The not-so-Infamous North Carolina Bathroom Law

Standard

From the Associated Press today: “U.S. Attorney General Says NC Bathroom Law Is Part of Civil Rights Struggle”

transgendered

U.S. AG Loretta Lynch is asserting that the North Carolina law that limits the use of toilet and locker room facilities by transgender people to the facility that “corresponds with their birth certificate” is an infraction of civil rights laws.

The North Carolina law she opposes, requires transgender people to use the public restrooms or locker rooms that correspond to the gender on the person’s birth certificate. The law may be restrictive, as all laws are, but not overly so. It is, however, poorly conceived in the sense that a transgender person who has completed the medical, psychological and surgical transformation (at great personal and financial expense) has indeed changed their gender. His or her birth certificate is no longer accurate. To be clear, the law does not  require people to somehow prove their gender before entering a facility, but it threatens legal action if someone is discovered using the “wrong” facility.

Back to Loretta Lynch’s assertion that this North Carolina law amounts to an infraction of civil rights laws; that’s a poorly thought out overstatement bordering on nonsense.

United States civil rights legislation mandates that there will be no discrimination based on race, sex, ethnicity, etc.; this civil rights legislation does not and cannot require automatic personal acceptance of the minorities themselves or require exposure to those minoritys’ behaviors. A plain English example of that: we do not have to quietly accept public displays of sexual acts between gay (or straight) couples.

The great majority of Americans accept the existence of transsexuals with no real problem (I include myself in that majority) but Loretta Lynch is suggesting in this case that those Americans must also witness, in the locker rooms, the after effects of transformative surgery or in the case of those faux-transexuals who are simply “in drag”, exposure to their naked bodies in the wrong setting.

Realistically, I believe that most adults in this 21st Century have witnessed enough nudity and sexuality on the TV, Internet and in movie theatres so that nothing they may see in a bathroom or locker room will make their “head explode.” It is only that minority of people who are either very young or have lived a sheltered life who will be offended or ‘scandalized’ by the naked body of a different gender. The North Carolina Bathroom Law was created to protect the rights of that minority; it was NOT created to impose on the rights of racial, sexual or ethnic minorities.

Attorney General Lynch, as usual, is so dedicated to minority rights that she is always willing to suspend the rights of non-minorities.

Huckabee and the Law

Standard

Huffington Post Headline: “Mike Huckabee On Kim Davis: Obey The Law Only ‘If It’s Right'”
(The GOP presidential hopeful wants citizens to disobey the Supreme Court ruling.)

Mike (God is my Vice President) Huckabee, already out of the running for president, except in the eyes of the most other-worldly Evangelicals), has now effectively trashed his credibility as a presidential candidate.

“Only if it’s right,” Huck? In whose eyes?

There are many thousands of American’s who still think that, in spite of existing laws, openly selling highly-addictive drugs to all who want them is ‘right.’ Should they just go ahead and do their thing? Go ahead and break the law because they don’t think it’s ‘RIGHT?’

Of course not; and I know Huck would agree with me on that because that could not, even in a Disney movie, be depicted as a victimless crime. But neither is the crime that Huck is so readily encouraging his minions to commit, a victimless crime; the crime of taking away the legal rights of tens-of-thousands of gay Americans because HE and his church disagree with their lifestyle.

For everyone, except those with their eyes firmly closed, it’s obvious that the “Free Exercise Clause” of the First Amendment was being misinterpreted as permission to mess with the lives and Constitutional rights of those who fall outside of “accepted religious belief and ritual.”

When Justice Kennedy’s majority opinion was written into law, the Supreme Court was recognizing and responding to the fact that the clear majority of states (37 out of 50) had already legalized gay marriage; but it’s pure folly to hope that the religious far Right will ever agree with the clear (and growing) majority on the subject of religion.

Speaking of the Religious Far Right: Justice Scalia, in the meantime, is bouncing off the walls. Scalia’s dissenting opinion is a scathing attack; surprisingly not attacking the majority opinion itself, but attacking the right of the Supreme Court to write that or any opinion into law.

Following is an excerpt from “The Big Think” titled: “Scalia’s Dissent in the Gay Marriage Ruling is a Dangerous Attack on American Democracy Itself:”

“(Scalia) is rejecting the very right of the Supreme Court on which he sits to adjudicate disputes where the answer requires interpretation of the Constitution, (which is of course precisely what the court did when it interpreted the Second Amendment to enshrine the personal right to own guns, an opinion Scalia wrote), a role that has proven to be a corner stone of American democracy. Because he is upset by this ruling (legalizing gay marriage), Justice Scalia directly rejects the authority of the court itself.”

