Patterico's Pontifications

5/23/2016

Oklahoma Pushes Back To Maintain “Public Peace, Health, And Safety”

Filed under: General — Dana @ 5:48 pm



[guest post by Dana]

Oklahomans aren’t happy about President Obama’s “sweeping decree”:

Oklahoma lawmakers have introduced a bill that would allow students to request on religious grounds that their public schools provide a bathroom or other facility that bars transgender people.

The bill appears to be one of the first state-level legislative actions to challenge the Obama administration’s directives, issued last week, that said students must be allowed to use the facilities that match the gender they identify as, even if that is different from their anatomical sex.

The bill defines “sex” as “the physical condition as being male or female, as identified at birth” by an individual’s anatomy”.

Under the bill, a student claiming a “sincerely held religious belief,” would be able to request a “religious accommodation” and be provided with the use of a restroom, shower, or locker room used solely by other students born with the “same anatomical sex” as their own.

Hmm… high schoolers in various states of undress, showers, and the opposite (biological) sex all in the same place. What could go wrong?? (It could just be me, but it doesn’t seem like the average self-loathing, insecure, shy teenager would really want to shower or be in various states of undress in front someone of the opposite (biological) sex. Are teenagers really that different today??)

Last week, Oklahoma also accused the president of Constitutional overreach with regard to his bathroom edict:

Senate Concurrent Resolution 43 calls upon Oklahoma’s elected U.S. representatives to “file articles of impeachment against the President of the United States, the Attorney General of the United States, the Secretary of Education and any other federal official liable to impeachment who has exceeded his or her constitutional authority.”

–Dana

26 Responses to “Oklahoma Pushes Back To Maintain “Public Peace, Health, And Safety””

  1. Opposite “biological” sex. Because the simple and universal opposite sex reference has lost it’s meaning.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  2. i can only imagine the tranny infestation in oklahoma is off the charts

    happyfeet (831175)

  3. Infestation??

    What, like cockroaches or rodents, happyfeet?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  4. christian slater is exaggerating as usual,

    narciso (732bc0)

  5. no like trannies

    they get all up in them bathrooms

    with their surly attitudes and their tranny schlongs

    happyfeet (831175)

  6. Who do you think you’re kidding, happyfeet? This is a smart bunch, here. We’ve been seeing the schlong going in a quarter inch at a time “just the tip” “just a little” for a very long time as na whole spectrum of paraphilias and fetishes becomes “normalized” and people whose stomach it turns are called abnormal. You’ve got to have a strong loud “No!” and a knee in the groin for even the slightest intrusion. Stop the infection before the germ colony gets a chance to multiply.

    nk (dbc370)

  7. icky, yucky and hand that sissy a knife.

    mg (31009b)

  8. health and safety, are not primary concerns, the care and feeding of skydragons is,

    http://dailysignal.com/2016/05/23/obama-raided-500m-for-zika-to-finance-uns-green-climate-fund/

    narciso (732bc0)

  9. The Mau Mau is a frustrated Manchurian. If he had tried to implement what he really wanted to implement, his own Secret Service would have taken him out. So he’s giving America these little “Screw you”s that he can get away with. And paying off his pervert big-money donors in Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Manhattan.

    nk (dbc370)

  10. Somehow this approach to Obama’s overreaching does not appeal to me.

    SPQR (a3a747)

  11. I feel the same, SPQR, but what do you suggest the states do?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  12. (It could just be me, but it doesn’t seem like the average self-loathing, insecure, shy teenager would really want to shower or be in various states of undress in front someone of the opposite (biological) sex. Are teenagers really that different today??)

    Who knows, Dana. It seems like lots of teenagers today have no compunction about sharing nude photos of themselves with their classmates, so maybe there are a whole bunch of them — both boy and girl — who look forward to using a shower with members of the opposite sex. But I would hope not.

    JVW (eabb2a)

  13. In the first place, we don’t let children — and that’s what American teenagers are today, children — make these decisions. Adults are supposed to make them for them. In the second place, it is not the children who are making these policies. It is adult perverts looking to groom them and recruit them into their lifestyle and to its acceptance.

    nk (dbc370)

  14. of course, but they are being conditioned to accept these policies, like the programming of the replicants,

    narciso (732bc0)

  15. Again then, what should the states that object to this next chapter in Obama’s transformation of America, do? What are their options if not seeking religious accommodations?

    Dana (0ee61a)

  16. It seems like lots of teenagers today have no compunction about sharing nude photos of themselves with their classmates…..

