North Carolina Passes Law Blocking Measures To Protect LGBT People

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Co'tor Shas**

North Carolina Passes Law Blocking Measures To Protect LGBT People

The North Carolina state Legislature has passed a law blocking local governments from passing anti-discrimination rules to grant protections to gay and transgender people.

The law comes a month after the city of Charlotte passed a measure protecting gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people from being discriminated against by businesses.

That measure was set to go into effect on April 1.

The state's General Assembly wasn't due to meet until late April, but it scheduled a special session — for the first time in 35 years, member station WUNC reports — on Wednesday to respond to the Charlotte measure before it went into effect.

Over the course of 12 hours, the state legislators introduced, debated and passed the bill, and Gov. Pat McCrory signed it into law.

The new law establishes a statewide nondiscrimination ordinance that explicitly supersedes any local nondiscrimination measures. The statewide protections cover race, religion, color, national origin and biological sex — but not sexual orientation or gender identity.

WFAE's Tom Bullock noted a possible implication of those categories: "Since religion is a protected class, and the definition of religion is broad enough, this could be a kind of backdoor religious freedom restoration act — allowing businesses the right to refuse to serve customers based on the owner's religious beliefs."
One word dominated the debate over the bill and the Charlotte ordinance before it: "bathroom."

Charlotte already protected residents from discrimination based on race, age, religion and gender. On Feb. 22, the city council voted to expand those protections to apply to sexual orientation and gender identity, too.

The most controversial element of Charlotte's expanded ordinance was the fact that it would allow trans people to use the bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity.

Opponents argued this would make bathrooms unsafe for women and children. WFAE's Sarah Delia, reporting on NPR in February, spoke to Pam Burton of Charlotte.
"I'm not scared of transgenders. That's not what I think the problem is. Sexual predators are not good people," Burton said. "They don't do the right thing. They're going to see this ordinance as a golden opportunity for fresh victims — our children. My 16-year-old daughter swims at The Y year-round. I'm not going to be able to confidently continue to allow her to use that locker room if this passes."

Charlotte resident Lara Nazario, a trans woman, said critics of the measure have it backward. The idea that it would be dangerous to defend trans people's rights to use the bathroom of their gender identity "is opposite to the reality that I live in," Nazario said.

It's forcing trans people to use the bathroom of the opposite gender that is dangerous, she said:

"If I were to walk into a men's bathroom, I would either be told that I'm in the wrong bathroom or I'd be outed as a transgender woman. This can often lead to violence or harassment, especially when there's no protection in place for people like me."

The Charlotte nondiscrimination ordinance extends protections to LGBT customers at bars, restaurants and stores, and in taxis. The heated debate over trans access to restrooms led to it being labeled by some as the "bathroom ordinance."

And North Carolina's response, in turn, is being called the "bathroom bill."

The law opens by requiring all government-controlled facilities — including schools and universities — to assign all multiple-occupancy bathrooms and locker rooms to a single sex and prevent anyone who doesn't match that biological sex from using the facility.

It later declares nondiscrimination "an issue of general, statewide concern," and says local jurisdictions can't craft their own nondiscrimination measures.

That nullifies Charlotte's ordinance — as well as existing LGBT nondiscrimination ordinances in a half-dozen other jurisdictions in North Carolina, WFAE reports. It also blocks any other city or local government from extending such protections to LGBT residents in the future.

Biogen, which employs more than 1,000 people in North Carolina's Research Triangle, and the Dow Chemical Co. have both tweeted their objections, as employers, to the new law.

The law bars local governments from passing other ordinances, as well.

Again, WFAE's Tom Bullock, from the station's extensive coverage during the bill's debate and passage yesterday:

"The bill would bar cities or counties from imposing their own minimum wage. So any move to establish a local minimum wage higher than the $7.25 an hour federal minimum wage would be a nonstarter. This has been done by other cities such as Seattle, which is phasing in a $15 an hour minimum wage.
"Cities and counties often have employment rules for companies seeking contracts. This bill also bars counties or municipalities from requiring these companies to pay a higher minimum wage in order to qualify for contracts. ... This provision also bars requirements like companies provide paid sick leave."
The bill passed the Republican-controlled General Assembly 82-26 in the House, and 32-0 in the Senate.

Gov. McCrory, after signing the bill late Wednesday, described the bill's passage as "bipartisan." But The Associated Press notes:

"Although 12 House Democrats joined all Republicans present in voting for the bill in the afternoon, later all Senate Democrats in attendance walked off their chamber floor during the debate in protest. Remaining Senate Republicans gave the legislation unanimous approval.
" 'We choose not to participate in this farce,' Senate Minority Leader Dan Blue of Raleigh said after he left the chamber."
McCrory also said he was acting to protect citizens' privacy, and criticized the Charlotte ordinance as "government overreach and intrusion."