This is the equivalent of a judicial nervous breakdown, as is illustrated by this excerpt directly from Scalia’s minority opinion:

“… the Federal Judiciary, which consists of only nine men and women, all of them successful lawyers, is hardly a cross-section of America. Take, for example, this court, which consist of only nine men and women, successful lawyers who studied at Harvard or Yale law school. Four of the nine are natives of New York City. Eight of them grew up in east- and west-coast States. Only one hails from the vast expanse in-between. Not a single Southwesterner or even, to tell the truth, a genuine Westerner. (California does not count.) Not a single Evangelical Christian (a group that comprises about one quarter of Americans) or even a Protestant of any denomination. … To allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.”

How about that as an example of allowing personal opinion to trash the rights of others and even the right of the Supreme Court to exist.

That said, I can’t help but agree with his unstated accusations that 1) The concept of Supreme Court Justice For LIFE is one that needs a closer look and 2) The Supreme Court inserting itself into the question of marriage is ludicrous.

OMG! There’s a drag queen in the girl’s locker room!

Standard

This article, “A transgender teen used the girls’ locker room. Now her community is up in arms.” from the “Washington Post” is one of many articles out there today talking about Lila Davis.

Lila is NOT, as the name might suggest, a girl. He’s a 17 y/o boy who wants to be a girl, who wants to dress up in a wig, falsies and a party dress, who wants to feel pretty, who feels he was born in the wrong body and, almost laughably, wants everyone to ignore the fact, as he strolls through the girl’s locker room naked, that he has a penis.

No, poor Lila Davis isn’t at all what he appears to be, at least not while he’s dressed up in his girl clothes.

Someone needs to let Lila know that he may feel like a girl, he may think he’s a girl and he may have tricked the school into thinking he is transgendered; but playing dress-up doesn’t make him a girl, it doesn’t make him transgendered either; it makes him a “drag queen.” Yet every article you find will refer to him as “her” and will call him “transgendered.”

My guess is that Lila is gay and effeminate and he uses the female “act” so he doesn’t have to admit to himself that he is gay and effeminate.

That of course is just a theory, he may, in fact, be getting ready to audition for the next season of “The Fosters.”

Miraculously, even in Missouri, at the edge of the Bible-Belt, where 90% of the people have a very dim view of any sex that isn’t performed in the missionary position or outside of the marriage bed, gay men and women are gradually being accepted into the society. It may take another 50 years, however, for drag queens to be accepted by more than just a few households.

Kentucky’s Mini-Gods

Standard

Rowan County, Kentucky

County Clerk Kim Davis was a “born again sinner” and claims that, since that day, she has “pledged the rest of her life to the service of the Lord.” To Kim Davis that pledge apparently means that she has become the sole arbiter, interpreter and executor of God’s word.

Kim Davis has apparently forgotten another vow that she made when assuming the position of Rowan County Clerk:

County Clerk Oath:

Did you catch that last sentence? “. . . ” will faithfully execute the duties of my office without favor, affection or partiality, so help me God!

Kim Davis is not only a Christian Bigot, she is a person who is willing to break an oath to God based on her own, amateurish interpretation of His word.

Does she hold a divinity degree? Does she have years of experience studying the works of biblical scholars? No, she’s just a reformed sinner who, like so many of her ilk, desperately wants to be a mini-God because she has no faith in her Creator’s ability to run His own show.

Hopefully God will reward her with just enough jail time to remind her of her place in the universe, enough of a fine to make her realize that “so help me God” means something and a period of unemployability that will remind her that she is the humble servant not anyone’s master.

The County Clerk’s oath (above) was borrowed from an article in the Daily Kos about another Kentucky County Clerk, Casey Davis (possibly a relative), who had the same hate-filled Mini-God complex that Ms. Davis has. Mr Davis, however, additionally, felt the need, as part of his position, to “remind” gay people that they would forever ‘burn in Hell.” His story and the above oath of office can be found HERE!

Speaking of Hell, where the Hell does Kentucky find these losers?

A note to those who claim God as their personal Savior:

Standard

If I remember correctly from my Bible Stories, Jesus (the leader of your tribe) preached love, understanding and tolerance; I see very little of that from some of you who claim to be Christians.

I’m reading that the most vocal Christians feel that the government, by legalizing the marriage of a man to a man or a woman to a woman, has “taken away your religious freedoms.” That’s also how bigots, racists and homophobes feel (yes, that’s the company you Christians are at least virtually keeping by not following your ‘Savior’s’ examples of love, understanding and tolerance). If being narrow-minded, being fearful of those who do not physically threaten you and being intolerant of those who do not follow your beliefs are considered “religious freedoms” you had better examine your religion. You might have a destructive devil in your heart rather than a savior.

Do a quick self-examination; you will probably find that in spite of the promises you made when being baptized or confirmed in your religion you have not lived up to your religious commitment (i.e., you have not been “saved.”)

