digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

See the original image at worldnetdaily.com

Guv strikes state's gender-specific restrooms

worldnetdaily.com — "'Sexual orientation' means a person's orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender status or another person's perception thereof." Check more on http://www.biloves.com, explore sexuality, come out, enjoy life, have fun, etc.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • djmdjm, on 05/30/2008, -2/+11I cannot imagine that the people of Colorado thought that this is what they were voting for when they voted out the Republicans in CO. I imagine that the Dems ran on family values and fiscal responsibility, total deception, and people believed it. On a positive note this makes it the perfect place for the Democrats convention this summer, under the banner: “For the Children.” This is almost like some kind of insurgency, I mean can you imagine if Democrats believed in being honest and running for office on crises such as of restroom discrimination the need of homosexuals to have sex in public, in front of thousand of onlookers including children like they do every year in San Francisco.? ( Just Google it for pictures if you don’t think that’s happening in broad daylight.) If Democrats were honest they’re would be no national Democrat Party though and I guess we can’t deny them they’re day in power. This will be interesting to see if Coloradoans get really p—d off and kick these folks rear ends out of office, or conversely if the media somehow is able to blame this on the GOP. I mean hey, take my money, waste billions of taxpayer dollars on a bunch of junk, kick God out of Government, confer divinity on the judicial branch, get self serving hucksters elected with hundreds of millions of dollars of gaming industry dollars ( theee largest single contributor to political campaigns in the USA 85% to the Democratic Party,) but no sweat, we will believe whatever you say about those evil right wingers and keep on voting for you. But to use the power of Govt. to force Coloradoan women to share the restroom with degenerate men, hmmm, I cannot believe there aren’t some changes coming down the road. This is such fodder for the GOP, they need to nationalize this like the contract with America. 1. Elect us and we will kick the perverts out of your restroom. 2. We will drill for our own oil, and put a refinery in every pot.
    • Terr01, on 05/30/2008, -0/+4I cannot help but imagine Ned Flander's terrified gasp as he walks through the Springfield museum (with the "Evolution" section, and then... confronting that most terrifying of things... THE UNISEX BATHROOM!
      • ThoughtfulWi, on 05/31/2008, -0/+2WE"RE HERE, WE"RE QUEER! WE DON'T WANT ANY BEARS!!!
        • chickenbig, on 05/31/2008, -1/+2Sorry, but this post doesn't even make sense. Please explain for us "ignorant" conservatives.
        • lydecker, on 05/31/2008, -0/+4I thought when reading it that it must have been another Simpson's reference (like the post above it), so I searched. It's from the episode "Much Apu About Nothing."

          "On an ordinary day, a grizzly bear strolls onto Evergreen Terrace, frightening the town. Everyone is advised to stay indoors. The bear is eventually subdued by the police, who tranquilize it. Homer convinces Springfield that something needs to be done to protect them from bears, and the town takes their complaint to Mayor Quimby. The chant Homer's mob repeats as they march on the mayor's office, 'We're here! We're queer! We don't want any more bears!', is a reference to Queer Nation."
  • RustyG, on 05/30/2008, -2/+10Add to this a recent judicial ruling that exonerated a guy who was using a mirror to look up under women's dresses and skirts IN A PUBLIC PLACE on the basis that the female victim had no expectation of privacy. God help us all.
  • nutz2u2, on 05/30/2008, -2/+11If you're a tourist driving thru Colorado and you've gotta go, remember this law probably also applies to the rest stops.
    • MarilynBr, on 06/01/2008, -2/+1This is very dangerous. All a rapist needs to do is dress in drag and enter a women's restroom anywhere, putting women in danger. I think this law is idiotic and the governor must be a fool for signing it.
      • ihateusernames3, on 06/01/2008, -0/+2rapists tend to be incredibly homophobic and transphobic, making them the least likely people to be in drag
        • lydecker, on 06/01/2008, -1/+2Is this true? Do you have statistics for this?

          It is my understanding that rapists would like to appear as inconspicuous as possible, and therefore would not want to alert suspicion to themselves in any way, especially by dressing up cross-gender in public and waiting around in a gender-specific bathroom.
        • ihateusernames3, on 06/01/2008, -0/+3I doubt that any studies have been done to the effect, but it is well known that the typical sex offender is hypermasculine, and even those who choose males as their targets dont consider themselves homosexual. I am not saying that there is no chance for a predator to use drag to disguise themselves, I am just saying that it is unlikely because they wouldnt want to do something they considered gay
        • MiserJ, on 06/02/2008, -0/+3This seems like too much work. Aren't they trying to find the easiest way to get to their victim? This includes targets with tight (or was that loose?) clothes and out of public areas.
  • djmdjm, on 05/30/2008, -3/+11I can't help myself, this it it, Obama's "Change! yes we Can!!!" what a gift from heaven for the GOP. There should be national adds with restroom designation figures crossed out and replaced with God knows what, with Obama's voice: CHANGE! and the crowd yelling "YES WE CAN!"
    • papipablo, on 05/30/2008, -5/+5Obama is a Senator from Illinois. How does your delusional mind connect him to this? Oh that right, you're a moron.
      • djmdjm, on 05/30/2008, -4/+5Very easily, he is way more to the looney left than Ritter and his associates in CO. Probably the most pro abortion pro homosexual candidate to ever run for Pres. My point in everything I said was that what happened in CO is the heart and soul of the Democrat Party. It is everything they are about.
  • MAXEPR, on 05/30/2008, -2/+9Just think, we can have this nationwide if we elect HC or BO. Any of you Coloradans ever hear of impeachment or recall.
    • ThoughtfulWi, on 05/31/2008, -1/+4Yeah, but they're so busy boycotting everything under the sun, they just don't have time.
  • jellytoast, on 05/30/2008, -3/+10You cannot send your children alone to the bathroom anymore, that is for sure. The predators are no longer lurking down dark alleys. Today they wear expensive suits, have degrees from so called prestigious universities and hold positions of power within our nation.
  • YankeeAvenger, on 05/30/2008, -3/+6I used to nervously chuckle at the statement "If God doesn't pass judgement on America soon, he'll have to apologize to Sodom and Gommorah." Now I cringe at what the Lord may do to this country if we don't reverse the downward slope we've traveled since the sixties!

    We can no longer sit out elections because "they're all alike" as many did in 2006. Those of us who love our Judeo-Christian heritage, who refuse to forget those who died over the past 2+ centuries to give us our freedoms, MUST come out in force in November. If there is no one decent running as in the presidential election, then write in someone. For me that will be Ron Paul, but if he's not your man, write in someone. Send these evil traitors on both sides of the aisle the message that they are through taking our votes and spitting in our faces and then ignoring their oath of office! If we don't wake up soon, those of us who still understand the word "decency" will end up in concentration camps.
    • ThoughtfulWi, on 05/31/2008, -1/+3Yeah, I know how you feel, I tremble to think how the Lord must feel about those 1 million dead Iraqis.
      • chickenbig, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2You must mean the ones that Sadaam gassed or put into the meat grinders.
  • oceanrain, on 05/30/2008, -3/+11What libtards thought of this bill? With all the real problems facing society, this is all they can come up with? What nonsense. Let's delegate that perversion is acceptabe. WTF?
    • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1Yes, someone left the door of the moonbat cave open! Time to go moonbat slaying! Impeach that moonbat Bill Ritter, and his buddies of course! Bill Ritter gives Colorado Women the big jitter!
  • jesusis1, on 05/30/2008, -3/+9A haven for hookers! Just tap your foot across the stall... Need I say more? Is this guv disabled? His brain sure is.
  • Savage24, on 05/30/2008, -3/+9Where in the world did they find this nut? The day of reckoning is coming. This should be a reminder to the American people as to just what the democrat party stands for. God help us all.
  • mcrunch2, on 05/30/2008, -3/+6Well, unfortunately, its not just the governor thats a nut. Apparently, their state congress has a majority of loons who must be so smashed that they can't tell which restroom is which. I worry enough about lurkers when I have to send my little girl to the bathroom in a nice place. With this bill, I would be forced to go with her since any lurker would now have the power of the police state behind them, ensuring them access where they don't belong.
    • oestec, on 05/30/2008, -5/+3Picture this scenario: your little girl comes running out of a ladies room crying because an adult man is in there! A man who thinks he's a 'woman' then steps out and approaches a security guard near by, claiming that he feels discriminated against and insulted because of the little girl screaming and running away from him ('her'), despite the fact that he ('she') has a legal right to use the facilities.
      Guess what? Your little girl will be up on charges of discrimination! She will be accused of "intolerance" and you, the parent, will probably end up paying a hefty fine. Don't be surprised if additionally some sort of re-education or "therapy" is also required to cure your daughter of her "intolerance". If she is being home-schooled, she may even be removed from your custody "for her own good and the good of the state".
      Mark my words, folks, this scenario could play out at any moment. This is where we are as a society today - the tail is now officially wagging the dog.
      • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -3/+6I was unaware of a law that we are not allowed to scream when we see someone. On what law would she have violated anti-discrimination policy?

        There is no law of non-discrimination on the basis of crying.

        I wonder if people made this argument against integration... What if some little girl comes out of school crying because there's a black person in there! She'll be sued!
        • ThoughtfulWi, on 05/31/2008, -3/+2I foresee this sort of thing occuring at least every 5000 years. God help us all. sarc/alert
  • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -4/+7I don't see where this eliminates gender specific restrooms, because as far as I read it just allows trans gender individuals into their gender identity bathroom. This isn't going to increase the amount of sexual predators lurking in bathrooms, because having a "Woman" sign does not stop sexual predators from doing what they want. This is a good step forward for transgender protection. It doesn't make illegal discrimination for men who identify as men from entering a woman's bathroom... but I wouldn't expect many of you here to really care.

    But transgender shouldn't fall under "sexual orientation," it's not a sexual orientation, it's a gender identity.

    And I'm curious how it is NOW a threat that homosexuals and bisexuals are in the same bathrooms. They always have been! Unless somehow Denver had specific bathrooms for heterosexual females, *****/bisexual females, heterosexual males, and *****/bisexual males.
    • ihateusernames3, on 05/30/2008, -0/+7EXACTLY! Sexual predators could just as easily walk into a womens bathroom anywhere without these laws as places with them. Contrary to popular belief, there is not a penis detector in the doorway of womens restrooms.

      From the article: "Henceforth, every woman and little girl will have to fear that a predator, bisexual, cross-dresser or even a homosexual or heterosexual male might walk in and relieve himself in their presence," Dobson said." Not only is that statement blatant fear mongering, but the term "relieve himself" cracks me up. It is as if they would be standing in the middle of the room, instead of using a stall.
    • kirralin23, on 05/30/2008, -2/+4Prior to this law any man who entered a woman's restroom would stand out like a sore thumb. Patrons would complain and he would be removed. Now any man can enter a woman's restroom and claim he's a woman because he thinks he is. If you are born with male equipment you are male. If you are born with female equipment you are female. I don't care what you have decided you are. This is a ridiculous invasion of privacy for both men, who use urinals that are not even enclosed by the walls provided by stalls, and women, who tend to value their privacy more than men in my experience. Plus there is no way to tell if the man in the women's restroom thinks he's a woman or if he's looking for a likely victim.
      • ihateusernames3, on 05/30/2008, -2/+4how long do you think anybody could linger in a bathroom without being reported and removed? "men, who use urinals that are not even enclosed by the walls provided by stalls." I am pretty sure the stall works just as well as the urinal for everybody, hence the fact that most people dont keep urinals in their homes
        • kirralin23, on 05/30/2008, -2/+2Yes, but Urinals are in public restrooms. Allowing a woman who believes she is a man to use the men's room violates the privacy of all the men who are using the urinals.
        • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -1/+6What privacy? You have your wang out and everyone over at the urinals can see it!

          Perhaps you don't think that gender identified males who are biologically female would stick out like a sore thumb, that he would walk over to the urinal, pretend to pee, and take glances at a "private" yet hanging out penis? (Every woman I know is just DYING to see penis, right?) Or is it peeping that violates privacy, and anyone male or female is capable of violating that privacy?
      • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -0/+5If you are born with male equipment your sex is male, your gender may not be. Prior and after this law, any biologically appearing man who stood in a woman's restroom visible would stick out like a sore thumb, so people would be watching that behavior, along with everyone else in the restroom regardless of their gender appearance, for suspicious activity. If someone is not visible, they would not stick out.

        You don't have privacy in a restroom, every time I pee at a urinal that doesn't have walls between it I have little privacy to those around me. In a stall, I have more privacy. I fail to see how allowing male gender people with female genitalia in my restroom is a threat to my privacy at the urinal more than other men being at the urinal. And logically, what would he be doing at a urinal with no male genetalia? Could it be that suspicious behavior such as that would be a good tip of something fishy, not the fact that someone is just in the bathroom trying to mind their own business?

        There is no way to tell if a man in the man's restroom is just a man or if he's looking for a likely victim.
        • kirralin23, on 05/30/2008, -2/+2Perhaps you are not aware that women go into restrooms for various reasons other than to relieve themselves. They use the mirror to primp their hair and make-up. They stand there for apparently no reason, when in actuality they're waiting for a child or a friend. They even talk to each other in the public restroom. The fact that someone is hanging around in a women's restroom is not considered suspicious behavior. Now a man can hang out in the women's restroom and if you complain he can claim he's a woman trapped in a mans body and cry discrimination. There is no way to tell by looking at a man if he really thinks he's a woman or if he's pretending because he's a voyeur, or worse.
        • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -0/+6So, do these women also stand in a corner and look everyone over as they enter the room, looking for someone to molest? Are you equally scared of the females that can be sexual predators who look inconspicuous by putting on makeup in the mirror, or don't hide but stand around for apparently no reason?

          Why would you complain that a man is hanging out in the woman's restroom simply for hanging out in the woman's restroom? You're right, that's not suspicious behavior, and if a female sexual predator was doing that too, you wouldn't think anything of it. Which is why I didn't mention "standing around" as suspicious behavior.

          Is he misbehaving? Would you report females who misbehave in restrooms? Is it really discrimination to kick someone out of a public restroom for misbehaving?

          It's quite ridiculous to prevent all gender identity individuals from using a restroom they feel more comfortable in because an opposite gender sexual predator might sneak in and somehow molest someone without being indicted on the basis of discrimination. Treat people the same, treat females and female identified people equally. If they are behaving wrong, treat them like they are behaving wrong. If they are minding their own business, treat them like they are minding their own business (as I'm sure you would expect people to treat you).

          Are you somehow delusional to think that only men dressed as women can be voyeurs or worse in a female restroom? Do you not take precautions already to prevent females or hiding men? Do you think that with this law passed, it is the only way that men can somehow make it into the female's restroom to peek on you?

          The facts are that transgender people are the ones who fear losing their right to privacy the most, and they're the ones who fear sexual assault and plain assault as well. And somehow, it seems people think they are only capable of fending off or protecting themselves from same-sex sexual predators to allow transgendered and transsexual people rights to privacy.
        • cnsrvatv, on 05/31/2008, -2/+0@lydecker
          "every time I pee at a urinal..."

          Sounds like you probably sit more than you stand.
        • lydecker, on 05/31/2008, -0/+4I have a shy bladder (except when I've been drinking), so unfortunately I take private stalls when there are others in the restroom, but I don't think I sit more than I stand.
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -3/+2Why should the gender confused people have more of a right to privacy than all the normal men and women in this nation. Are you suggesting that everyone else's right to privacy is trumped by those few gender confused individual? How is this not special rights?
        • ihateusernames3, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2more of a right to privacy? How about the right to not be beaten up for who you are, or to not develop bladder infections from holding it too long?
        • eir574, on 05/31/2008, -0/+5"Why should the gender confused people have more of a right to privacy than all the normal men and women in this nation"

          How does this legislation give them a greater right to privacy? If you're saying that in response to something lydecker wrote, I'm not clear what that would be. So far as I can tell, he didn't say that anyone should have a greater right to privacy than anyone else. He just said that some people fear that they'll lose their right to privacy more than others do.
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2When a man walks into a mens room he is not beaten up because he thinks he's a woman. Nobody knows what he thinks about himself. When a woman walks into a womens room she is not beaten up because she thinks she's a man. Nobody knows what she thinks about herself. Based on these posts and posts I've seen with similar stories it is the women who identify themselves as women who are most concerned about losing their privacy, not the trans-gendered. I am a woman who is very concerned about losing my privacy, and I am not alone out there. Why do those few gender confused individuals have more of a right to privacy than me and the many other women out there like me. The majority of women in this country do not want biologically male individuals in the womens restrooms. This is a nation which is supposed to be led by the will of the people, the majority of the people, not the few and far between. I suffer with pain like a bladder infection, and worse, every day of my life. I have Interstitial Cystitis. If I try to hold it I'm not only likely to end up with an infection, I'll suffer excruciating pain and eventually pee my pants. That's particularly embarassing when it happens in public. I also have difficulty urinating, you see my body doesn't want to go because that too is very painful, and I doubt I could relax enough to go with a man in the restroom, I can't even go with someone talking to me. I really don't like to use a catheter to empty my bladder and I am not adept enough at inserting it to manage it in a public restroom, without a floor length mirror and the kind of privacy unavailable in a public restroom stall. But you think that a gender confused man has a right to be in the womens restroom? That since he feels uncomfortable in the mens room he should be allowed to make all the women in the womens room feel uncomfortable instead?!? IC is very rare in men, and I'm sure that includes the gender confused ones. Homosexuals, bisexuals and transexuals are not the only group of people out there with special interests. And they are not the only group singled out for torment. Public places currently have two restrooms. One for biological males, the other, for biological females. Are we now supposed to build one for the mentally ill as well? I've known a couple of homosexuals who decided not to be anymore. I've known a young man who decided he must be gay because his stupid, abusive father kept telling him he was gay because he enjoyed acting and didn't enjoy sports, and eventually he kicked him out of the house because he had a play in his room that had a homosexual charachter in it. So it seems that homosexuals can change their minds and stop being homosexuals. Heterosexuals can change their minds and become homosexuals. Bisexuals can do whatever they want. Unfortunately, I cannot wake up tomorrow and decide I don't have IC.
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2When a man walks into a mens room he is not beaten up because he thinks he's a woman. Nobody knows what he thinks about himself. When a woman walks into a womens room she is not beaten up because she thinks she's a man. Nobody knows what she thinks about herself. Based on these posts and posts I've seen with similar stories it is the women who identify themselves as women who are most concerned about losing their privacy, not the trans-gendered. I am a woman who is very concerned about losing my privacy, and I am not alone out there. Why do those few gender confused individuals have more of a right to privacy than me and the many other women out there like me. The majority of women in this country do not want biologically male individuals in the womens restrooms. This is a nation which is supposed to be led by the will of the people, the majority of the people, not the few and far between. I suffer with pain like a bladder infection, and worse, every day of my life. I have Interstitial Cystitis. If I try to hold it I'm not only likely to end up with an infection, I'll suffer excruciating pain and eventually pee my pants. That's particularly embarassing when it happens in public. I also have difficulty urinating, you see my body doesn't want to go because that too is very painful, and I doubt I could relax enough to go with a man in the restroom, I can't even go with someone talking to me. I really don't like to use a catheter to empty my bladder and I am not adept enough at inserting it to manage it in a public restroom, without a floor length mirror and the kind of privacy unavailable in a public restroom stall. But you think that a gender confused man has a right to be in the womens restroom? That since he feels uncomfortable in the mens room he should be allowed to make all the women in the womens room feel uncomfortable instead?!? IC is very rare in men, and I'm sure that includes the gender confused ones. Homosexuals, bisexuals and transexuals are not the only group of people out there with special interests. And they are not the only group singled out for torment. Public places currently have two restrooms. One for biological males, the other, for biological females. Are we now supposed to build one for the mentally ill as well? I've known a couple of homosexuals who decided not to be anymore. I've known a young man who decided he must be gay because his stupid, abusive father kept telling him he was gay because he enjoyed acting and didn't enjoy sports, and eventually he kicked him out of the house because he had a play in his room that had a homosexual charachter in it. So it seems that homosexuals can change their minds and stop being homosexuals. Heterosexuals can change their minds and become homosexuals. Bisexuals can do whatever they want. Unfortunately, I cannot wake up tomorrow and decide I don't have IC.
