The Right to Privacy and Anti-Discrimination Bills



via



Most of us are willing to allow others the right to make their own choices, even if we don’t agree with those choices. New legislative trends concerning discrimination, however, are inviting absurd unintended consequences and are denying the right to privacy assured us under our Constitution.

Such is the case with the anti-discrimination legislation emerging in several states; for example, SB-262 in Utah’s 2013 legislative session. While on the surface these laws appear benevolent, the legal implications of such legislation open Pandora’s Box, bringing consequences never intended by those who naively sponsor the bills. Our state and federal constitutions already prohibit discrimination; additional legislation is unnecessary. We need only enforce the laws we have.

Read excerpts below from a Wall Street Journal article about the unintended consequences of similar legislation in Massachusetts. Note that the rights of the many are being destroyed to cater to the feelings of the few. Such matters bring an air of absurdity to the entire legislative process, leaving many of us feeling that the world has been turned upside down.

 via

 

Make Way for Transgender High School
'Gender identity' trumps any squeamishness girls might feel about sharing bathrooms with boys.

By JAMES P. EHRHARD

On July 1, 2012, a law went into effect in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts titled "An Act Relative to Gender Identity”, commonly termed "transgender." Transgender students are those whose assigned birth sex doesn't match their "internalized sense of their gender," the directive says, and they "range in the ways in which they identify as male, female, some combination of both, or neither." Therefore, "the responsibility for determining a student's gender identity rests with the student." (note: in past, a person’s gender identity has rested with his or her  physical characteristics.)

The new law's strongest proponents estimated that no more than 33,000 people would come under the umbrella of those having "gender identity" concerns. That means the statute was rewritten to cover 0.51% of the state's population (6,464,144 as of July 2012, according to the U.S. Census Bureau), even though advocates for the change were never able to show evidence of widespread transgender discrimination. The need for this addition to the antidiscrimination law was never clear. The existing statute appeared to apply to every citizen of Massachusetts who could conceivably be the object of discrimination. "Sexual orientation" was already on the menu.

 There was always a hint of the absurd in the movement for "An Act Relative to Gender Identity."  The 11-page directive, released on Feb. 15, reads like it was written by someone who believes that anatomical and biological differences between the sexes are about as significant as the differences between individuals in shoe size or hair color.

Some of the highlights include allowing transgendered and gender-questioning students to use the bathrooms of their choice or to play on sports teams that correspond to the gender with which they identify. Under the…guidelines, a 16-year-old high-school junior who says that he believes he is a girl has the right to use the girls bathroom and locker room. (But before boys who are unconfused about their gender get any bright ideas, the guidelines are ready: The transgender feelings must be "sincerely held." School staff can challenge anyone who seems to be making the assertion for "some improper purpose.") If a female student feels uncomfortable and objects to the boy's presence when she is in the bathroom, the rules say, the complaint "is not a reason to deny access to the transgender student." (note: the rights of 0.51% of the population now take precedence over the rights of the 99.49%).

It is a given that nearly all teenage girls will feel deeply uncomfortable having an anatomical male of any sort using the same bathroom or locker-room shower. That is the reality of human life, and no young woman should be forced to endure such embarrassment. As for an anatomical but transgender girl showering in the boys locker room, that hardly bears contemplating.

…what the guidelines don't recognize is that it is impossible to erase the differences between the sexes, even if a politically connected few would wish it so. It is entirely possible, though, to erase common sense and replace it with a policy that gives transgender students more rights and privileges than their classmates.

*Mr. Ehrhard, the owner of the law firm Ehrhard & Associates, P.C., in Worcester, Mass, is an elected member of the Tantasqua (Sturbridge, Mass.) Regional District School Committee.

- Pam