11 thoughts on “Council Votes Against Barring Travel to North Carolina to Protest Anti-LGBT Rights Law

  1. What absolute foolishness and a waste of valuable council time! However, you have to admit that the reality of this madness sure beats anything that a good fiction writer could come up with!

  2. The NC Legislation has nothing to do with sexual preference or being gay. It has to do being Transgender…. So horrible headline Charlie…

    And this nonsense has ZERO to do with what the Council was elected to do. Once again Councilor Falkoff has lost her mind !!!

    The NC law is about public safety and privacy !

      • Charlie the law is not anti-gay… it simply doesn’t include sexual orientation as a protected class. From what I read here anyway… There is a difference. Sexual orientation may already be covered by existing Federal Law….as are all of the other protected classes. Of course the notion of protected classes is problematic to begin with.

        And sorry folks a person with male genitals doesn’t have the right to shower in the same locker room at the gym with women. That is not a civil liberty or civil right. The Constitution doesn’t remotely address it. The 14th Amendment talks about rights granted by the Constitution to all citizens, not being abridged by the States. It was intended to address the issue of former slaves. That was the intent of the authors of the 14th Amendment and under standard of reasonable exegesis, is therefore the meaning of the text.

        Moreover, even if, and I’d argue it’s not the case… even if by some taffy pulling methodology you stretch the text to mean, that includes transgender folks…. you still have a conflict between rights. So you have a micro-minuscule segment of the population that suffers negligible impact by having to use the public facilities that match their genitalia, verses the privacy and safety rights of the vast majority of the population. And while the Constitution protects a minority from oppression by the majority, not to the point of the micro-minuscule minority’s right to encumber upon on the rights of vast majority. That principle has precedent in over 2 centuries of Constitutional Jurisprudence.

        Let there be no mistake… no one is arguing that transgender people present the threat to safety… but it is those who would abuse the law. There have already been reported instances of this happening. We live in a day of very small cameras, built into the phones or smaller devices… the original Charlotte ordinance was rife for opportunities for serious abuse and presented a clear and present danger to women and young girls.

        As for the comfort or discomfort of transgender people in using the PROPER facility….again.. there they do present a threat to the privacy and comfort level of women and young girls. Anyone rational person, who hasn’t had their brains turned into mush by cognitively impaired academics, understands that. So when you weigh this alleged right to use the wrong public facility, against the rights of the vast majority…. the answer is clear, if you don’t live in an Ivory Tower.

        Seriously folks… how many parents with daughters wanted them forced to be college roommates with a person who has male genitals ? Sure let them sleep and have to change in the same room…. why not ?? And of course the average 18 year old boy would never think of saying he was transgender to get room with coed. No that would never happen.

        As for the Council’s role in all this… it’s simply not the Council’s concern in any remote way. They were elected to administer the town’s issues… not make symbolic statements about issues that aren’t directly related to Watertown. And if we go down this road… where does it stop. Let’s ban an possible to a variety of Muslim Nations, where Homosexuality is often a capital offense. Come to think of it… let’s pass an ordinance that the Town Vehicles not use an Saudi Oil… Being gay is illegal, women are oppressed… etc, etc, etc….

        Councilor Falkoff, sadly has history of this sort of nonsense and it cost her a seat on the Council in 2005. Since regaining her seat in 2007, she’s showed a nominal amount of common sense in this area. Apparently he memory is short.

  3. Well, that was fast. Was Bernard Lafayette even here? Too bad some people are unclear on the concept of speaking up for basic human rights and civil rights for ALL people. And no, the North Carolina law is not just about transgender people. But even if it were, the law would still be wrong. Municipalities across the country are taking a stand against this flagrant denial of legal protection against discrimination for LGBTQ and trans people.

  4. A middle aged 200 pound transgender man walks into a public restroom in Watertown to disrobe and change into his street clothes after a long sweaty bicycle ride.

    The only other person in the restroom at the time is a 13 year old girl who is just arranging herself after having done her business.

    The girl becomes uncomfortable and frightened and runs out.
    What about HER civil rights? Liberals don’t care.

    And by the way, how are you supposed to know what sex a person thinks he or she is in a public restroom?

    Does the young girl ask the 200 pound man, “Sir or Madam, what sex are you?”

    Something liberals have not thought through. There have been lots of such cases, but the liberal mainstream media won’t report them.

  5. Focus on the real issues facing Watertown. This is a waste of time. Town employees should be able to travel wherever they want on personal business and for work, why would they be traveling to NC?

  6. Not sure why any town employee would have to travel to N. C. ? Is there any history of Watertown sending town employees to N. C. ?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *