Need to Pee in Arizona

[Misato]

I just wish there was a way to shame the places that'd take advantage of this law (Edit: Just noticed I called it a law already.  But single party control, who am I kidding?).  I keep thinking of an on-line registry of places in AZ where trans people have been discriminated against could be reported but, that isn't visible enough. 

But maybe, probably, that isn't the right way to go either.  Maybe we should accentuate the positive.  Places that let us pee in peace could be lauded.  Put a sign in the window with a counter saying, "X many days with transgender people using our bathrooms without incident!"

[Vicky]

The subject of Federal pre-emption via the Interstate Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution is going to bite them big time.  A TG trucker going through the state cannot be required to carry an out of state Birth Certificate, and the first one arrested will be in fat city on violation of Federal law.  Interstate commerce issues apply to anything almost.  Its a fun topic to think about from that point of view. 

[Charley Bea(EmeraldP)]

Sorry for asking being that I am useless when it comes to understanding politics(For which I am mostly grateful) but what does party line vote mean?

[Jamie D]

A "Party line vote" happens when the representatives of one political party vote a certain way, and the members of the other political party(s) vote the opposite way.

[Cindy]

Without in anyway provoking argument, but what is the stated purpose, or reason for the statute/law/proposal. Presumably the person who has drafted the proposal has a statement in why he/she thinks it is needed, so what is that reason? Is it to protect people from cross dressed paedophiles? Is it to prevent 'men in dresses' from leaving the seat up in the ladies loo? And when does it finish? If a person has had surgery (MtF) is she allowed to pee in the ladies or is she in the gents?

I'll leave the issue of FtM peeing to my brothers on the forum - although I'm interested in the reasons to prevent them from having a pee in the gents loo - surely it is not for affecting the delicate nature of other patrons of the gents?!

I speak as a foreigner who sometimes finds the USA a somewhat amusing play pen of dysfunctional political and religious people who often seem to have intense problems with the utterly unimportant matters in life. 

[Jamie D]

I'd disagree again (though I really respect your analysis, Jamie. Hearing your viewpoint is always enlightening and interesting.)

I think lasting gains come from LEADERSHIP.

Most people are accustomed to their leaders helping them make up their minds. The tide really turned on gay marriage, for example, when Obama came out in favor. Societal opinions on civil rights did most of its changing after 1964, when the government took its most significant action.

I have a lot of Catholic friends who excuse their opposition to same-sex marriage by deferring to their religion. When a pope finally decides that children raised by same-sex couples also deserve to have married parents, it will have another tidal wave of support.

Leadership need not take time. Leaders can change their minds very quickly.

I can not argue with the issue of leadership. Your point is well-taken.

Great leaders take the people where they need to be, but don't necessarily want to go.  When I think of truly great, transformational leaders, I think of the likes of Jefferson, or Lincoln, or Churchill.  Unfortunately, I don't any of that caliber around.

[Brooke777]

Arizona House panel OKs softened transgender bill

By BOB CHRISTIE Associated Press
Posted:   03/27/2013 05:09:18 PM EDT

PHOENIX—An Arizona House panel late Wednesday approved a measure targeting transgendered people who want to use bathrooms of the gender they identify with, voting along party lines to advance a bill that protects business owners who bar the practice.
The 7-4 vote concluded an hours-long parade of transgendered and straight people who tried to persuade the panel to oppose Appropriations Committee chairman Rep. John Kavanagh's bill. The crowd broke out in chants of "shame, shame, shame" as the vote on the bill sponsored by the conservative Republican passed.


http://www.eveningsun.com/nationworldnews/ci_22884156/ariz-lawmakers-consider-softened-transgender-bill

[Brooke777]

I guess congratulations are in order for the "Conservative Transgender,"
...and condolences for any TG/TS that does not "pass well in Arizona.....as you dahrling may have to piss you knickers...
so much for "Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"

I wonder how they are going to prove what someones birth gender was? My drivers license says female, so without looking between my legs how will they know?

[Constance]

I wonder how they are going to prove what someones birth gender was? My drivers license says female, so without looking between my legs how will they know?

Well, at least 1 bill indicated that the birth certificate was proof of gender. Can I see a show of hands for all those out there who actually carry their birth certificates with them as part of the ID they carry?

[Charley Bea(EmeraldP)]

I don't know of anyone transgendered or cisgendered that carries their birth certificate around with them, far too risky what if it gets lost? Seriously do politicians ever think with their brains and not their asses?