    The whole anti school prayer crap of the 60’s was the groundwork for what’s going on today. Remove God, remove standards. Remove standards, eliminate modesty. And so on and so on. I keep saying these commies always think for the long game. Incrementally if you will.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (734193)

  17. Rev. Hoagie,

    I’ve been thinking about modesty ever since the president made his decree. We are all born with a certain innate modesty. It’s what makes us embarrassed in jr. high during sex ed talks in mixed company at school, it’s what makes girls blush, young men uncomfortable, etc. when certain subjects come up. But what we have indeed steadily seen is the slow but determined stripping away of any modesty and shame, in all its forms. Today’s student who is embarrassed by their classmates’ nude photos is a peculiar throwback to a prudish time. And so forth.

    If this effort is met with the success hoped for, we will have become an wholly indecent society. There will be no shame and no moral standards on which to anchor ourselves. this is why when things like the bathroom issue arise, I know it’s about something far more dangerous and insidious than using a toilet. That’s just the vehicle to get to the next target.

    Dana (0ee61a)

  18. Ninth and Tenth Amendments. The education of children is within the authority of the parents and within the parens patriae power of the several states, doubly so in public schools which are local government facilities. Can the federal government impose unisex bathrooms in the Oklahoma statehouse? kind of thing.

    nk (dbc370)

  19. Just say NO.

    crazy (cde091)

  20. I agree, Dana. However, I believe we already have become that “wholly indecent society” you spoke of. A society can’t be decent, have modesty, shame and morality when they are fed a steady diet of evil.

    Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.
    John Adams

    Two things occurred which changed the course of America. First, turning over our children’s education to any government authority. What were adults thinking when they put education into the hands that hold the levers of power? What good can come from having your children educated by a adult who holds none of the cultural, religious, political or social beliefs of the parents?

    Second was the insidious removal of God from schools under the lie of some suppose separation of church and state. What followed was exactly what they wanted to follow: the replacement of God with government. No longer were we obligated to follow the moral dictates of some unseen God, only the laws made by man needed to be obeyed.

    Abortion on demand even as birth control, trans this and that, shared rest rooms, gay parades, teaching there is more than two sexes, and the hundreds of small 1000 cuts that are slowly taking America down. All of which are promoted by people who hate God and hate America. When was the last time you heard a democrat talk about love of country, patriotism? When was the last time you heard a democrat use the word “patriotism”? To them our country is not something to be loved and fought for and preserved it’s something defective, immoral, to be reviled and in need of “fundamental change”. And that’s what we’re getting. We are all Caitlyn Jenner now.

    Rev. Hoagie ™ (734193)

  21. Hoagie, I can promise you most of this comes from “Daddy Hatred.”

    But as we have seen with various political candidates, people who say they hate a particular point of view appear to love that point of view delivered by another person.

    So bringing down Western Civilization is a thing at present, yes.

    Those same people will be happy to go to the barricades for another social structure that they like.

    There is something evil that beats in the chest of every human being…and it burns to tell other people what to do. Normally, that is balanced by the freedom to do what one likes. I fear we will see, “Animal Farm” style, what it is like when the whip is in another trotter.

    Simon Jester (2002f6)

  22. Quoth Dana,

    It could just be me, but it doesn’t seem like the average self-loathing, insecure, shy teenager would really want to shower or be in various states of undress in front someone of the opposite (biological) sex. Are teenagers really that different today?

    The “average” teenager is irrelevent and harmless, just as the average adult male. The danger arises from the quirky, hedonistic, misogynistic, oversexed, narcissistic, heteronormative male, whether teen or adult. The guy who “knows,” deep in his bowels (or his dangly bits), that he’s soooo hot, every girl wants him; and if she says she doesn’t, she’s just playing “hard to get.”

    That is the guy who will talk his middle-school chums into bursting into the girls’ locker room and joining their showers unwanted. And if he traumatizes and scares the hell out of the girls, that’s icing on the cake.

    Can anybody guarantee that no teenager (or creepy gym coach) would ever do such a thing? But we’re already seeing a wave of middle- and high school kids having sex in the back of the school bus, or even in the classroom itself, usually videoed and sent to a bunch of other kids via iPhone.

    Dafydd (d4fbf5)

  23. I linked on another thread, the crazy zampolits prosecuting the state of north carolina,

    narciso (732bc0)

  24. Teenagers don’t shower at school anymore.

    If state’s no longer accept federal Dept of Ed dollars for their schooling, they’d be entirely exempt from these decreed rules, correct?

    TheNaBr (0c7c2f)

  25. 25. Teenagers don’t shower at school anymore.

    If state’s no longer accept federal Dept of Ed dollars for their schooling, they’d be entirely exempt from these decreed rules, correct?

    TheNaBr (0c7c2f) — 5/24/2016 @ 3:50 pm

    WTH? There are no such thing as “federal Dept. of Ed dollars.”

    The feds have no money to spend except what they rake in from the taxpayers living in the fifty states. In essence what they, and you, are saying is if they dance to the government’s tune the government will allow them to have some of their own money back. This reverses the Constitutional order; the federal government is supposed to serve the people, the people are not supposed to serve the government.

    The “federal money” argument is bogus. It is based upon the leftist idea that it was never your money to begin with. If you believe, TheNaBr, as Obama, fauxcohontas, Sanders, et al, that the contents of your bank account really is government property because “you didn’t build that” the government did and in theory they could take it all then come out and say so. Or, don’t use the argument that if you want your own money back in some form then you must submit to government ownership of your own mind and body.

    Because that’s really what we are talking about, which leads to my next point. Dana @15, I would frame it as a right of conscience rather than one of religious exemption. Because even an atheist has a right to objective reality and a right to privacy. The hypocrisy of the progressive left, i.e. socialist collectivists, is really breathtaking when you think about it. They go on about how people have the right to privacy and how dare those Bible humping xtofascists force their values on other people.

    “Stay out of my uterus!”

    Apparently the right of privacy in their eyes only protects abortion, as we are seeing with the drive toward “affirmative consent.” Whereby, the progressive leftists are inviting the government into their bedrooms to monitor sex. But that’s an argument for another day.

    The fact of the matter is this drive toward what are called in Orwellian doublespeak “inclusive bathrooms,” which actually makes 90% of the people not want to use them, goes against every legal principle regarding people’s right to privacy.

    The federal courts including the Supreme Court have consistently ruled that a person’s right to privacy and bodily integrity include the right to choose not to undress or appear in a state of full or partial nudity in front of someone of the opposite biological sex. I mention the latter because President Tiger Beat’s DoE has decreed that “transgender” kids have the right to use the bathroom of their choice even if it makes everyone else uncomfortable.

    So someone else’s right to privacy and dignity erase everyone else’s right to privacy and dignity in bathrooms and locker rooms. Moreover, there is no such thing as objective reality, we are told. Nobody can look at another person’s genitalia in a shower and think for themselves that those genitalia put put that person in any particular category. That’s bigotry. There is now only subjective reality, and the only person’s subjective reality that counts is the person belonging to the protected class this administration has created for the “transgendered.”

    There is absolutely nothing in the Constitution, the law, or case law that supports this vile administration’s position on this. It all goes the other way. So let’s follow the logic.

    Why would this be limited to intimate spaces like bathrooms or locker rooms and showers? What about other embarrassments or indignities? Now if the TSA agent, police officer, or prison guard despite their male or female appearance “identifies” as the opposite biological sex then then anyone who objects to the search is a bigot? It’s the same principle involved; everyone has a right to privacy and dignity.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html

    SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

    SAFFORD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT #1 et al. v. REDDING

    … Savana’s actions in their presence necessarily exposed her breasts and pelvic area to some degree, and both subjective and reasonable societal expectations of personal privacy support the treatment of such a search as categorically distinct, requiring distinct elements of justification on the part of school authorities for going beyond a search of outer clothing and belongings. Savana’s subjective expectation of privacy is inherent in her account of it as embarrassing, frightening, and humiliating. The reasonableness of her expectation is indicated by the common reaction of other young people similarly searched, whose adolescent vulnerability intensifies the exposure’s patent intrusiveness. Its indignity does not outlaw the search, but it does implicate the rule that “the search [be] ‘reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.’ ” T. L. O., supra, at 341. Here, the content of the suspicion failed to match the degree of intrusion…

    You could make a good case that schools have a legitimate interest in keeping drugs out of schools. But in this case that compelling need did not override 13. y.o. Savanna Redding’s 4th Amendment rights nor her inherent rights to privacy and dignity.

    But no one can make a case that the state has some legitimate interest in forcing a 13 y.o. girl to have even less of a right to privacy and dignity by appearing fully nude in front of a classmate of the opposite biological sex.

    Since that’s the case the Obama administration is throwing absolutely everything that came before it out the window making a blanket claim that no one has an inherent right to privacy and dignity except the “transgendered” individual. Because the “transgendered” individual’s subjective reality is the only reality that counts. This is what happens when we abandon rationalism for relativism. Eventually someone has to become the arbiter when subjective realities collide.

    And the Obama administration is only too happy to oblige. And why not? Government, we were told in 2012, is the one thing we all belong to. There is nothing beyond the scope of government as far as the progressive left is concerned. So of course it should determine and control reality. Who else is going to do it? Your flying spaghetti god, Bible humping xtofascists? This is the role the government has taken on for itself. In addition to everything else it would confiscate and ration out, now it has confiscated objective reality and is rationing out subjective reality to favored groups. And denying it to “bigots” whose subjective realities are deemed “oppressive,” “exclusive,” and “intolerant.”

    I just don’t think it’s correct to carve out only a religious exemption to this insanity. I’d make it a conscience right.

    Steve57 (fa6407)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0893 secs.