Press Release: FHA Action Responds to House Bill 1008 Veto

@SoDakCampaigns

FHA Action Responds to House Bill 1008 Veto

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Wednesday, March 02, 2016

Amidst the Super Tuesday drama, another drama was almost quietly sputtering to a conclusion. As folks across the country waited to see if Governor Daugaard would sign the landmark HB1008 into law, emotions have run pretty hot in South Dakota. The aim of this bill was as well-meaning and void of malice as it was accommodating for people on both sides of the issue. It genuinely sought to address what likely is going to be a prolonged debate in the not-so-distant future in our state. The question at hand is this: should transgender elementary and secondary public school students be allowed to shower and use the restrooms with students of the opposite sex. The State House voted to mandate that instead, it would be incumbent on the schools to accommodate the transgender individual in a respectful and decent manner. The State Senate agreed. Unfortunately, Governor Daugaard did not concur, vetoing the bill late in the day on Tuesday, March 1. We sincerely believe that the Governor missed an opportunity to get out in front of this issue and help accommodate both sides in a peaceful and respectful manner. We appreciate the seventy-eight Legislators who stood on principle and voted in support of HB1008. We are thankful to all those who called or emailed their Legislators and the Governor asking for support, and for all those on both sides of the debate who opted for civil discourse in the discussion of this issue.

Sincerely Yours,

Dale A. Bartscher
Executive Director
Family Heritage Alliance Action

###

78 thoughts on “Press Release: FHA Action Responds to House Bill 1008 Veto”

      1. What embarrassment? South Dakota isn’t alone on this. A dozen state legislatures are grappling with this very same issue. No one has a right to impose their confused ideas on gender on others, especially in bathrooms and showers when people are most vulnerable. No one except the feds. What a world.

        1. Cliff,

          No one is forcing anything on anyone in regards to the high school association policy. If in the small chance and it is a very small chance there is a transgender child in that school his or her parents will be working with the coaches, teachers, administration, mental health professional, possibly a clergy member will be looking for the least threatening and disruptive way to go about this.

          This is supposed to be respectful and safe for all parties involved including other students and their parents if a concern is raised.

          Every situation will be different in regards to the local dynamics, the child who is transgender. Even the intensity of those going thru this is different.

          It gives the local school system and all parties involved the ability to handle each situation differently and make accommodations when needed.

          1. Lynn…

            I appreciate your thoughtful response. Please consider, though, all the interactions that schools, parents, coaches and students have to go through to accommodate that tiny population of boys who think they’re girls and girls who think they’re boys. That sounds more like indulgence, not respect.

            The law acknowledged biology as the final word when it comes to locker rooms and restrooms. I’m truly stumped how that harms anyone.

            1. Speaking as someone who has had a trans student in their class and after school activities, accommodating the few students is not an issue. My colleagues, parents, and students have figured this out ten years ago without anyone’s help.

              What is an issue is a bunch of self-deluded armchair warriors proclaiming to be more knowledgeable than the APA and AMA spouting utter nonsense. HB 1008 was a wholly unnecessary effort that wasted time and political capital on an intrusive nanny-state policy. Local control is far more capable handling these issues than a group of far-removed individuals preoccupied with increasingly improbable what-if scenarios.

              1. The reason the Legislature acted was in response to a 2014 federal memo that indicated they would consider it a breach of Title IX by schools anytime a transgender complaint was made. The state has resources to deal with this, more so than individual school districts.

                The law was to provide a boundary to keep the outrageous expectations — those that California schools have dealt with poorly because, unlike you and your school, they haven’t “figured it out” — of some in check. Because when boys shower with girls and go into the girls bathrooms — and vice versa — well, what could go wrong?

            2. BTW, the feds in fact will force schools to let students make the choice where they shower and what bathroom to use at the school when there’s a complaint by a transgender boy or girl. It’s a civil rights violation in their eyes.

  2. The real loser in all of this is Scott Craig and the FHA.

    Had Craig not caved on taxes the transgender bill would have been signed on a deal. Instead the FHA showed no political skill and was schooled by the governor.

    The conservative movement was derailed from within by not showing strength.

    I love Scott Craig but he cost sd this with his indecisiveness.

  4. FHA is nothing more than a purveyor of hate and bigotry in the guise of Christianity. Shame on them.

    1. Since when did using science & genetics become hate & bigoted?

      A: When you’re advocating anti-scientific ideas.