[Dawn Heart]

I don't see any anti-trans or other anti-anyone bill becoming law for several reasons:

1. Federal Interstate Commerce Laws

2. EEOC / Equal Access Laws / other related formal laws, and case law.

3. The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection of the laws and due process. The state had due process afforded it when a trans person changes their name and gender markers after a court of law grants such motion. To violate the due process and equal protection of laws to someone simply because of an imagined fear about something that "could possibly happen" is not something that holds the weight of legal justification. If it did, everyone in society would become a criminal suspect at all times, and would be subject to living in a midevil totalitarian police regime sort of state. 

4. Cruel and Unusual Punishment at the state and federal levels would also be violated in that telling someone that they have to hold their bodily functions due to the way they look is not only facially unsound in the legal sense, it is something that would place real people in real medical danger. Holding your human waste functions for an unacceptable period of time DOES result in real medical peril!

BTW, FWIW, there IS a recall effort underway to unseat this klown!

[Charley Bea(EmeraldP)]

Unseat I think he should be disbarred he is seriously fast becoming the jack thompson(lawyer) of LGBT world.

I believe it was the 14th amendment that the supreme court judges brought up when the marriage equality argument was brought to them and they basically said "why are we wasting our time on this?"

[Constance]

3. The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection of the laws and due process.

And yet, an argument I hear from anti-LGBTQ persons is that the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to us because what we are is "unnatural."

[Jamie D]

And yet, an argument I hear from anti-LGBTQ persons is that the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to us because what we are is "unnatural."

Don't listen to the nutcases Connie.  Let's look at the text of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution:

14th Amendment, Equal Protection Clause

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The 14th Amendment (adopted in 1868, as a "Reconstruction Amendment) served to apply due process protections to the States.  Prior to that time, the due process protect only applied to federal actions.

The purpose of the Section in the Amendment was to prevent the reconstructed southern states from passing laws, as they had done previously, denying ex-slave and other people of color rights.  Hence the phrasing, "any person ..." rather than "any citizen," or "any white person," or "any male," or "anyone over the age of 21." etc.  "Any Person."

I believe that you, me, and every other poster here are "persons."

Well, at least 1 bill indicated that the birth certificate was proof of gender. Can I see a show of hands for all those out there who actually carry their birth certificates with them as part of the ID they carry?

The article posted by Brooke, above, contained these paragraphs:

The original bill would have made it a crime for a transgendered person to use a bathroom other than his or her birth sex. The new bill instead seeks to shield businesses from civil or criminal liability if they ban people from restrooms that don't match their birth sex....

Kavanagh began the hearing by telling the crowd his original bill went too far, and that he had completely re-written it after hearing criticism, including some from his own caucus in the House.

It seems to me that the deliberative process worked to make needed changes in the proposal.  There is no birth certificate requirement, and no criminal liability in the proposed bill coming out of committee.  Before it becomes law, it would need to be passed by both houses of the Arizona legislation and signed by the Governor.  Still time to voice your concerns.

[Alainaluvsu]

"We're doing it to protect the businesses here! I'm a pro-business kinda guy!  "

"PS Vote for me and I will bring you NEW ICONS!"

[ToriJo]

Would the bill really needed to be passed by both houses, since it already passed the Senate and this is just an amendment?  I don't know how AZ's process works, but might it end up just being a conference committee to reconcile the different "versions" of the bill?

[Alainaluvsu]

Would the bill really needed to be passed by both houses, since it already passed the Senate and this is just an amendment?  I don't know how AZ's process works, but might it end up just being a conference committee to reconcile the different "versions" of the bill?

It has yet to pass the Senate. It passed the committee in which the bill was created. It will move onto the House floor soon for a vote there.

[Jamie D]

Would the bill really needed to be passed by both houses, since it already passed the Senate and this is just an amendment?  I don't know how AZ's process works, but might it end up just being a conference committee to reconcile the different "versions" of the bill?

Both Houses must pass the identical version of the bill.

[Joanna Dark]

Speaking of bathrooms, this guy was elected by a margin of 10,000: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2012/jul/25/richard-floyd-deserves-reelection/

IMO, it appears this is becoming a national issue. Not just some Arizona thing.

EDIT: In the primary, his opponent received 782 votes to his 7,862. Ironically, Brandon Teena's dream was to get to Nashville, where apparently stomping a trans person for using the bathroom gets you alot of votes. Stomping is his word not mine. He said it. he did receive some backlash but I consider 7,000 to 700 a landslide and huge endorsement for his views. For the record, he doesn't consider stomping a trans person to be violent and he is the victim of trans people.