Negative
treatment leads to negative outcomes - trans kids as young as 5 express
self-harm and suicide when forced to live opposite the gender they know
themselves to be, and the various "treatments" that have been tried over
the years make it worse, not better. Real care, by real doctors, of
real kids has demonstrated that supportive and affirming care lead to positive
outcomes - well adjusted, happy, successful. Access to restrooms is part of