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -2/+1When a man walks into a mens room he is not beaten up because he thinks he's a woman. Nobody knows what he thinks about himself. When a woman walks into a womens room she is not beaten up because she thinks she's a man. Nobody knows what she thinks about herself. Based on these posts and posts I've seen with similar stories it is the women who identify themselves as women who are most concerned about losing their privacy, not the trans-gendered. I am a woman who is very concerned about losing my privacy, and I am not alone out there. Why do those few gender confused individuals have more of a right to privacy than me and the many other women out there like me. The majority of women in this country do not want biologically male individuals in the womens restrooms. This is a nation which is supposed to be led by the will of the people, the majority of the people, not the few and far between. I suffer with pain like a bladder infection, and worse, every day of my life. I have Interstitial Cystitis. If I try to hold it I'm not only likely to end up with an infection, I'll suffer excruciating pain and eventually pee my pants. That's particularly embarassing when it happens in public. I also have difficulty urinating, you see my body doesn't want to go because that too is very painful, and I doubt I could relax enough to go with a man in the restroom, I can't even go with someone talking to me. I really don't like to use a catheter to empty my bladder and I am not adept enough at inserting it to manage it in a public restroom, without a floor length mirror and the kind of privacy unavailable in a public restroom stall. But you think that a gender confused man has a right to be in the womens restroom? That since he feels uncomfortable in the mens room he should be allowed to make all the women in the womens room feel uncomfortable instead?!? IC is very rare in men, and I'm sure that includes the gender confused ones. Homosexuals, bisexuals and transexuals are not the only group of people out there with special interests. And they are not the only group singled out for torment. Public places currently have two restrooms. One for biological males, the other, for biological females. Are we now supposed to build one for the mentally ill as well? I've known a couple of homosexuals who decided not to be anymore. I've known a young man who decided he must be gay because his stupid, abusive father kept telling him he was gay because he enjoyed acting and didn't enjoy sports, and eventually he kicked him out of the house because he had a play in his room that had a homosexual charachter in it. So it seems that homosexuals can change their minds and stop being homosexuals. Heterosexuals can change their minds and become homosexuals. Bisexuals can do whatever they want. Unfortunately, I cannot wake up tomorrow and decide I don't have IC.
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -2/+1When a man walks into a mens room he is not beaten up because he thinks he's a woman. Nobody knows what he thinks about himself. When a woman walks into a womens room she is not beaten up because she thinks she's a man. Nobody knows what she thinks about herself. Based on these posts and posts I've seen with similar stories it is the women who identify themselves as women who are most concerned about losing their privacy, not the trans-gendered. I am a woman who is very concerned about losing my privacy, and I am not alone out there. Why do those few gender confused individuals have more of a right to privacy than me and the many other women out there like me. The majority of women in this country do not want biologically male individuals in the womens restrooms. This is a nation which is supposed to be led by the will of the people, the majority of the people, not the few and far between. I suffer with pain like a bladder infection, and worse, every day of my life. I have Interstitial Cystitis. If I try to hold it I'm not only likely to end up with an infection, I'll suffer excruciating pain and eventually pee my pants. That's particularly embarassing when it happens in public. I also have difficulty urinating, you see my body doesn't want to go because that too is very painful, and I doubt I could relax enough to go with a man in the restroom, I can't even go with someone talking to me. I really don't like to use a catheter to empty my bladder and I am not adept enough at inserting it to manage it in a public restroom, without a floor length mirror and the kind of privacy unavailable in a public restroom stall. But you think that a gender confused man has a right to be in the womens restroom? That since he feels uncomfortable in the mens room he should be allowed to make all the women in the womens room feel uncomfortable instead?!? IC is very rare in men, and I'm sure that includes the gender confused ones. Homosexuals, bisexuals and transexuals are not the only group of people out there with special interests. And they are not the only group singled out for torment. Public places currently have two restrooms. One for biological males, the other, for biological females. Are we now supposed to build one for the mentally ill as well? I've known a couple of homosexuals who decided not to be anymore. I've known a young man who decided he must be gay because his stupid, abusive father kept telling him he was gay because he enjoyed acting and didn't enjoy sports, and eventually he kicked him out of the house because he had a play in his room that had a homosexual charachter in it. So it seems that homosexuals can change their minds and stop being homosexuals. Heterosexuals can change their minds and become homosexuals. Bisexuals can do whatever they want. Unfortunately, I cannot wake up tomorrow and decide I don't have IC.
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -1/+1I tried to post an apology for the multiple posts and it didn't show up. Perhaps I'm going to end up with multiple apologies as well.
        • lydecker, on 05/31/2008, -1/+6Based on these posts, what do you know about the transgendered? Is it possible that you haven't heard the perspective of the transgendered because they haven't commented here? Well, let's change that. You can find what many people are offering as their advice, and as their concerns, for transgendered people in this post:

          http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=200801 ...

          Transgenders and non-transgendered have equal rights to privacy. There are not private stalls for only transgendered, and others must use other more public facilities.

          The fact is that transgenders make everyone uncomfortable. Biological females and males that are transgendered don't fit in any bathroom perfectly. I can see how some would feel uncomfortable having either transgender in their bathroom, but it's not granting someone more privacy than another.

          Homosexuals, bisexuals, and transsexuals are not the only people with special interests, which is why we don't cater to special interests, but to equality. Allowing people access to the bathroom facility based on their gender identity, not based on their biological status (which you often cannot prove). We are not supposed to make special facilities for mentally ill, because they are also equally free to use facilities.

          Your post is completely inconsistent, lacks a consistent point, and in it's structure definitely seems more like an angry ramble than anything you've clearly thought out. You are also very obviously thinking only about yourself and how comfortable you feel with transgender, homosexual, heterosexual women in your bathroom with no regard to the reasons they might choose to use the restroom. If you were one of these people, would you not understand that their reasons perhaps are the same and more significant than your reasons?

          I hope you will have read through that link. Here is another that might help:

          http://blog.myfathershe.com/2007/03/saturday-featu ...
        • ihateusernames3, on 05/31/2008, -0/+5"So it seems that homosexuals can change their minds and stop being homosexuals." Because you know two people who are ex-gay, it proves that homosexuality is a choice? I'm sorry that you have urinary troubles, but that doesnt mean that other people should suffer. If allowing transgender women to use a women's restroom will keep them from having to go through what you do (the % of trans women with bladder infections is surprisingly high), why shouldnt they be allowed to?
        • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -2/+1Based on the first link you gave me lydecker even transgender people say go to the restroom with the people you look like. They don't recommend a person who appears male to go into the women's restroom. They recommend that if you still or now appear male use the men's room. Most of them also recommend that if you look in between you go to the men's room. Heterosexual females care enough about losing their privacy that they will physically drive a man out of the restroom and call security and police for assistance. Men don't care as much. I think the whole surgery and hormone therapy is an abomination. But regardless, even transgender people say if you don't look like a woman stay out of the women's restroom. I don't know the % of trans women with bladder infections, I also don't know the % of normal women with bladder infections. But women with simple bladder infections don't go through anything like what I go through. The fact is that transgender is a special interest, the same as IC is a special interest and one special interest doesn't trump the other. For instance, when there is a line in the restroom I don't try to cut ahead of everyone because of my pain, my special interest doesn't trump the majorities right to equal treatment. I stand there and tremble, the color drains from my face and I break out in a cold sweat. If somebody notices and offers me the chance to go ahead of them I thank them and accept. But the rest of society is not responsible for my special interest. Of course if you enter the women's room and you appear female nobody will question you. Often if you enter the men's room and you look like a female nobody will question you, but that doesn't always hold. If you enter the women's restroom and you are obviously a man the women in that restroom will at the very least feel uncomfortable and many will feel threatened. They may feel threatened enough to drive you out. So, clearly, the women in this nation feel much more threatened at the loss of their privacy than the gender confused.
        • lydecker, on 06/01/2008, -1/+5So this law would let people choose the bathroom they feel more comfortable in, and let them go to the bathroom of the gender they look like. And the vast majority will go into the restroom where they look alike, because they value privacy. These laws say owners of public restroom facilities cannot discriminate based on transgender, therefore allowing ftm transgenders and transsexuals access to the men's bathroom.

          Allowing someone to use a private stall in a bathroom and allowing you to use a private stall in a bathroom is not one special interest group trumping another.

          Nobody of any gender has restricted access to a bathroom because transgenders have equal unrestricted access as you.
        • ihateusernames3, on 06/01/2008, -1/+5To kirralin: I have known a few trans women, and even those who look very feminine and 'passable' as women sometimes get clocked. It happens, because they werent born with female bodies. When that happens, it becomes a legal problem b/c they are not legally allowed to use the women's restroom in most places. Then it becomes a toss up as to whether they want to risk arrest by going to the ladies' room, or risk being beaten up in the men's. I would defenitely be uncomfortable if a man, dressed as a man, came into the women's bathroom, and I would probably tell security. But if I saw a person who I could tell is trans, no matter how masculine their traits are, I would not; that is the group that this law is aiming to protect.
        • kirralin23, on 06/01/2008, -2/+2Transgenders have access to whichever restroom they happen to choose. If a transgender individual who looks like a woman uses the women's room nobody will know unless that person decides to let people know and nobody will feel uncomfortable and threatened. But if a transgender person who looks like a man uses the women's room everyone in the restroom will know there's a man in the women's room and many womem will feel uncomfortable and threatened. That one person does not have the right to make everyone else feel uncomfortable and threatened; their need does not trump the needs of the majority of the women in this country, just as my special needs don't give me the right to cut in front of everybody waiting in line, or the right to use the men's room.
        • ihateusernames3, on 06/01/2008, -1/+4"If a transgender individual who looks like a woman uses the women's room nobody will know unless that person decides to let people know and nobody will feel uncomfortable and threatened." Like I said above, it isnt as simple for them as a yes or no to "do they look like a woman," because of how much that varries. They all get 'spotted' on occasion, no matter how good they look. One of my friends looks absolutely flawless, but is terrified every time she has to go to a public bathroom, because she is afraid someone will freak out and call the police. Especially for people on the borderline of how they look, it is a tough thing, and I dont see how that is 'trumping' everyone else's rights.
        • lydecker, on 06/01/2008, -0/+4"Transgenders have access to whichever restroom they happen to choose." Good, it's settled then.

          And maybe someday you'll see that because a transgender uses a bathroom, EVERYONE doesn't feel uncomfortable and threatened. Few do. Nobody has the right to make anyone uncomfortable and threatened, whether it be a nontransgender or a transgender. We have the right to use bathrooms.



          "DEAR ANN LANDERS: Last week, I was at a restaurant and needed to use the ladies' room. I was washing my hands when a tall, heavyset woman entered. I realized this was a man dressed as a woman.

          I am an open-minded person, Ann, but I felt extremely uncomfortable. My daughter said, "If he is dressed like a woman and feels like a woman, it is perfectly OK for him to use the ladies' washroom." I say, if he is a male, he should use the men's room. Will you settle the argument?

          - A He or a She in New Jersey

          DEAR N.J.: I would be willing to bet that the person you encountered in the ladies' room was indeed a woman. Tall females who wear pantsuits are not uncommon these days, and with the chic, short haircuts, they DO look quite masculine.