            1. I’ll try one more time.

              Crossgrain; please tell us the biological and/or genetic markers for transsexualism.

              waiting….

              1. I already linked you to the relevant articles in a previous thread. It’s not my fault you won’t read them…. I assume because you would rather have another game of “gotcha”. If I link but one example, you’ll quick google it and think that by finding some small flaw to that one example, you’ll therefore be vindicated in your insular bigoted worldview, rather than considering the entire body of evidence.

                I won’t be party to your intellectual laziness. If you’re truly interested, GO LEARN.

                1. According to the info you previously provided, transsexualism was largely the result of one’s environment & upbringing–i.e., it was NOT biological or genetic.

                  Are you maintaining that position?

                2. –in your insular bigoted worldview

                  Being “intellectual lazy” & and “bigoted”, surely you, as a master teacher, have the information for the biological & genetic markers for transsexualism.

                  Or are you not conceding there is no known biological or genetic basis/es for transsexualism?

                  Or are you admitting you don’t really know the science behind transsexualism, but you jumped on the bandwagon because you’re so enlightened?

                    1. So, you have no personal knowledge on the biological or genetic bases for transsexualism?

                      “Google” is not a gene, pal!

                      There you have it folks, like the Westboro gang, crossgrain simply places his faith in a god called google, but he can’t tell us anything about that god.

                      Being as informed as he claims to be, surely crossgrain can teach us about the biological & genetic bases for transsexualism.

                      Bigots like crassgrain rarely care for science, let alone understand it.

  5. The most dangerous place in school for a boy-who-thinks-he’s-a-girl is in the locker room with the girls’ basketball team.
    The most dangerous place in school for a girl-who-thinks-she’s-a-boy is in the locker room with the boys football team.
    The bill required the schools to provide safety and privacy. With the veto, they won’t even have to rent a port-a-potty for these kids

    1. Please! Come on! Stop the hype! What is amazing is that the kids are way ahead of the parents in all this. If an issue arises it will be dealt with in a very low key and sensitive way.

  6. So much is made of the supposed fact that the children are all fine with so-called transgender children using the bathrooms of their choice, but the truth is that any children who oppose it have been bullied into silence and fear repercussions by their classmates and, worse yet, the school administrators who will discipline them for what the administrators and teachers will call hate speech. Silencing opposition has been the true aim of the ant-bullying campaign. If you walk through a school, you will not go more than 10-15 yards without seeing an anti-bullying sign or poster. The indoctrination is reminiscent of totalitarian regimes.

  7. We see the “bullying” right in this thread with the reference to Hiltler “doctor” Mengele and who in the other other thread called every person who opposed his position a bigot and filled with hatred.

    Going to the bathroom is a private act done in a semi-private place to be done as discretely and quickly as possible. Going to different bathrooms isn’t about how one feels about oneself. Its about body parts. And bathrooms are designed to accommodate those body parts doing what they are designed to do.

    Personally, I don’t give a rip if a person stands next to me with parts like mine is gay. But, I don’t want a person with different parts using the stall designed for those with male parts to do a particular type of business because the allocation of capacity was done under an assumption of the quantity that type of business is to be done. Similarly, I suspect those with different body parts (confirmed in conversation) don’t want a person taking up their stall doing more slowly what can be done next door more quickly because they have enough “line” problems.

    Some matters aren’t political or about feelings. Some matters are simple biology/body parts doing what one wishes could be done in complete privacy. Drowning out the discussion with cries of bigotry or the like is simple bullying.

    1. Paint it however you want to help you sleep. End of the day: your morality is out of step with modern thought on human sexuality and identity. Too bad if your morality marginalizes some poor “abnormal” kid trying to take a leak, right?

      1. –with modern thought on human sexuality and identity.

        It would be nice if you were to EDUCATE us not-so-modern thinkers on this modern thought, like where are the biological & genetic markers for transsexualism?

        Please, just tells us in your own, well-thought out modern thoughts.

        Otherwise, you’re no better that Westboro zealots or the bullies that you claim to abhor.

        1. My own thoughts are that there is sufficient evidence pointing to biological and genetic factors which play a role in gender identity.

          Clear enough?

