Jump to content
Login with your Gmail HERE and start posting in seconds! ×
Don't just read! Be part of the Community! Join the conversation ×








White House signals reversal in transgender bathroom policy

webfact

By webfact
in World News

 Share

Recommended Posts

webfact Grand Master Member

webfact

Posted
Posted

White House signals reversal in transgender bathroom policy

By Daniel Trotta

REUTERS

 

r1.jpg

A sign protesting a recent North Carolina law restricting transgender bathroom access is seen in the bathroom stalls at the 21C Museum Hotel in Durham, North Carolina May 3, 2016. REUTERS/Jonathan Drake/File photo

 

(Reuters) - The White House on Tuesday signaled it was preparing to reverse a U.S. policy on transgender rights, raising concern among rights advocates that Republican President Donald Trump is about to revoke a signature initiative of his predecessor.

 

Former Democratic President Barack Obama's administration issued guidance to public schools last May to allow transgender students to use bathrooms matching their gender identity, a move transgender people hailed as a civil rights victory.

 

Asked at a news briefing about concerns the government would reverse the guidance, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said Trump believed the matter was an issue for the states to decide, which is contrary to the Obama stance.

 

"All you have to do is look at what the president's view has been for a long time, that this is not something that the federal government should be involved in, that this is a states' rights issue," Spicer said, adding that the Justice and Education departments would have "further guidance" at an unspecified time.

 

Legal advocates for transgender people say federal law and the civil rights of Americans are legally enforced by the federal government, as was born out during the civil rights movement of the 1960s that led to legal equality for African-Americans.

 

"Enforcement of federal civil rights law is not a states' rights issue. Full stop," said Rachel Tiven, chief executive of Lambda Legal, which defends lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people.

 

The federal law in question, known as Title IX, bans sex discrimination in education. But it remains unsettled whether Title IX protections extend to a person's gender identity. The U.S. Supreme Court could settle the issue in a case due to be argued in March.

 

Thirteen states led by Texas used a states' rights defense in a lawsuit against the Obama administration over its transgender bathroom guidance. That lawsuit would be rendered moot if Trump to were to reverse the Obama policy.

 

(Reporting by Daniel Trotta; Editing by Jonathan Oatis)

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-02-22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

tpaul1 Newbie

tpaul1

Posted
Posted

so why should the state be any more involved than the federal government? Why would they be able to make a better judgement on what is violating or not the rights of a person in such a case? Some Americans still think they are in the 19th century!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nothing to see hear (pee here?). Just trump caving to his anti-LGBT civil rights base.

 

Pretty much the moment trump was inaugurated, LGBT civil rights language was DELETED from the white house web page.

 

This is no surprise. Look at the history of his V.P. Pence, the most anti-LGBT civil rights V.P. in U.S. history. 

 

Pro civil rights Americans aren't going to take this sitting down --

 

 

Edited by Jingthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted (edited)

The is ultimately what the right wing tactic is for marriage equality. If they get 2 or 3 SCOTUS picks they have a chance of taking marriage equality to the states. That would create a nightmare patchwork of legal problems in so many ways, including federal recognition, which they might potentially end. State marriage without federal recognition is almost totally worthless. What happens when a married couple in one state moves to another state where their marriage doesn't exist? trump may have said marriage equality is settled law, but he will pick anti LGBT civil rights SCOTUS judges that have the power to change settled law towards inequality. 

Edited by Jingthing
Link to comment
Share on other sites
alanrchase Gold Member

alanrchase

Posted
Posted

30 years ago it was a bit of a shocker when a woman was mopping the floor in the gents toilet at Don Muang. Took all of 5 seconds to get over. Seen various "ladies" in gents toilets since. As far as I know nothing to see in ladies toilets, never been. The bigger shock is an old man that wanders into young girls changing rooms just because he owns the pageant.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
otherstuff1957 Platinum Member

otherstuff1957

Posted
Posted

Marriage equality?  About 70 years ago my mother was a student at UC Santa Barbara.  Two of her friends decided to get married, but had a small problem.  He was black and she was white and that kind of intermarriage was illegal in California.  They had to drive up to Oregon to get married.

 

So, are we* going to go back to the days when a serious life choice is illegal in one state and legal in another?  We are all citizens of the same country and should have the same rights no matter where we live.

 

*those of us who are from the US, that is. :smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, otherstuff1957 said:

Marriage equality?  About 70 years ago my mother was a student at UC Santa Barbara.  Two of her friends decided to get married, but had a small problem.  He was black and she was white and that kind of intermarriage was illegal in California.  They had to drive up to Oregon to get married.

 

So, are we* going to go back to the days when a serious life choice is illegal in one state and legal in another?  We are all citizens of the same country and should have the same rights no matter where we live.

 

*those of us who are from the US, that is. :smile:

Yes, there are direct parallels between the two cases:

https://goodmenproject.com/arts/the-loving-case-paved-the-way-for-marriage-equality-now-its-a-great-movie-too-wat/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alanrchase Gold Member

alanrchase

Posted
Posted
Marriage equality?  About 70 years ago my mother was a student at UC Santa Barbara.  Two of her friends decided to get married, but had a small problem.  He was black and she was white and that kind of intermarriage was illegal in California.  They had to drive up to Oregon to get married.
 
So, are we* going to go back to the days when a serious life choice is illegal in one state and legal in another?  We are all citizens of the same country and should have the same rights no matter where we live.
 