          However, if indeed this person was a transvestite, he was not a threat to you. In fact, using the men's room dressed that way could have been dangerous for him. Because women's bathrooms have stalls and there is no need to expose oneself, I say let him use the bathroom he is most comfortable with."
      • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1That is so true! Now remember Bill Ritter's name, so when he runs for President someday, this will blow up in his face! King Moonbat Of Colorado needs to be humiliated...why he's as bad as that ninny Pelosi!
  • Christianptriot, on 05/30/2008, -5/+6Even though this does not open up bathrooms or restrooms to anyone in either gender-identified restroom, there is NOTHING in the law that would stop a pedophile from dressing as a woman to gain access to a women's restroom - without question - and entering to stalk his next victim. This is tacit approval for any and every sexual predator, whether they prefer men, women or children, to freely roam showers and restrooms. the first time you challenge one of them, they will cry "Discrimination!" and you will be the one arrested for questioning them in trying to safeguard your children.

    Anyone who doesn't see the inherent harm in this is fooling themselves.
    • papipablo, on 05/30/2008, -4/+3Paranoid moron.
    • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -2/+4There is nothing in current law that would stop a pedophile from dressing as a woman to gain access to a women's restroom and entering to stalk his next victim. Nor for them to enter a men's bathroom to stalk his next victim.

      I would also ask why is someone challenging a sexual predator?
      Does that person know he is a sexual predator? Is this because of his actions? Because I don't think we give tacit approval to anyone - sexual predator or not - for stalking or abusing people in restrooms.
      Does that person know he is a sexual predator because he's seen his face on TV? Then perhaps people should watch him, because he could do the same things in either bathroom.
      Does that person not know he is a sexual predator?
      Does this person assume a transgender is a sexual predator just because of her looks? I don't think you can get arrested for just pointing that out, but people would likely allow her to remain in the bathroom if nothing was proven.
      Does this person assume a transgender is a sexual predator because she is being creepy? I'm sure if someone was acting suspicious, you'd be careful and alert people regardless of their gender or gender identity.

      The facts are that this law doesn't allow anything that can't already happen. It's not tacit approval of sexual predators being in bathrooms.

      Anyone who thinks not allowing trans gendered people into their bathroom is the only thing protecting them from inherent harm is fooling themselves.
      • chickenbig, on 05/31/2008, -0/+4I agree that this laaw doesn't allow anything that can't already happen, but what it does is give the perpetrator a tool to flip the table and claim victimhood.
      • Christianptriot, on 05/31/2008, -1/+3This is NOT about protecting people from potential harm - this is about allowing and empowering a potential predator to claim the victim status that chickenbig mentioned in his/her remark. WHY give the criminal element one more way to accomplish their goal and reduce a potential safeguard for potential victims?!
        • lydecker, on 06/01/2008, -2/+3This rule is not about allowing predators. Predators exist, and they can get into the bathroom anyway. The criminal element is not prevented from molesting people by not having a law against gender identity discrimination
        • Christianptriot, on 06/01/2008, -1/+3BEFORE this law, you could challenge someone entering a restroom who was obviously not the same gender as the sign on the door. AFTER this law, if you challenge them, they can sue you or have you arrested for a hate crime.....see the difference here?
    • Terr01, on 05/30/2008, -1/+5"there is NOTHING in the law that would stop a pedophile from dressing as a woman to gain access to a women's restroom"

      So? Currently laws don't "stop" them from trying that trick anyway, and it's not like they'd get a sentence you'd be happy with if they were caught in either case.
      • Christianptriot, on 06/01/2008, -2/+3BEFORE this law, you could challenge someone entering a restroom who was obviously not the same gender as the sign on the door. AFTER this law, if you challenge them, they can sue you or have you arrested for a hate crime.....see the difference here?
        • lydecker, on 06/01/2008, -0/+2If by "you" you mean an employer or owner of a restaurant, then AFTER this law, you can be sued for discrimination if you disallow them access, not if you question them. Normal public attendees are not responsible for deciding who has and who doesn't have access to public facilities.

          And hate crimes have to be crimes before they can be classified as bias.
  • LifeguardMom, on 05/30/2008, -4/+8The Bible verse in Romans chapter 1 is becoming more and more evident:

    verse 22: "professing themselves to be wise, they became as fools"

    verse 24: "wherefore God gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts"

    God help our country.
  • 10QGZus, on 05/30/2008, -3/+9This governor isn't exactly the brightest crayon in the box, is he? It's amazing that anyone in their right mind would approve such a thing. If one child is molested because of this increedibly stupid law, I hope the parents sue this governor for every penny he has. I can't believe how stupid law makers and government officials have become in the last 15 years. Stupid - or evil - take your pick.
    • lydecker, on 05/30/2008, -1/+6A child could be molested with or without this law. This law does make molestations easier.
    • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1Bill Ritter is a brainless moonbat!
  • kemojr, on 05/30/2008, -3/+8This governor is as dumb as a board. Does he not know that people might want their personal privacy when using the bathroom? It is inexcusable for this dunderhead to waste the taxpayers money on such stupidity.
    • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1Moonbats like Bill Ritter have no brains...even the scarecrow from the Wizard of Oz would be smarter.
  • uberbear, on 05/31/2008, -4/+6 This is what you get when you elect democrats. Sure, they run on platforms that promise to help out the "little guy" and all the rest of that balony, but notice the first things they do when they get in office, paybacks for the gay lobby and all the rest of the far left kooks. God help us.
    • ihateusernames3, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2I dont think you understand how lobbying works. Even if gay people controlled all democratic politicians (insert laugh here), they wouldnt be getting paid by the politicians. Lobbyists are the ones that pay politicians in the hopes of preferential treatment in lawmaking. Why would a politician feel the need to pay a lobbyist?
      • kirralin23, on 05/31/2008, -1/+2I don't think you understand uberbear's post. The politician is paying the lobbyist by passing their special interest legislation, not with money.
        • ihateusernames3, on 05/31/2008, -2/+2oh, whoops, you're right. I think I read "paybacks" as "paychecks." In any case, the 'gay lobby' that he is so afraid of is not controlling anybody
  • stevwal, on 05/31/2008, -3/+7I would like to see a women's group do something that actually helps women for a change, instead of just carrying water for the Democrats. Get a petition started to remove this madman from office. This is insanity.
  • jellytoast, on 05/31/2008, -4/+5Here, too, is the thing about liberals. They get into everything we do. Christians formed a nation where people were free. Yeah, yeah, I know it wasn't perfect. In a free society some people are free to do wrong. Jesus, though, brings liberty. Liberals bring enslavement. The further we get from the Christian foundation, the closer we get to enslavement. You cannot even go to the bathroom with out liberals interfering! Do you realize how many liberal wrongs a man can commit simply by going out to eat dinner? By sitting on the couch? By barbecuing in your backyard? By going to the bathroom?
    • lydecker, on 05/31/2008, -3/+4So, it was the liberals who had slaves? And the Bible never mentioned and Christians never had any slaves?