          I base those thoughts on some of the following research, much of which I have at least read the abstracts of, and have delved into some more than others. I admit that since I am neither a trained researcher nor a geneticist, that my grasp of all the minutia may be somewhat lacking for such an esteemed globally recognized expert such as yourself. But just as I’m also not a rocket scientist, I still firmly believe we have actually landed on the moon, and that the earth really does revolve around the sun:

          Balen, Adam H., et al. “Polycystic ovaries are a common finding in untreated female to male transsexuals.” Clinical Endocrinology 38.3 (1993): 325-329.

          Bao, Ai-Min and Swaab, Dick F. “Sexual differentiation of the human brain: Relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders” Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology 32 (2011): 214–226.

          Berglund, H. et al. “Male-to-Female Transsexuals Show Sex-Atypical Hypothalamus Activation When Smelling Odorous Steroids” Cerebral Cortex 18 (August, 2008): 1900—1908.

          Cantor, James M. “New MRI Studies Support the Blanchard Typology of Male-to-Female Transsexualism” Arch Sex Behav 40 (2011): 863–864.

          Coolidge, Frederick L., Linda L. Thede, and Susan E. Young. “The heritability of gender identity disorder in a child and adolescent twin sample.” Behavior Genetics 32.4 (2002): 251-257.

          Dessens, Arianne B., et al. “Prenatal exposure to anticonvulsants and psychosexual development.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 28.1 (1999): 31-44.

          Dorner, Gunter, et al. “Genetic and Epigenetic Effects on Sexual Brain Organization Mediated by Sex Hormones.” Neuroendocrinology Letters 22.6 (2001): 403-409.

          Emory, Lee E., et al. “Anatomic variation of the corpus callosum in persons with gender dysphoria.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 20.4 (1991): 409-417.

          Fontanari, Anna-Martha V. et al. “Serum concentrations of brain-derived neurotrophic factor in patients with gender identity disorder” Journal of Psychiatric Research (2013): 1-3 (advance copy).

          Futterweit, Walter, Richard A. Weiss, and Richard M. Fagerstrom. “Endocrine evaluation of forty female-to-male transsexuals: Increased frequency of polycystic ovarian disease in female transsexualism.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 15.1 (1986): 69-78.

          Gooren, Louis “The biology of human psychosexual differentiation” Hormones and Behavior 50 (2006): 589–601.

          Green, Richard, and Eric B. Keverne. “The disparate maternal aunt–uncle ratio in male transsexuals: an explanation invoking genomic imprinting.” Journal of Theoretical Biology 202.1 (2000): 55-63.

          Green, Richard. “Family cooccurrence of “gender dysphoria”: Ten sibling or parent–child pairs.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 29.5 (2000): 499-507.

          Haraldsen, I. R. et al. “Sex-sensitive cognitive performance in untreated patients with early onset gender identity disorder” Psychoneuroendocrinology 28 (2003): 906–915.

          Hare, Lauren et al. “Androgen Receptor Repeat Length Polymorphism Associated with Male-to-Female Transsexualism” Biol Psychiatry 65.1 (January 1, 2009): 93–96.

          Hengstschläger, Markus, et al. “Sex chromosome aberrations and transsexualism.” Fertility and sterility 79.3 (2003): 639-640.

          Hines, Melissa, Charles Brook, and Gerard S. Conway. “Androgen and psychosexual development: Core gender identity, sexual orientation, and recalled childhood gender role behavior in women and men with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH).” Journal of Sex Research 41.1 (2004): 75-81.

          Italiano, M. “Comment on Cantor” Arch Sex Behav 41 (2012):1079.

          Khandelwal, Ashish et al. “A 47,XXY Female with Gender Identity Disorder” Arch Sex Behav 39 (2010):1021–1023.

          Kruijver, Frank P. M. et al. “Male-to-Female Transsexuals Have Female Neuron Numbers in a Limbic Nucleus” The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 85.5 (2000): 2034-2041.

          Ku, Hsiao-Lun et al. “Brain Signature Characterizing the Body-Brain-Mind Axis of Transsexuals” PLOS ONE 8.7 (July, 2013).

          Lentini, E. et al. “Sex Differences in the Human Brain and the Impact of Sex Chromosomes and Sex Hormones” Cerebral Cortex 23 (October, 2013): 2322-2336.

          Luders, Eileen et al. “Regional gray matter variation in male-to-female transsexualism” Neuroimage 46.4 (July 15, 2009): 904–907.

          Meyenburg, Bernd, and Volkmar Sigusch. “Kallmann’s Syndrome and Transsexualism.” Archives of Sexual Behavior 30.1 (2001): 75-81.

          Meyer-Bahlburg, Heino FL. “Transsexualism (“Gender Identity Disorder”)–A CNS-Limited Form of Intersexuality?.” Hormonal and Genetic Basis of Sexual Differentiation Disorders and Hot Topics in Endocrinology: Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference. Springer New York, 2011.

          Oh, Seok-Kyun et al. “Brain Activation in Response to Visually Evoked Sexual Arousal in Male-to-Female Transsexuals: 3.0 Tesla Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging” Korean J Radiol 2012;13(3):257-264

          Rametti, Giuseppina et al. “White matter microstructure in female to male transsexuals before cross-sex hormonal treatment. A diffusion tensor imaging study” Journal of Psychiatric Research 45 (2011): 199-204.

          Rametti, Giuseppina et al. “Effects of androgenization on the white matter microstructure of female-to-male transsexuals. A diffusion tensor imaging study” Psychoneuroendocrinology 37 (2012): 1261—1269.

          Sabalis, Robert F. et al. “The Three Sisters: Transsexual Male Siblings” Am J Psychiatry 131 (August 8, 1974): 907-909.

          Sadeghi, Majid, and Ali Fakhrai. “Transsexualism in female monozygotic twins: A case report.” Australasian Psychiatry 34.5 (2000): 862-864.

          Savic, Ivanka and Arver, Stefan. “Sex Dimorphism of the Brain in Male-to-Female Transsexuals” Cerebral Cortex 21 (November, 2011): 2525—2533.

          Swaab, D.F. “Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relevance for gender identity, transsexualism and sexual orientation” Gynecol Endocrinol 19 (2004): 301–312.

          Yokota, Y. et al. “Callosal Shapes at the Midsagittal Plane: MRI Differences of Normal Males, Normal Females, and GID” Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology 27th Annual Conference Shanghai, China, September 1-4, 2005.

          Zhou, Jiang-Ning, et al. “A Sex Difference in the Human Brain and its Relation to Transsexuality.” Nature 378.6552 (1995): 68-70.

          Zubiaurre-Elorza, Leire et al. “Cortical Thickness in Untreated Transsexuals” Cerebral Cortex Advance Access, published August 31, 2012.

          Zucker, Kenneth J., et al. “Psychosexual development of women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia.” Hormones and Behavior 30.4 (1996): 300-318.

          There are other articles of course, and several of the articles listed above actually refute some of the genetics of earlier gender identity studies. See, rather than cherry pick a single argument or paper or bit of info to play silly “GOTCHA” games as is your wont, I prefer to consider that the available evidence provides a reasonable conclusion that there’s something going on in the brain and psychology of human gender, and that they’re not simply “choosing” to be transgender because “SATAN!”

          1. What this show is that you can copy & paste from

            http://transascity.org/the-transgender-brain/

            Not only are you NOT a rocket scientist, you’re a slacker.

            Just admit it–you’ve READ NONE of those “studies”.

            By simply copying & pasting, you again are no better than the Westboro folks who simply quote from the Bible without ever having read the whole thing.

            How does it feel to be just like the Westboro zealots?

            1. Yeah, that’s the list. That’s the site that probably had more impact on my way of thinking than any other. It’s comprehensive, well written, and takes into account BOTH sides of the argument. I don’t go in much for anecdotal evidence, or cherry-picking data or arguments.

              It’s clear to me that you’d much rather obfuscate and strawman your way out of having to refute overwhelming piles of evidence than to have any substantive discussion, so… refute the list, the site, and the science, or shut the hell up.

          2. Unlike you lazy crossbrain, I can tell you EXACTLY where to find the genetic markers for maleness and femaleness–that was the scientific basis for the vetoed bill.

            Why can’t you do the same for transsexualism?

            1. Exactly? Seriously? Holy crap! Somebody call the Nobel Prize committee, because the science is FAR from settled on an all-encompassing understanding of gender… ESPECIALLY in that gender identity can be traced to an EXACT location/function in the brain.

          3. You probably don’t remember the story of David Reimer.

            http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/May/13/ln/ln52a.html

            The scientific/medical/psychological experts at Johns Hopkins ( like those whom you place your religious faith in) told his family to believe in and follow their “modern thoughts”.