*those of us who are from the US, that is.[emoji2]


On issues such as you describe I think Donald would prefer to shirk any responsibility. Leave it up to each state. For such a "tough" man he actually has no b@$#s. I think Ivanka may keep them in her pocket.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted

trump is currently out to gut financial regulations that include non-discrimination language for LGBT for things like BANK LENDING (for consumer purchases and businesses). Another sneaky way to DEGRADE LGBT civil rights that the trumpists voted for, although a minority of the American people, they now have almost all the power. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
timendres Platinum Member

timendres

Posted
Posted

This is how America works. Groups come into power, and they push legislation in their direction. When they push too far, they are voted out of power and the pendulum swings the other way. Eventually, I believe, we find the most optimal point. It is never 100% for all people. That's life in a democracy. These changes do not occur in months or years. The biggest changes take generations. It is never enough to simply enact legislation. You must change the minds and hearts of the people as well. This takes time.

 

In my opinion, the LGBT community has made enormous progress in reasonably good time. I sometimes feel that they are trying to move too fast on too many fronts. With proper management of the message, patient education, and strategic legislation, each successive generation becomes more enlightened and progress is made at a pace that is more sustainable. Pushing too hard too fast can sometimes backfire, causing otherwise supportive groups to back away.

 

Personally, I prefer the original constitution putting Federal power at the bottom, under local and state power. The "one size fits all" approach of Federal legislation is often the least effective and most onerous governance. Unfortunately, in the modern age, more and more things do need to be dealt with at the Federal level. In this case of Trump and toilets, really, this is not something the Federal government should be wasting it's time with. Leave it to the States. Let people vote with their feet. That is the beauty of the USA. Over time, States that stick with ignorance will lose the best and the brightest, and will be forced to adapt to survive - or not. On the other hand, marriage is a significantly complex problem that may be ill suited to be left to the States.

 

Leaving things to the States is often a better model. Think about it. If every gay-hating moron moved to one State, and the rest of the people could live without them in their midst, would that be such a bad result? The haters can live in ignorant blissful isolation, and gay folks know where not to live. (obviously, that is a gross over simplification made for illustrative purposes) This is the genius of the USA, letting people find a way to live that makes them happy, while letting the others find their way. If we try to pack everyone into the same box, we will just end up with a lot of unhappiness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alanrchase Gold Member

alanrchase

Posted
Posted
Go Liberals! 
 
Keep up the fight to get trannies in the girls bath room!  
 
Republicans win at least 6 states on this one. 
 
Thanks


Who cares who is in the bathroom? College kids having a laugh? Perverts are perverts and it would seem th US president is one.

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
timendres
 
Good post, totally agree. Each state should have greater say and then let the people choose which system they want to live in.  I think the USA would function much better under that system.

You wouldn't like it so much if your marriage was legally meaningless at the federal level. It's so easy to be callous about other people's civil rights. I get it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dunroaming Gold Member

dunroaming

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Jingthing said:


You wouldn't like it so much if your marriage was legally meaningless at the federal level. It's so easy to be callous about other people's civil rights. I get it.

My marriage is legally meaningless.  We got married in Thailand and it is not recognised by the UK.  But I don't see you're point.  I am in favour of State control rather than federal control.  With Trump at the helm he will try to destroy peoples rights on a federal level.  Surely taking away that power is a good thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
My marriage is legally meaningless.  We got married in Thailand and it is not recognised by the UK.  But I don't see you're point.  I am in favour of State control rather than federal control.  With Trump at the helm he will try to destroy peoples rights on a federal level.  Surely taking away that power is a good thing?
Horrible in the case of marriage equality. Sorry you don't get it. Maybe read up on the mess when some states had marriage equality and no federal recognition. You're not American and you have strong feelings about the details of state/federal stuff in the U. S.? Odd.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dunroaming Gold Member

dunroaming

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Horrible in the case of marriage equality. Sorry you don't get it. Maybe read up on the mess when some states had marriage equality and no federal recognition. You're not American and you have strong feelings about the details of state/federal stuff in the U. S.? Odd.

I am not American and maybe that is why I take a simplistic approach.  I may be wrong and that is why I rely on the American posters to put me straight when I get it wrong.  To me it seems straightforward but things in US politics seldom are.

 

As for the marriage thing it really doesn't bother us at all. We don't seek any support from benefits and as far as our friends and family are concerned we are a married couple.  We share the same surname and the rings are on the appropriate fingers.  More importantly with our son we are a real family and we don't need the UK's stamp of approval for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alanrchase Gold Member

alanrchase

Posted
Posted
My marriage is legally meaningless.  We got married in Thailand and it is not recognised by the UK.  But I don't see you're point.  I am in favour of State control rather than federal control.  With Trump at the helm he will try to destroy peoples rights on a federal level.  Surely taking away that power is a good thing?



My understanding of weed in the US is that it is legal in certain states. Federally it is illegal. Money made from weed is possibly legal in a State but if it is deposited in a bank may be illigal due to federal legislation! Good idea to let states regulate but where do you stand on conflicts?

Sent from my SM-A500F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jingthing Legendary Member

Jingthing

Posted
Posted
I am not American and maybe that is why I take a simplistic approach.  I may be wrong and that is why I rely on the American posters to put me straight when I get it wrong.  To me it seems straightforward but things in US politics seldom are.

 

As for the marriage thing it really doesn't bother us at all. We don't seek any support from benefits and as far as our friends and family are concerned we are a married couple.  We share the same surname and the rings are on the appropriate fingers.  More importantly with our son we are a real family and we don't need the UK's stamp of approval for that.

Yeah you don't understand. Nothing to do with your personal situation. If you moved to the UK you could marry if there was a legal need to. Anyway marriage equality won but now under trump there is a threat to it. This is too off topic anyway. We'll debate this if trump ever gets two or three picks.

States are good for trying things out but ultimately you need federal laws. Pot may be legal in your state but the feds if they choose can still make arrests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...