What About the Transgender?

trans bathroom signWell we’ve all been hearing about transgenders being allowed to now use the rest room of their choice.  Initially I was just as upset as everyone else. Outraged even. But then I had someone ask me a question. He said – Do you think this is new? Transgenders have already been using the rest rooms of their choice. I felt like Tony DiNozzo after Gibbs smacks him in the head. Of course we have already been sharing the bath rooms with transgenders.  It’s not new. What is new are the laws that are being passed making such a big deal of it that it has caused the outrage we are seeing. I do have to wonder what is the real purpose for making this such an issue now?

As I said, we have already been using restrooms with transgenders. It’s not the fully transgender or even the transitioning transgender that I am concerned with. They see themselves as they are – which is whatever sex they want to be. So if there is a transgender female in the rest room I am no more threatened by them than I am of a lesbian sharing the rest room with me. What I am concerned with are the impostors. The perverts who want to take advantage of the new law and abuse it. That has already happened. What this law has done was not further the rights of a transgender but has caused woman and children (male and female) to be unsafe using a rest room. Let’s take for example the Pennsylvania man who was arrested for allegedly invading the women’s bathroom. According to Snopes this man’s arrest was not related to the new law, his crime was in taking pictures of a minor, which he has been charged with.  But this is splitting hairs. If the law did not allow him to enter the woman’s bathroom then he would not have been in there to take pictures. It is this type of reasoning that will cause us to continue to be faced with the unlawful acts and not solutions. So let’s not keep making excuses but let us begin to acknowledge the main cause of this issue.

We can not have a law that is so loose that it puts people at risk including the transgenders. If anyone can wake up and decide “well today I think I feel like a woman” and wear women’s clothing, that does not make them a woman anymore than my wearing jeans and boots will make me a cowboy. The clothing alone should not dictate which bathroom you use. They are cross dressers, and some still prefer the opposite sex and would never consider transitioning and surgically changing their genital. When I see the male transgenders who have obviously been on hormone therapy and clearly looks male I have to ask myself who are they kidding by trying to take issue with this law? No one is going to do a genital check before they head into the men’s rest room so how are you going to be forced to use the rest room that matches your genitals? You can’t be, so you really have no argument. This would also apply to the female transgender. Who is going to question you when you go into a stall? No one.

The transgenders want to blame the Republicans for trying to force them to use the rest room that matches the sex they were at birth. Well as I said earlier, who can make you do that without going through a genitalia check first – no one can force you to do that. That law is not for the fully transitioned transgender or the transgender in process. It is to reduce the risk of just any man walking into the woman’s rest room claiming to be female. The recent incidents have already justified our need for a law that helps to better clarify who can and who can not use which bathroom. Now the Democrats who have claimed for years that it’s the Republican’s that have this so called war on woman have only proved they are the real culprits. It’s the Democrats that are pushing for anyone claiming to identify as male or female without any qualifiers to use the rest room of their choice. This has clearly set woman and children at risk. So who is it that really has the war on woman?

Eich’s Forced Resignation – A Sad State of Affairs

It’s a sad state of affairs when we live in a society that is so intolerant of personal beliefs. The CEO of Firefox was forced to step down based on a personal contribution to an anti-gay marriage campaign 6 years ago in California.  He has never imposed his personal views in the work place  and since he believed in traditional marriage he wrote a check for $1000.00 to a campaign that was successful, as a large portion of Californians supported Proposition 8. Intolerance  has gone way to far when a company can fire or force out an employee  for no more then their right to exercise their own personal views on a personal level.  Gay and Lesbian groups are claiming he has hurt others by his beliefs.  I ask exactly how has he done that?  He had the same position 6 years ago as Obama.  In fact, Obama’s position changed in 2012, as it was important for him to have the Gay and Lesbian votes to help win his second term as President.   In 2008 Obama openly aired his views on marriage as being between one woman and one man in an interview.  Those views he said were in support of his Christian beliefs.  Yet the gay and lesbian community found no reason NOT to vote for him in 2008.  So it seems to me that the position of the Gay and Lesbian community is based on who they believe supports their Liberal viewpoints and agenda, and anyone who opposed them will be persecuted – except of course for our President – as his Liberal policies suit the Gay and Lesbian agenda.

G&L advocate groups are not satisfied that they have won rights, now they want to marginalize and ostracized anyone who has different views from the society in which they want to create.  Political correctness has gone to far.   We are moving towards a society that we all have to be of the same mind in order to be accepted and successful.  Everyone in constant agreement?  Wow how boring that would be. I have worked for companies that did not share my political or religious views.  Are the days of equal opportunity over?  How can a company claim to be an  equal opportunity employer if they can discriminate against anyone they discover does not share their political views?  Where does that end and how far can that be taken? Will that become a question on an employment application – What is your political affiliation?  Can you be fired or forced to resign if the company you work for does not support your religious or political views if they discovered you supported your faith or political views personally?

This country was founded on religious freedom – which means the right to choose the religion you wish to belong to and worship without fear of ridicule.   It was also founded on inter-woven political and religious policies.  God was very present at all the points of the constitution and the founding of this great country.

We are not and have not prevented the G&L community from working and living. G&L Advocates have spent the last decade fighting for marriage equality and they have now won, I say accept your success and build on your what you have, but that’s not enough. They don’t just want acceptance by the majority, they want to demand that everyone accept them in spite of personal views.

We have seen issues such as with Phil Robinson who supports prayer and traditional marriage be ridiculed by the main stream media.  Of course, Phil was supported unanimously by Christians all across the country and A&E had to change their initial action to remove Phil from the show.  The change in action by A&E only goes to show the power Christians have to affect change.  We now see Firefox taking similar action.

This past month I have purchased a new laptop and I am still in the process of getting documents and software downloaded that I typically use.  I previously used FireFox as a search engine,  I will NOT now use them.  I can not support a company who does not allow employees to have personal views and takes strong action against anyone who they disagree with politically and religiously.

As pointed out by – Charles Krauthammer : Declaring that the forced resignation of Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich is a sign of the “totalitarian impulses on the left,” conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer called for a counter boycott and warned the progressives’ efforts to stamp out thoughts they disagree with “will only get worse if it succeeds.”

Krauthammer was speaking as part of a Fox News panel Friday discussing Eich’s forced resignation from the popular web browser over donations he made to the successful Proposition 8 campaign that banned gay marriage in California until it was overturned by a federal judge. “This is the culture of the left not being satisfied with making an argument, or even prevailing in an argument, but in destroying personally and marginalizing people who oppose them,” he said. “In the same way that proponents of climate change declare the issue closed — it’s over, there’s no debate, it is settled science — and therefore anybody who is skeptical of that is considered anti-science, and is called a denier – in a conscious way to echo that there’s some kind of moral or intellectual equivalent to denying the holocaust.

“In the same way, people are now declaring that the national debate that we’ve had for a decade or two on gay marriage is closed, and anybody who opposes gay marriage is a bigot and should be written out of polite society, ostracized and should lose their jobs,” he continued. “This is totalitarian discourse, and it shows a level of intolerance that is absolutely — it should be unacceptable, and people ought to get what they’re giving out and field a counter-boycott.”

As Christians we need to support our right to worship and  exercise our beliefs and it is important that we stand up and show companies who take pertinacious action against anyone who dares to personally support their beliefs, such as the actions taken by Mozilla and A&E that we will NOT accept that.   That it is nothing more then abuse of power.  I will NOT re-download and use  FireFox as a result of their position but I will instead seek out other services more inline with my views or that exhibit tolerance for my views.