      You can go to the bathroom and do your business fine without liberals interfering. And now transgendered people can go to the bathroom and do their business fine without anyone interfering.
  • LoverofLife, on 05/31/2008, -1/+6What about transracials? I was born a genetic hispanic male but have always thought myself to be a African American. The Gov. of Colorado should pass a law to allow me to go around as a black. This includes getting goverment contracts, etc. I am lot closer genetically to a black man than an I am to any woman. We need transracial equality now.
    • chickenbig, on 05/31/2008, -0/+5Great comment...I love it!
    • Christianptriot, on 05/31/2008, -0/+6I love this angle - can I be American Indian and share in the casino revenues?!
    • ihateusernames3, on 06/01/2008, -3/+2that is such a racist comment, because it assumes that there are inherent differences b/w races. You cant be born in the wrong race because we are all human, and people's brains dont develop differently based on their skin color. Our brains do, however, develop differently based on gender, making it a very likely scenario that transsexuals' brains have developed differently from those of their physical sex.
      • kirralin23, on 06/01/2008, -0/+4I think LoverofLife wasn't suggesting that anyone of a different races is born differently than anyone else. He was refering to Afirmative Action and the inequality it creates.
      • ihateusernames3, on 06/01/2008, -0/+2Yes, I recognized the affirmative action angle, but he was also making a joke about "transracials," which is a stupid argument that I have heard from time to time. I was pointing out why it is stupid to equate transsexualism with 'thinking you are the other race.'
      • djmdjm, on 06/11/2008, -1/+2Thing is, it isn't a brain issue but a spritual one.
      • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1I always thought I was half man and half elephant...why can't I have all the free peanuts I want? (har har!).
  • rjwusa, on 05/31/2008, -4/+8Another victory for reprobates and perverts. Recall the Governor now!
  • rameses92, on 05/31/2008, -3/+3I just cannot believe that such a bill becomes law without the consequences being considered. I wonder if the governor and the legislators who made this law gave thought to sharing a restroom with someone of anothet gender- it does aply to government offices i assume
  • raybojabo, on 06/01/2008, -2/+5Democrat motto: Do it to the children! Uh, wait a minute, this is an open forum. Read that as "Do it for the children".
  • sexydarin, on 06/01/2008, -4/+2They are trying to social engineer. I think the only social engineering needed is the barrel of a gun.
    • FriarZero, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1And it's exactly because of people like you this bill was passed. It was passed so transgendered women weren't forced to use the male rest-room with homophobic lunatics like yourself and risk harm from sociopathic rage over your own repressed homosexuality
  • momw, on 06/02/2008, -2/+2My fellow Americans of Colorado. Now is the time to stand up for your rights. You need to let these people know that this is not what you want for the state of Colorado. Speak up or forever hold your peace.
  • steveinatl, on 06/02/2008, -1/+1Thank God I don't live in Colorado. This is sickening, disgusting, and asinine. All it will do is open the door for the transvestite and pedophile sickos and perverts to have more opportunities to perpertrate more evil. What is wrong with this idiot governor? Has he lost his mind?
    • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1This governor never had a brain...remember that he's a moonbat! I'm glad that I don't live in Colorado either...it's moonbat heaven over there, along with Oregon too. And no, I don't live in Oregon either.
    • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1Bill Ritter never had a mind...he fits the democratic mascot perfectly..a dumb axx!
  • lodibug3, on 06/04/2008, -1/+2So much for that trip to Colorado...but as Dr Dobson said, it's only a matter of time before it comes to my state.
    • MaryanneForever, on 06/10/2008, -0/+1Please see attached link:

      http://www.susans.org/forums/index.php/topic,36563 ...



      Thanks,

      Sincerely,



      Maryanne Arnow
    • michaelmooreon, on 08/11/2008, -0/+1It's going to be coming very fast...I suspect my state of California is next. I just hope that Antonio VivaLaRaza doesn't run for Governor in 2010...he's just as bad a moonbat as Ritter! We need a Hall Of Shame list of Governors...Ritter and Jon Corzine of New Jersey would top the list.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.