+menu-


WA State Bathroom Rule

WA State Bathroom Rule
SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY
Chapter 162-32-010 WAC TOOK EFFECT DEC. 26, 2015

—————————-
ULTIMATELY WE THE PEOPLE MUST HOLD OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES RESPONSIBLE

————————–
The final rule removed any discretion for school officials and mandates that all schools must allow boys into the girl’s locker room if they claim to be a girl.

—————————————–
This inclusion of sexual identity that shall allow persons with biological male bodies who identify as girls/women to use girls/women’s bathrooms, locker rooms, and other sex-specific facilities, without having legally changed their names or undergone surgery or hormone treatment.

—————————————–

Allowing boy’s/men unrestricted access to girl’s /women’s restrooms and locker rooms, if they claim to be a girl,  “defies common sense and common decency.”

——————————
BOY’S WILL BE BOY’S OR NOT?

What If A BOY/MAN just claims to be a girl/women?  FOR THE FUN OF IT?

Boy’s/men dressed OR UNDRESSED AS IN NAKED, SHALL BE ALLOWED unrestricted use of women’s restrooms and locker rooms?

So, all you GIRLS /women who are uncomfortable with the naked guy over there, “Please come with me and leave him alone.”

The opponents of this WA State WAC must use every argument available to protect our public school girls, teenagers, middle school, high school, college students and the adult female population of the state of WA from SEXUAL TAUNTING,  HARASSMENT AND ASSAULT.

————————————
Sexual predators look for opportunity. This WAC provides it.
 It shall give male sexual predators unrestricted access girl’s/women’s restrooms, lockers and showers.

96% of people who sexually abuse children are male

WHILE THE WA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION HAS AUTHORITY DELEGATED TO IT BY THE WA STATE LEGISLATURE,

THE WA STATE LEGISLATURE HAS THE AUTHORITY AND RESPONSIBILITY TO CORRECT MISTAKES MADE BY AGENCIES OR COMMISSIONS.

ULTIMATELY WE THE PEOPLE MUST HOLD OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES RESPONSIBLE
—————————————————————————————–
SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND GENDER IDENTITY
Chapter 162-32-010 WAC TOOK EFFECT DEC. 26, 2015
————————————————————————————-

Washington Quietly Adopts New Transgender Bathroom …

dailysignal.com/…/washingtonquietlyadoptsnewtransgenderbathroo

One day after Christmas, Washington state quietly adopted a set of new policies regarding transgender individuals using sex-specific facilities. The rules, adopted by the state Human Rights Commission, make it illegal for business owners to limit sex-specific facilities such as bathrooms, showers, and locker rooms to persons with the anatomical parts of one sex.

“To my knowledge, this is the first time in the country that there’s been a statewide effort to mandate all public accommodations cooperate with the gender identity concept that somebody declares,” Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington, told The Daily Signal.

—————————————————————————————–

New Bathroom Rule: It’s Worse Than We Thought

www.fpiw.org/blog/2016/01/…/bathroomruleitsworsethanwethough

2 days ago – But as details have become available, it appears the final version of the rule is actually worse than the proposed rule. Here are some of the …
New Bathroom Rule: It’s Worse Than We Thought
by Joseph Backholm, FPIW.org | January 6, 2016
Last week, news broke about a new rule passed by the Washington State Human Rights Commission creating a statewide mandate that businesses must allow men into women’s bathrooms and locker rooms if they say they are a woman.

But as details have become available, it appears the final version of the rule is actually worse than the proposed rule. Here are some of the “highlights”:

  1. Mandate on Schools as Well as Businesses

While the draft rule imposed a mandate on every business in the state, it provided discretion for schools to deal with each case on a case-by-case basis.

However, the final rule removed any discretion for school officials and mandates that all schools must allow boys into the girl’s locker room if they claim to be a girl.
• Mandate on schools as well as businesses
While the draft rule imposed a mandate on every business in the state, it provided discretion for schools to deal with each case on a case-by-case basis.
However, the final rule removed any discretion for school officials and mandates that all schools must allow boys into the girl’s locker room if they claim to be a girl.
Women will be removed from the women’s restroom. Naked men will not.
The rule states that it is illegal to ask someone who is confused about their gender to use a separate facility for the benefit of women and children who might be uncomfortable.
However, once a man begins to undress in the women’s locker room a person who “expresses concern or discomfort…should be directed to a separate or gender-neutral facility.”
So, all you women who are uncomfortable with the naked guy over there, “Please come with me and leave him alone.”