On my phone, so sorry if the setup is wonky.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/24/471700323/north-carolina-passes-law-blocking-measures-to-protect-lgbt-people

**jasper76**

Regarding the bathroom issue: Sexless bathrooms. Every toilet must have a stall with decent privacy. Done. Star Trek rules.

**feeder**

Pretend trans persons invading bathrooms for jollies is an absolute non-issue. (facepalm)

WTG, NC. WT-fething-G.

**Goliath**

So in this bill we have provisions blocking an increase to the minimum wage, provisions specifically intended to feth over LGBT* people and in particular trans people, and a block on paid sick leave requirements.

Well done NC, you're acting like a bunch of fething morons.

**d-usa**

Goliath wrote:
So in this bill we have provisions blocking an increase to the minimum wage, provisions specifically intended to feth over LGBT* people and in particular trans people, and a block on paid sick leave requirements.

Well done NC, you're acting like a bunch of fething morons.

The amazing thing is that they follow the same pattern as Oklahoma:

The party of Small Government(TM) and followers of the "local government knows best" and "let people govern themselves" motto is passing more laws telling local government what to do and preventing people from governing themselves.

**Sigvatr**

Unisex toilet / toilet stalls is the only way to satisfy both sides. The inconvenient truth is that by allowing people identifying themselves as the opposite gender to use the other gender's bathroom inconveniences a lot of people. They feel less safe by allowing the presence of another gender in their bathroom and what many people don't like to hear is that those people have rights too. Their feelings count as well. It's extremely irrational and downright...foolish to just waltz over those people because of a very vocal, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny minority.

On the other hand, by not giving in to that vocal minority, you certainly upset them and act against their feelings.

Thus - unisex. Everyone going in there knows what he is to expect. You can even have a unisex stall in a regular toilet which costs very little - keeping in mind that 100% of the cost for every company would have to be paid by taxpayer money and 0% by the company itself.

It was a very good decision that promotes justice for /everyone/ and not bending over for a vocal minority just because they are loud.

**whembly**

Anyone have the text of the bill?

The law looks like it's over the bathroom/locker thing... not on anti-gay policies.

**jasper76**

Sigvatr wrote:

Thus - unisex. Everyone going in there knows what he is to expect. You can even have a unisex stall in a regular toilet which costs very little - keeping in mind that 100% of the cost for every company would have to be paid by taxpayer money and 0% by the company itself.

Why would the taxpayer be expected to flip the bill on bathroom renovations for private companies? Let them pay for it.

**Ustrello**

whembly wrote:
Anyone have the text of the bill?

The law looks like it's over the bathroom/locker thing... not on anti-gay policies.

anti LGBT legislation, it even says that in the title whembly

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its also ironic only 25 percent of NC supports this bill but it was still ramrodded in by the republicans and their lobbyists

**Prestor Jon**

Sigvatr wrote:
Unisex toilet / toilet stalls is the only way to satisfy both sides. The inconvenient truth is that by allowing people identifying themselves as the opposite gender to use the other gender's bathroom inconveniences a lot of people. They feel less safe by allowing the presence of another gender in their bathroom and what many people don't like to hear is that those people have rights too. Their feelings count as well. It's extremely irrational and downright...foolish to just waltz over those people because of a very vocal, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny, tiny minority.

On the other hand, by not giving in to that vocal minority, you certainly upset them and act against their feelings.

Thus - unisex. Everyone going in there knows what he is to expect. You can even have a unisex stall in a regular toilet which costs very little - keeping in mind that 100% of the cost for every company would have to be paid by taxpayer money and 0% by the company itself.

It was a very good decision that promotes justice for /everyone/ and not bending over for a vocal minority just because they are loud.

Separate bathrooms based on gender isn't a problem for anyone. There aren't any bathrooms in the state that have attendants in them that are checking people's genitaia to make sure they're in the appropriate bathroom. The Charlotte bathroom ordinance was an unnecessary law that created an easily exploitable loophole that caused widespread concern. The concept of unisex bathrooms makes people in NC uncomfortable enough that they want legal protection against it so that if a problem arises from having a person in the wrong bathroom there is a path for recourse. That's why we have laws to give the state legal and moral authority to punish people who behave in a way that society deems harmful. The only barrier to entry into a public bathroom is failing to appear upon the most cursory of inspections to be of the appropriate gender to someone in that bathroom who raises an objection. Again, there aren't any public bathrooms in NC that require people to show that they have the appropriate genitalia so there is nothing preventing trans people from using the bathroom of the gender they identify with. More than likely a trans person is going to have at least some outward appearance of being the gender they identify with and nobody is going to object in the time it takes that person to walk into a bathroom stall.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ustrello wrote:
whembly wrote:
Anyone have the text of the bill?