            He too committed suicide, but not because he was or could be or wanted to be transsexual, but because the experts said he SHOULD be transsexual.

            Talk about bullying…

            1. Yeah. Good thing that nobody is trying to force a particular gender on anyone because that could lead to bullying and bad outcomes.

              Oh wait.

      2. — End of the day: your morality is out of step with modern thought on human sexuality and identity

        See ,there’s your problem cb.

        Your WEIRD obsession with sexuality in a discussion about the biological functions of defecating & urinating.

        Why are you OBSESSED with sex, crossbrain?

        SD Legis/Troy/Governor/me are all talking about poopy, and you’re making the jump to sex–why is that?

        Why are you OBSESSED with sex, crossbrain?

        1. If it’s just poop, why does it matter what room you do it in, as long as there are facilities within said room to handle the poop?

            1. Wait… modesty and culture? What do modesty and culture have to do with the biological function of pooping? Pick a lane.

  8. Crossgrain, paint this as a morality or identity issue all you want. Nothing I’ve said is about morality (right and wrong) and is purely mechanical about body parts doing a job they are designed to do except for your introduction of Mengele into the discussion as a clear effort to bully while pretending in your own mind you have moral superiority.

    1. If it’s all just “purely mechanical”, why don’t we have separate stalls to sneeze in? Your morality and modesty definitely dictate your stance, and just where do those factors emanate from?

      Funny how you can feel so “bullied” by a Hitler reference, yet have no problem bullying transgender students into having to pretend they’re something they’re not. You’re not a victim, Troy.

      1. –If it’s all just “purely mechanical”, why don’t we have separate stalls to sneeze in?

        If sneezing exposed genitalia, you’d have a point, Modern Thinker.

        Otherwise, you’re off-base.

        Try again.

      2. –yet have no problem bullying transgender students into having to pretend they’re something they’re not.

        No one is bullying anyone, CB. NO ONE. Except maybe you and your ongoing refusals to inform us of the scientific bases for transsexualism.

        –You’re not a victim, Troy.

        And males dressed as females, or feeling they are females, who are required to use the male restroom are not victims either.

        1. Forcing gender roles on people, as evidenced by your links to David Reimer, will lead to poor outcomes.

          1. But that’s what the experts/scientists/psychologist told them was the Truth.

            And you’re relying on the same folks, using the same rationale.

            1. And here’s the danger of cherry-picking sources and using anecdotal evidence. Consider the whole body of research on this, yeah?

  9. Crossgrain,

    Nice try. Personally, I couldn’t give a rip if we had one big restroom. I spent a lot of time on a farm where this wasn’t done with modesty. What you fail to recognize (and thus cast wide aspersions) is that there is a large segment of the population considers this a private act and expect accommodation for their views on modesty and sanitation.

    Regarding the Hitler reference, it is an argument used by the weak-minded to impugn opponents views and an aggregation of three logic fallacies commonly called Reductio ad Hitlerum or “playing the Nazi card” to derail arguments, because such comparisons distract because the comparison to Hitler becomes the substance of the discussion instead of the issue at hand.

    Argumentum ad hominem: Attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly.

    Argumentum ad misericordiam: The logic fallacy in which someone tries to win support for an argument or idea by exploiting his or her opponent’s feelings of pity or guilt. It is a specific kind of appeal to emotion.

    Guilt by association: An inductive informal fallacy of the type hasty generalization or red herring to link a view to a person/thought that is generally repulsive (in this case Hitler).

    1. LOL

      The question was asked since when did science become hate. I answered with a perfectly good example of what happens when those two ideas are juxtaposed. It was a stupid question, and it got a stupid answer.

      Next time that same stupid question is asked, I’ll just go with Unit 731 so as not to lump you in with Nazis.

  10. Crossgrain,

    The Nazi’s hated. Its that simple. They manipulated everything they could to serve their hatred. There was no reputable science behind their hatred.

    And, try to get people to buy into your delusional agenda that bodily functions are somehow about gender identity, it is ludicrous. A person with women parts who identifies as a man still has to go to a gynecologist for a pap smear and a person with man parts who identifies as a woman still has watch their PSA.

    Not so long ago, people said “before long, we will fighting about this with regard to bathrooms.” Your crowd said those people were paranoid nuts. I agreed because this going to the bathroom isn’t about anything for which we can be made equal short of surgery. It was about body parts doing what they are designed to do in order to continue to live in the immediate short-term.