On some level, you must know that Christians have not ‘lost anything to legalized gay marriage except an excuse to hate someone or a reason to feel superior to others who feel (and truly believe) differently from you. Both of which are truly unchristian feelings.

I would guess that those who fear different lifestyles are most likely insecure in the belief that the lifestyle they are living is as good as it could be.

Those of you who are intolerant or hate-filled are doing the work of the Devil by leading those who love and respect you in a bad direction.

Then, on a more practical/worldly level:

Those of you who are in business for profit and want to turn away customers because they don’t share your religious beliefs are just plain stupid!  

Stupidity and bad business practices should NOT be punished under law, however, they have their own inherent punishments.

Huckabee in La-La-Land

Standard

Mike Huckabee has threatened to “Leave the Republican Party” if the GOP does not actively, openly and loudly oppose gay marriage.

It wouldn’t be a big loss for the GOP if Huckabee leaves and takes his few thousand homophobic followers with him. In fact it would be a plus for the GOP to be rid of someone who is so blind to America’s problems that he is willing to desert the party that is America’s best hope over a non-issue like Gay Marriage.

Hey Mike, how about pushing the GOP to take meaningful positions on stuff like the threat of radical Islam, American terrorists, the potential Ebola crisis, the disgraceful National debt, America’s ever weakening military might, the growing distrust of our allies (if we have any left after 6 years of Obama), the government’s rejection of the Free Market (the very system that once made us the most powerful nation on earth), the massive influx of illegal aliens that is being ignored by this administration when it is not being encouraged by this administration, or the government’s refusal to take advantage of our natural oil and gas resources to free us from dependence on foreign energy, Or maybe you could urge the GOP to do something simpler like getting Marine Sgt. Andrew Tahmooressi freed from the Ciudad, Mexico jail where he’s been rotting away for the past four months for no real reason.

No Mike, gay marriage will not destroy America but people like you will unless you get your heads out of the sand and focus on real problems.

The social issues and religious mandates you push don’t belong on any national agenda. All the Christian values like worship, respect, humility, honesty, morality, generosity, forgiveness, and all the other Christ-like virtues are absolutely wonderful for personal and spiritual growth and personal relationships but our country is dealing with brutal enemies, deadly disease and poor leadership; things that we can’t pray away. You are a politician, you should know better.

Revisiting “The Homophobic Baker”

Standard

Arizona Senate Bill 1062 was one of several similar bills in U.S. state legislatures allowing business owners to refuse service based on religious beliefs. The bill was passed by the Republican-controlled state legislature and then, on February 26, 2014, unexpectedly vetoed by Republican Governor Jan Brewer.

Remember? There was a baker in Arizona who refused, because of his religious belief that homosexuality is a sin, to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple. The lawsuit that arose out of that situation was one of the prime factors behind AZ SB-1062.

I posted an article on this blog last December “The Case of the Homophobic Baker”  condemning the baker based on Federal anti-discrimination laws that make it illegal and legally actionable for a business to discriminate against members of protected classes. “What Is, IS!” It’s a law and we have to follow it or face legal penalties.

What I didn’t realize at the time (and still do not understand why) was that every state has a different list of protected classes. Isn’t this Federal legislation? Doesn’t Federal legislation automatically trump state legislation?  Guess not! That teaches me to try and think logically about any aspect of the Federal Government. Just because LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgendered) individuals were added to the Federal ‘list’ of protected classes, it apparently does not mean that every state has to add them to their state anti-discrimination legislation. Arizona, at least at that point at the beginning of this year, does not have anti-discrimination legislation that covers LGBT individuals.

So, going back to the baker who I condemned as a law breaker; I was wrong! What IS in many states, IS NOT in Arizona.

I’m not saying that discrimination based on a person’s sexual identity is in any way right, or that this particular baker is not reprehensible but, at least in Arizona, it’s apparently perfectly legal and justified to be a religious bigot.

Governor Brewer faced a hail-storm of criticism because of her veto of SB-1062 and it primarily came from religious bigots who identify themselves (as most do) as Conservatives. Thanks however to Governor Brewer, as much as she may have wanted to as a Conservative politician, she could not bring herself to sign that legislation that would potentially allow uncontrolled religious discrimination. As part of her statement after the veto she said:

“Religious liberty is a core American and Arizona value. So is non-discrimination.”

Unfortunately Gov. Brewer made that good decision based on a common misconception. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was put in place not to protect citizens from unwarranted religious bigotry but to protect religions from government interference. All that, however, has nothing to do with anti-discrimination laws; they were put in place to protect citizens from racial, sexual, and religious bigotry. Either way, the “Homophobic Baker” comes out a loser (not to mentions being an incompetent businessman).

Read about the case:

CNN Politics: “Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoes controversial anti-gay bill, SB 1062