A battle is brewing in the State of Washington. Who has more legislative authority — a state commission or the Washington state legislature? The battle stems over an unelected state commission enacted rules requiring “bathroom, shower, and locker room use in public accommodations be based on ‘gender identity,’ not sex,” according to the Washington Times.
Washington state legislators are already drafting bill in response to the Washington Human Rights Commission’s new rules, declaring the commission overstepped its “authority by leaving the legislature out of such a major change in policy and understanding.” Republican State Rep. Graham Hunt declared the unelected body was making decisions that would widely affect the public without being accountable to the public.
“For the Human Rights Commission to unilaterally make a [Washington Administrative Code] change — they’re not an elected body,” said Republican state Rep. Graham Hunt. “They’re making decisions that widely affect the public although they’re not elected and held accountable to the public in the same fashion.”
The commission took action after an eight-month dispute over transgender access at the YMCA of Pierce and Kitsap counties, which at first allowed and then prohibited opposite-sex use of bathrooms, showers and locker rooms.
In a Dec. 15 statement, YMCA President and CEO Bob Ecklund said the organization planned to be in compliance with revisions to the Washington Administrative Code effective Dec. 26.
“As this relates to our restrooms and locker room procedures, we will not discriminate based on gender identity effective December 21,” Mr. Ecklund said. “This timing will allow for staff education and training.”
Commissioner Charlene Strong said the panel’s rulemaking only “enhances” the state Legislature’s work “and in no way harms that work.”
According to the American Civil Liberties Union legal director, Emily Chiang, this action by the Human Rights Commission is a “clarification of the 2006 Washington Law Against Discrimination, not a wholesale change.”
Ms. Chiang stated in an email, “What they’ve done is basically clarify existing Washington state law, which already prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. So, it wouldn’t really make sense for the Legislature to be involved, the HRC action is designed to give additional guidance to people looking to understand the state law.”
Calling the move a “fabulous thing,” Chiang reinforces the ACLU’s continued support of the rights of transgender people.
What everyone is talking about is allowing men who claim to identify as women to use bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms previously identified as women only and vice versa. It’s the promotion of sexual deviancy and places women and girls at risk of assault and rape at the hands of men entering women’s facilities for nefarious purposes. How is one to tell the difference between a man who identifies as female and a man pretending to identify as female to gain access to victims? The answer is you can’t.
While States are busy bending to the whims of 0.03% of the population to satisfy these degenerates demand of invented bathroom rights, who is protecting the rights of women and girls to have some expectation of safety in public restroom accommodations? No one. The rights of women and girls to privacy and safety are discarded in favor of sexual deviancy and invented rights. The same with men and boys as women, though a small percentage, can be predators as well.
Washington is fighting back as the public is not buying into the new rules.
Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute in Washington, said, “This first-of-its-kind, statewide law is part of the recent push to frame gender-segregated bathrooms as an affront to ‘equality’. So far, the public hasn’t been buying it.”
Backholm cited the controversy in Houston, Texas, where in a November vote, voters overwhelmingly defeated the “equal rights ordinance” that would have allowed transgender men to access female facilities and impose penalties on businesses that stopped “biological males who identify as females” from using women’s facilities.
Rep. Hunt claimed several bills have been drafted anticipating the legislative session beginning on January 17, to address this issue. Hunt’s bill would require pre-operative and post-operative transgender individuals to “use the facilities corresponding to their biological sex.” He cited the threat to public safety created by the commission’s rules whereby sexual predators could not be stopped from taking advantage of the law.
“My concern is the safety side,” Hunt said. “There are folks who have come forward and reached out to me that have been taken advantage of, put into abusive situations because of somebody who’s been allowed access to private, intimate settings like locker rooms and bathrooms.”
Hunt continued on saying he had also heard from some transgender people who are comfortable using the gender-neutral facilities and private changing rooms but were concerned about being thrust into the spotlight.
Some members of the transgender community have reached out and said, ‘This is what we prefer to use,’” Mr. Hunt said. “They don’t want to be put into an uncomfortable situation either. And in fact some of them have mentioned that they’re actually pretty darned upset that this has become such a highlighted issue, because it’s drawing attention to them whereas they otherwise didn’t want the attention.”
Oh boo hoo hoo. If attention was not wanted, then these people should quit trying to force over 99.97% of the population to bend to their deviancy.
In true Democrat fashion, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee came out in support of the HRC rules saying, “We cannot keep perpetuating the stereotype that transgender people pose a threat to our communities.”
Here is an example of another one who doesn’t get it. Transgender is a sexual deviancy. It is also a mental illness — claiming to be the sex opposite your DNA and biological equipment. Promotion of sexual deviancy and mental illness as normal is dangerous and does pose a threat. It’s a threat to societal structure by endangering the family unit through confusing children into thinking anyone can be any gender in deviance of God’s law and threatening reproduction.
Allowing transgender individuals to use facilities based on how they “identify” poses a threat and danger to women and girls through the inability to identify a transgendered man from a male predator pretending to be transgendered.
Transgender individuals can dress like the gender which they identify and surgically mutilate themselves to fit that deviant mental image, but, DNA does not change — a man is born a man and a woman is born a woman despite the mental defects. This change in “rules,” should it be upheld in law, poses a risk to all women and girls, as well as men and boys. Hopefully, the legislature nips this quickly or takes it to a vote of the people. If not and the rules are formally legislated, the first woman or girl, man or boy who is the victim of a sexual predator taking advantage of this “rule” should sue not just the state and the HRC, but each and every member of the HRC, the State legislature and the governor personally for everything they each own as an accessory to the perpetrator in commission of the crime.