    I was proven wrong and those people weren’t paranoid nuts. There is no line or reason to your agenda.

    1. The crux of the whole damn argument is that this is an issue that can and SHOULD be handled on an individual basis at the local level, where transgender students, teachers, other students, parents, counselors, doctors, and community can reach a workable solution. Keep your big government hands out of my pants, and quit trying to legislate morality.

  11. Crossgrain,

    Well, that is progress. So, we can ignore all your other silly arguments and logic fallacies? And, when we argue something is a matter of local control or not the purview of the government, we won’t get assertions we are bigots etc.?

    1. Bigots apply blanket assumptions – like passing a statewide law. If you take the time to listen to all interested parties, including taking into account the needs of the transgender individuals at the local level and can come to a compromise solution that spares the dignity and sense of well-being of those parties, then YES! We have an agreement.

      Which, incidentally, is the way this issue WAS and IS being handled now… WITHOUT the need of this stupid legislation.

  12. P.S. Just to be clear, if it is a matter of local control, some schools will not make the decision you want. Are you prepared to accept that?

    1. I for one doubt it.
      When some SD district (or a Catholic school more likely), adopts a common sense policy reflective of this vetoed bill, the LGBTAQUAA zealots and Crossgrain are not going to tolerate it.

      They know it & Crossgrain knows it.

      This is less about bathrooms and showers and sexual attractions than it is mostly about another opportunity for bigoted anti-Christian crusaders forcing their new-age religion of secularism onto the American culture.

        1. Then why the long list of “studies” on transsexualism?

          You were asked repeatedly for you to speak about the biological and genetic markers for transsexualism, and you copied & pasted (without attribution btw) from

          http://transascity.org/the-transgender-brain/

          Since they speak for you and with you by your own admission, surely you understand that the LGBTAQUAA zealots (and Crossgrain by his own admission) are not going to tolerate ANY deviation from their mandated accommodations.

          Make up your mind–either speak for yourself or stop copying & pasting from other websites, and then whine that you can speak for yourself.

          pick one.

          1. The list was meant as a place for YOU to start your research. One article or book ain’t gonna pass the smell test.

              1. LOL – The only thing that pops up is your post.

                I’m familiar with a couple permutations up to and including LGBTQIA.

                For my own edification, I ask again for you to please elaborate.

    2. If the needs of the community and transgender student are accounted for, then YES. No problem. I don’t doubt some transgender students can and will work with the understanding that others may be affected by their decisions, and that those other parties may need that individual to NOT use a certain bathroom. As long as everyone can agree and come to a compromise (even if less than ideal) situation, then have at it. Just don’t assume all situations, communities, and people will arrive at the same blanket state-wide conclusion.

  13. The great “compromise” is to allow different governing units to reach different conclusions and decisions without having to deal with charges of bigotry. So, long as you will accept that some schools are within their authority to decide that bathrooms are based on body parts OR some other criteria such as identity, we have agreement.

    But, if you think compromise means the local governing unit must reach a different conclusion or accommodation than above, we don’t have agreement.

    1. Case by case. You don’t need a policy that covers more or attempts to preempt any future possibilities. Districts will have to take into account the needs of all interested parties, and find the best solutions for all interested parties.

  14. Crossgrain,

    Pardon me if I’m being picky but I’m not sure I’m getting an answer.

    Will you accept a decision by a local governing unit (after considering the needs of all parties and all potential solutions) to determine bathroom use is based on body parts?

    1. That’s a pretty big hypothetical – what makes you think that will be the decision?

      Say I’m a man, and your governing unit decided that even after talking to me that I should now start using the ladies room, I think I’d tell them to get stuffed. Wouldn’t it be more likely that we would agree to find a solution that protected everyone’s dignity?

  15. I have no idea what is the best solution on a case by case basis based on the situation in that particular situation. I’m just asking that potential decision is within the range of potential decisions acceptable to you.

    Sometimes my wife asks me to do something or vice versa when the “ask” is really a nice way to tell the other to do something. Fold laundry, shovel the steps, etc. If there is doubt on which the “ask” is, we say “do I have a choice?” If the answer is yes, the other can make a different choice than desired by the other without consequences.

