[perseus29]

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65690

With today's signature on SB200, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter, a Democrat, has eliminated gender-specific restrooms and locker rooms statewide, giving woman and girls reason to fear being confronted by predators, cross-dressers "or even a homosexual or heterosexual male," according to a critic.

The state's new "transgender nondiscrimination" bill makes it illegal to deny a person access to public accommodations, including restrooms and locker rooms, based on gender identity or the "perception" of gender identity.

Ritter signed the Expanded Discrimination Prohibitions, approved by the legislature, with this definition:

"'Sexual orientation' means a person's orientation toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, or transgender status or another person's perception thereof."

"Who would have believed that the Colorado state legislature and its governor would have made it fully legal for men to enter and use women’s restrooms and locker-room facilities without notice or explanation?" said James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, the Christian publishing and broadcast ministry in Colorado Springs.

[CHATSDALE]

i wonder if they are taking the urinals out of the men's room...this would be a perfect excuse for flashing

[HM2Viking]

I reserve comment except to say that James Dobson uses this as an opportunity to bash every person who is not heterosexual.

He doesn't know squat about sexual predators. (Most sexual and child predators are within the family system and the vast majority are heterosexual.)

Without seeing the text of the actual law it seems to be fear mongering along the lines of the Adam and Steve commercials from a few years ago.

See:

The law's proponents dismiss Focus on the Family's argument as a narrowly-tailored scare tactic that ignores the greater purpose of the law.
"This is an important step forward for the state to make the state's laws of fairness and justice applicable to everyone who lives here," said Bruce DeBoskey, executive director of the Anti-Defamation League's Rocky Mountain chapter.
"It's not controversial. It's not a stretch. It's not an exaggeration," he said.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Jennifer Veiga (D-Denver) was unavailable for comment Friday afternoon.

at http://www.9news.com/article.aspx?storyid=92754

[Stanley-RN2B]

Focus on the Family... BLEH!!!!!!!!!!!! Only person that could lead them better would be Farrakhan.

I haven't read the new bill yet, but a transgendered person should be allowed to use whichever bathroom they please. I personally don't like full public restrooms in any case and tend to wait or wait untill it is empty. Anyone uncomfortable with this situation can do the same I guess.

The ultra conservatives must be really po'd.

[CHATSDALE]

you don't have to be conservative to be modest

[Stanley-RN2B]

Originally Posted by CHATSDALE

you don't have to be conservative to be modest

Modesty is usually pride in disguise... or low self-esteem. Either way your discomfort is a drop in the ocean compared to what they must go through. In any case, the arguments against them are usually the same ones used 50 years ago when bathroom were separated by race. Women will get over it.

[suzanne4]

Toilet stalls will have doors on them, just as they have in the past.

And this practice has been going on for years in many other countries, including almost all of Europe and has not been any issue for them.

A woman can use a men's bathroom just the same and have actually seen many do it when we have attended conferences and there was a line up at the ladie's room.

Just no big deal at all.

Predators usually could care less about any type of signage and this is not going to make any difference to them, but perhaps will slow them down if there are more people around.

[Spidey's mom]

I don't want to share a bathroom with a guy . . . I already share a bathroom with 4 males in my own home and they make a big mess in the aiming department.

I want privacy. I am modest and it has NOTHING to do with "pride in disguise". It is simply that I don't pee or poo in front of anyone and I don't want to watch them, much less have men in there.

How rude to say that there is something wrong with people who are modest.

I teach my daughter modesty - she doesn't wear those low cut tops and even lower cut pants. What is wrong with modesty????????

steph

[hikernurse]

Originally Posted by Spidey's mom

I don't want to share a bathroom with a guy . . . I already share a bathroom with 4 males in my own home and they make a big mess in the aiming department.

I want privacy. I am modest and it has NOTHING to do with "pride in disguise". It is simply that I don't pee or poo in front of anyone and I don't want to watch them, much less have men in there.

How rude to say that there is something wrong with people who are modest.

I teach my daughter modesty - she doesn't wear those low cut tops and even lower cut pants. What is wrong with modesty????????

steph

I agree, Steph. And at least bathrooms have doors. I would be very upset to be changing clothes (or heaven forbid) into a swimsuit in a locker room with men wandering around. And I would be even more upset to have my teenage girls in the same situation.

[perseus29]

Originally Posted by suzanne4

And this practice has been going on for years in many other countries, including almost all of Europe and has not been any issue for them.

\

REally? I lived and traveled over europe for more than a year last year, and didn't see that, and we did hit a lot of public restrooms...I did see some cool urinals in Holland that are in the middle of the street. Quite efficient.

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_f-SOcftP_M0/Rq...Q/IMG_1934.jpg