Home Contact Register Subscribe to the Beacon Login

Monday, April 25, 2016

SALLY MORRIS: SEPARATING THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAFF

The recent discussion about public restrooms has separated more than genders – it has separated the liberals from the mugwumps from the conservatives. It turns out that the transgender bathroom debate has revealed who the candidates are and have been all along. In the wake of the big rumble about North Carolina's gender specific bathroom law we have seen all the celebrities weighing in - Bruce Springsteen won't be going to North Carolina any more. On the other hand, outspoken Curt Schilling is willing to take another risk by standing with North Carolina's law. Politicians are all taking a swing. Minnesota's Governor, Mark Dayton, for one, has "banned" travel to North Carolina. Of course the GOP presidential hopefuls had to be interviewed on this, and predictably, Ted Cruz asserted that no way would he approve of his little girls in a public restroom with an adult male. Makes sense. Kasich seemed vague as ever, believes that we just run into problems when we make laws about things, and he "wouldn't have signed" it. Donald Trump is just fine with adult males using the same facilities as little girls, a very typical view for a liberal, which he is. The Governor of Mississippi signed a similar bill into law while the Governor of Georgia vetoed one.
Here, in North Dakota, such controversies might seem remote, but we should not be sanguine. Recently Rob Port interviewed the gubernatorial candidates of all parties on their views. Not surprisingly, Democrat Marvin Nelson was all for people using whatever bathroom they wanted at any given moment. Equally predictably, Libertarian Marty Riske just wants fewer laws and rejects the idea of costly "toilet police". The GOP candidates – there are three of them – also gave their opinions.
Doug Burgum would kick the can down the road to the local jurisdictions and professed to not be very familiar with North Carolina's law. Wayne Stenehjem is seemingly unable to get off the fence. He wants to consider the rights of everyone involved, but he, too, would shoot this down to businesses and local governments. He would not support laws that would "require or mandate choice". Whatever that means.  Do they mean that local jurisdications will be on their own to defend such decisions in federal court?  Or did they think about that?
Paul Sorum thought about both the transgender issue and also about the certainty that tolerating transgender people using restrooms opposite their biology would enable abuse by various kinds of predators. He's right to be concerned about this. We already have enough issues with vice. Child porn is a very serious crime and we need to be sure that we protect our children – and women – from the kind of creep who would take advantage of this. He alone of these candidates has considered that transgender people are also victimized by such predators, in that their issue will be used by them. He made it absolutely clear that he would make it a priority to protect children.
Although his position on this issue is by far the most thoughtful and considered, his opinion that it won't affect North Dakota any time soon is probably overly-optimistic. States which have no such laws on the books are being sued now in federal courts. A challenge to traditional restroom designation in North Dakota will more likely originate with an LGBT-funded lawsuit than through either the state legislature or a referral measure. It is likely to come and soon. So it behooves voters to inform themselves on where, exactly, each candidate stands and weigh it when it's time to vote in June.

Click here to email your elected representatives.

Comments

No Comments Yet

Post a Comment


Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?