    When you don’t answer the question directly, your “local decision” sounds like it is a local decision means so long as they do what you want them to do.

    So, again, can a local governing unit decide after THEY have considered all potential solutions and needs to define usage based on body parts?

    1. If, in your hypothetical, the needs of the transgender student are not sufficiently met, then I would reject such a proposal. I prefer to remain optimistic that the needs of all parties can be reasonably met/accommodated.

  16. Crossgrain,

    Thank you for your honest answer. You probably noticed but I had never commented on this bill because I wanted to hear the full debate. For most of the discussion, I was leaning against the bill because I didn’t think the “compelling case” to usurp local control had been made. I presumed that the existing situation was sufficient to allow each school district to make what THEY deemed the best decision based on that situation.

    However, your answer has changed my mind. Your answer makes it clear that “local decision” means only local decisions with conform to your narrow focus on one person can be acceptable. And, since that “acceptable policy” is meeting a particular person’s “needs” without regard to the needs of others and the reasonable capacity for that school district to accommodate that need, a compelling case for the State has been made in my eyes.

    I urge over-ride of the Governor’s veto. There is a limit upon which the needs of the ONE can demand accommodation on the needs of the MANY.

    1. Huh. So much for progress. I did say that the needs of all parties must be reasonably met. If your daughter absolutely couldn’t live with a transgender woman using the same bathroom, I would hope that her and the transgender woman along with staff and families could accommodate both in some way – hey, that’s what they do right now!

      Just to piss on your fire, though, I’d like to know your feelings on the following, equally as ridiculous hypothetical:

      Say there’s an autistic kid. This autistic kid disrupts class, has difficulty learning in a traditional classroom setting, and is bullied for being “not normal”. What to do? Do we force the kid to “deal with it” and use the same classroom and teachers, even though we KNOW they won’t be successful? do we kick the kid out? Or, perhaps, do we actually accommodate the kid by hiring a special education teacher and a non-traditional learning environment?

      The systems for dealing with both autistic and transgender kids are already in-place, are being dealt with, and everyone is, for the most part, happy – within reason at least. Don’t take this to mean that we need to hire additional staff for transgenders, I’m just pointing out that we already have to sacrifice the needs of the many for the needs of the one/few.

  17. P.S. for the record, the limit upon which the needs of ONE are limited include issues with which I agree, including the expectation schools will make sincere efforts to accommodate these students within reason.

    1. Wut.

      “The limit upon which the needs of one are limited…”

      Bro, do you even english?

  18. Crossgrain,

    That isn’t a ridiculous hypothetical as it is one which applies to one of my grandchildren (not autism but closely related). Between the experts and my daughter, a list of needs were made. The school they attended was unable to accommodate sufficiently on the list resulting in the entire family transferring to anotherto another school here in Sioux Falls which could better accommodate the list. Even then, not every need was met.

    However, if they lived in a small town, I doubt such accommodation could have been reasonably made when weighed against the needs of the other students whereby the “solution” would have been a dedicated teacher in a single room which solves the learning issue but doesn’t serve the socialization needs of children with this condition.. The consensus in our family was gratitude they lived in Sioux Falls for in their own words, “we would have had to move.”

    There is a limit in which the needs of ONE can be imposed against the needs of the MANY.

    1. I never said ALL needs, only reasonable accommodation. Since we are talking toilets and not special education, one would reasonably assume the bar to be far lower in meeting sufficient needs for all parties.

  19. All this back and forth above just proves the intolerance of those who agree with Crossgrain. This is what has led to a baker being sued because he wouldn’t bake a cake for a gay couple’s wedding because it violated his religious beliefs. If this was the only baker in the whole country available to that couple to bake the cake, they might have had a point. The reasonable person would simply respect the beliefs of said baker and find another baker who would be more than willing to bake their cake and probably throw in a few cookies too. But those who demand tolerance of others while displaying intolerance themselves will never do that. They prefer to holler racist or bigot or whatever and sue. The same thing with the transgender bill. The federal govt has already intruded into local control, so Crossgrain’s assertion to stay out his bodily functions etc is moot. The state was simply trying to lessen the effects of the federal mandate when, and it will be when, an intolerant transgender decides to sue the school. But, now we will just wait for the first hue and cry from the transgender people and the screams of bigot, and then the want of the ONE will be imposed on the privacy rights of the MANY once again.

Comments are closed.