The law looks like it's over the bathroom/locker thing... not on anti-gay policies.

anti LGBT legislation, it even says that in the title whembly

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its also ironic only 25 percent of NC supports this bill but it was still ramrodded in by the republicans and their lobbyists

The bill only removes LGBT as a protected in class in the municipalities that had them listed as such. For the geographical majority of the state nothing changes. Is there any evidence of LGBT discrimination in the area that didn't have them listed as a protected class? Is there reason to believe that in municipalities that did have LGBT as a protected class, like Asheville, will now see LGBT discrimination? For this bill to negatively impact the LGBT community we would have to presume that the only thing preventing LGBT descrimination in Asheville was the ordinance making them a protected class, not the absence of people who wished to descriminate against LGBT people.

**Ustrello**

So by that logic we should get rid of all discrimination legislation because I mean it doesn't actually protect people from being discriminated against. Finally I can kick all of them pesky blacks out of my store for being black

**Frazzled**

Its about time. For years the citizens of North Carolina have suffered under the oppression of LG...wait what? No thats just stupid.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

jasper76 wrote:
Regarding the bathroom issue: Sexless bathrooms. Every toilet must have a stall with decent privacy. Done. Star Trek rules.

I know right. I just want better doors. This fascination with toilets is a little disturbing.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Goliath wrote:
So in this bill we have provisions blocking an increase to the minimum wage, provisions specifically intended to feth over LGBT* people and in particular trans people, and a block on paid sick leave requirements.

Well done NC, you're acting like a bunch of fething morons.

Its just taking care of all the state's biggest concerns in one fell swoop.

**Prestor Jon**

Ustrello wrote:
So by that logic we should get rid of all discrimination legislation because I mean it doesn't actually protect people from being discriminated against. Finally I can kick all of them pesky blacks out of my store for being black

No, by that logic you can't proclaim that the new bill harms LGBT people without supporting evidence that not making them a protected class is subjecting them to incidents of discrimination. Again, in the majority of the state they weren't a protected class ever, was LGBT discrimination ocurring in those areas?

**Sigvatr**

Ustrello wrote:
So by that logic we should get rid of all discrimination legislation because I mean it doesn't actually protect people from being discriminated against. Finally I can kick all of them pesky blacks out of my store for being black

Huge misunderstanding. Anti-discrimination laws are important, but a blanket allowance is the most stupid change that could take place and thus it's a good thing this got slammed down. Discrimination laws must be taken step-by-step, law-by-law, not by taking the biggest brush available and stroking over the legislation in a single stroke. Get on a round table with everyone, read: EVERYONE, involved and try to find a solution. Every other way of tackling this is unethical and unacceptable.

jasper76 wrote:
Sigvatr wrote:

Thus - unisex. Everyone going in there knows what he is to expect. You can even have a unisex stall in a regular toilet which costs very little - keeping in mind that 100% of the cost for every company would have to be paid by taxpayer money and 0% by the company itself.

Why would the taxpayer be expected to flip the bill on bathroom renovations for private companies? Let them pay for it.

It's something that is enforced upon a company due to a political agenda with the company having zero benefit. If you want a political agenda, you pay for it with your own money, simple as that. If people aren't willing to pay for what they want to change, then they don't want a change to begin with.

**Tannhauser42**

Interesting to see how the big corporations handle this in comparison with, what's the current one, Georgia?

**oldravenman3025**

Ustrello wrote:
whembly wrote:
Anyone have the text of the bill?

The law looks like it's over the bathroom/locker thing... not on anti-gay policies.

anti LGBT legislation, it even says that in the title whembly

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Its also ironic only 25 percent of NC supports this bill but it was still ramrodded in by the republicans and their lobbyists

I hate to break it to you, but most of the State's rural and semi-rural right and center-right politicians are Democrats. North Carolina is mostly controlled by a corrupt Democratic Party machine that dates back to the pre-Civil War era. They just change their spots to appeal to the people in their district and for the times. The fact that the Republican Party has gained ground since the 1980s, and last few governors have been mostly Republican, is largely irrelevant.

**AegisGrimm**

Here's the rub.

Can anyone here guarantee they've NEVER had a trans-person pooping in the stall next to them in a public restroom? Prove it. And yet here we all are, completely unmolested.

Remove all urinals. Toilets only in all restrooms. Other than at the sinks washing your hands (where it's now a moot point as you're already done making your horrible noises) there is no way you can ever tell who is entering the stall next to you as you sit there.

What a hilarious first-world problem. A vast part of the world don't even have the luxury of a toilet to use at all.

**Tactical_Spam**

I found this while snooping about. I'm sure its relevant.

http://governor.nc.gov/press-release/myths-vs-facts-what-new-york-times-huffington-post-and-other-media-outlets-arent

**Ahtman**

Since this is stupid laws passed by idiots we just one of the most draconian Abortion Bills in America in Indiana. I have yet to run into anyone here, either R or D that thought it was a good idea but it made it through the Legislation so there must be some religious zealot somewhere happy about it.

Article

The disability part gets the most play but it also had things such as forcing women to pay for the funeral of miscarriages.

You know it was great when it was done at the last minute, behind closed doors, and sealed with a religious public proclamation.

**Relapse**

AegisGrimm wrote:
Here's the rub.

Can anyone here guarantee they've NEVER had a trans-person pooping in the stall next to them in a public restroom? Prove it. And yet here we all are, completely unmolested.

Remove all urinals. Toilets only in all restrooms. Other than at the sinks washing your hands (where it's now a moot point as you're already done making your horrible noises) there is no way you can ever tell who is entering the stall next to you as you sit there.

What a hilarious first-world problem. A vast part of the world don't even have the luxury of a toilet to use at all.

For myself, after a couple of incidents I walked in on going to the men's room, I began using stalls as a matter of course anyway.

**Ahtman**

Relapse wrote:
For myself, after a couple of incidents I walked in on

Where are you going to the restroom? I've never had it happen once but you've had it happen "a couple" of times? Goodness me.

**Silent Puffin?**

Ahtman wrote:

Where are you going to the restroom? I've never had it happen once but you've had it happen "a couple" of times? Goodness me.

It happened a couple of times, with perseverance and dedication

**BobtheInquisitor**

"Things walked in on" stories would make a great addition to the retail horror thread. I've certainly seen a few things I wish I hadn't.

**Ouze**

It would be interesting to draw a venn diagram between people who believe you shouldn't pass gun laws because criminals don't follow the law, and people who think we need to pass legislation preventing people from using the restroom of the sex they identify as, because it will prevent pedophiles from having access to children in the bathroom.

**djones520**

Ouze wrote:
It would be interesting to draw a venn diagram between people who believe you shouldn't pass gun laws because criminals don't follow the law, and people who think we need to pass legislation preventing people from using the restroom of the sex they identify as, because it will prevent pedophiles from having access to children in the bathroom.

Maybe we should pass a law that lets us shoot pedophiles, and everyone can be happy?

**Prestor Jon**

djones520 wrote:
Ouze wrote:
It would be interesting to draw a venn diagram between people who believe you shouldn't pass gun laws because criminals don't follow the law, and people who think we need to pass legislation preventing people from using the restroom of the sex they identify as, because it will prevent pedophiles from having access to children in the bathroom.

Maybe we should pass a law that lets us shoot pedophiles, and everyone can be happy?

It's already legal you just have to catch them in the act or the attempt.

**Relapse**

Ahtman wrote:
Relapse wrote:
For myself, after a couple of incidents I walked in on

Where are you going to the restroom? I've never had it happen once but you've had it happen "a couple" of times? Goodness me.

In my younger years, I used to travel around the country a lot by bus, and would sometimes walk into a station restroom to find some interesting things happening.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Silent Puffin? wrote:
Ahtman wrote:

Where are you going to the restroom? I've never had it happen once but you've had it happen "a couple" of times? Goodness me.

It happened a couple of times, with perseverance and dedication

exalted.

**Buttery Commissar**

AegisGrimm wrote:
Here's the rub.

Can anyone here guarantee they've NEVER had a trans-person pooping in the stall next to them in a public restroom? Prove it. And yet here we all are, completely unmolested.

Remove all urinals. Toilets only in all restrooms. Other than at the sinks washing your hands (where it's now a moot point as you're already done making your horrible noises) there is no way you can ever tell who is entering the stall next to you as you sit there.

What a hilarious first-world problem. A vast part of the world don't even have the luxury of a toilet to use at all.

What about gyms, swimming pools and such?
I'm assuming this bill doesn't refer exclusively to defection.

**SilverMK2**

Prestor Jon wrote:
djones520 wrote:
Maybe we should pass a law that lets us shoot pedophiles, and everyone can be happy?

It's already legal you just have to catch them in the act or the attempt.

Not entirely certain that is the case... certainly not in every state.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Buttery Commissar wrote:
What about gyms, swimming pools and such?
I'm assuming this bill doesn't refer exclusively to defection.

A lot of pools etc are now moving towards single large changing rooms which have enclosed changing spaces within them, varying from single person to family changing spaces.

**Silent Puffin?**

SilverMK2 wrote:

A lot of pools etc are now moving towards single large changing rooms which have enclosed changing spaces within them, varying from single person to family changing spaces.

I was in Germany with a school trip in the mid 90s and I discovered that their pools, or at least the on one Oberstdorf, had a mixed open plan changing room. An interesting experience for a 14 year old.