—————————————————-
• The rule bans lots of speech
In addition to prohibiting reasonable accommodations that recognize the public’s right to privacy along with the bathroom needs of the transgendered, this rule targets a wide range of speech.
It is illegal to ask “unwelcome personal questions about an individual’s sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity, or transgender status.”
The commission provides no guidance to the public about how they are supposed to know which questions are unwelcome before they ask them.
It is also illegal for a business to deliberately “misuse” someone’s preferred pronoun. If a man believes he is a woman, but you refer to him as a “he” anyway, he can sue you.
However, you should be careful not to ask questions about which pronoun he prefers. Remember, if that’s an “unwelcome question” he can sue you for that.
It is also now illegal to use “offensive names, slurs, jokes, or terminology regarding an individual’s sexual orientation or gender expression or gender identity.”
The fact that “offensive” is an undefined and completely subjective term that provides no guidance to the public about what they can and cannot do is apparently lost on the commission.
The best advice may be to just stop speaking. As we all know, someone is offended by everything.
________________________________________
WATCH: Joseph Backholm answers some FAQ’s on the new bathroom policy
As the public wrestles with how to respond to this, here are some of the most frequent questions we have been asked in the last few days.
1. Is this really true?
Very few other media outlets have covered this story. That has led a lot of people to wonder if there isn’t some kind of mistake. Sadly, there is no mistake. Other news outlets have began to cover the story here, here, and here.
2. What will happen if I violate this rule?
The Human Rights Commission has the authority to issue fines and create a range of orders intended to “eliminate the effects of an unfair practice and prevent the recurrence of the unfair practice.”
The rule specifically states that businesses and schools open themselves up to civil liability for violations of any of their new rules.
3. Who made this rule anyway?
The Washington State Human Rights Commission was created to help enforce the Washington State Law Against Discrimination. The Washington State Human Rights Commission was created to help enforce the Washington State Law Against Discrimination. There are five members who are appointed by the Governor and are not subject to election. You can find them here.
While rule-making authority is frequently delegated to agencies for the purpose of enforcing laws the legislature passes, the concern is that a policy of this magnitude and scope far exceeds what the legislature intended or the public expected when the non-discrimination law was passed.
4. What can I do?
While the Human Rights Commission has authority delegated to it by the legislature, the legislature has the authority and responsibility to correct mistakes made by agencies or commissions.
You can contact your legislators through the legislative hotline at 1-800-562-6000 or email them all at one time by clicking here.  If we know your address, this tool allow you to email them all at once.
5. Isn’t this outrage just much ado about nothing?
If you believe this could never happen, simply search for Jason Pomares, Norwood Smith Burnes, or Taylor Buehler on the search engine of your choice.

 

Burnes exposed himself to children in a Walmart restroom in 2010 while Pomares dressed as a woman and snuck into a Macy’s bathroom to videotape women in 2013.  Buehler wore a bra and wig and slipped into a bathroom and locker room in 2012 to watch women at Everett Community College. All three men were arrested.

In addition, Christopher Hambrook sexually assaulted multiple women in a Toronto women’s shelter while “identifying” as a woman.

Sexual predators look for opportunity. This provides it.
Everything we do is made possible by friends like you. If you can chip in $5 or more to help restore rational bathroom policies, we’d be grateful.

——————————————————

New rule in Washington opens bathroom use to transgender people
Posted 10:32 AM, January 6, 2016, by Associated Press
———————————————————————————-

UPDATE JAN 8, 2015

UPDATE: Click here to see Governor Jay Inslee’s response to the Human Rights Commission’s bathroom rule.
From: FAMILY POLICY INSTITUTE OF WASHINGTON <info@fpiw.org>
Legislative Hotline: 1-800-562-6000 Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Gov. Inslee Won’t Answer Question About Bathroom Rule; Bryant Opposes

Print pagePDF page

On December 26th, a new rule went into effect that has generated a significant public response.   The rule, which was passed by the Washington State Human Rights Commission, mandates that all schools and businesses in Washington State maintain open bathroom/locker room policies which will allow people to choose the facility they want to use based on their gender identity or gender expression.

It makes it illegal for any school or business to ask someone to use a bathroom that corresponds to their biological gender or to provide them a separate gender neutral option.

Members of the Human Rights Commission are appointed by Governor Inslee.

InsleeYesterday, FPIW communications director Zach Freeman had a chance to talk with Gov. Jay Inslee as well as his Republican challenger Bill Bryant to ask them their thoughts on the new rule.

Gov. Inslee appeared uncomfortable and resorted to asking Mr. Freeman a series of questions in an apparent attempt to avoid answering any questions himself:

Gov. Inslee: Are you a journalist?

Mr. Freeman: I’m trying to be.

Gov. Inslee: Who do you work with?

Mr. Freeman: The Family Policy Institute of Washington

Gov. Inslee: Who is that?

Mr. Freeman: It’s Joseph Backholm’s group…

Gov. Inslee: It’s a what group?

Mr. Freeman: It’s a group that does family policy

Gov. Inslee: Well what kind of family policy

Mr. Freeman: We do issues of marriage, life, religious freedom…the things that nobody really likes to talk about.

Gov. Inslee: Really? What kind of things are they working on?

Mr. Freeman: Well, at the moment I’m actually asking about the bathroom rule that was proposed by the Human Rights Commission…

Gov. Inslee then cut off the question by again asking Mr. Freeman if he was a journalist and who he was working for.

He concluded the exchange by telling Mr. Freeman that if he became a part of the Associated Press “then I’m really happy to answer your question.”

After the interview, FPIW reached out to Governor Inslee’s press office for a statement on the issue but they have not responded.

BryantBill Bryant, the only current challenger to Gov. Inslee in the 2016 gubernatorial election, was also in Olympia yesterday. He was more willing to discuss the issue. “Everybody deserves to be in an environment where they feel safe.” Bryant said.  “That includes someone who is transitioning between genders, but it also includes a high school girl who wants to go into a locker room.  I think the Human Rights Commission picked the rights of one group over the rights of others.”

Bryant suggested that it would be appropriate for the Governor to set the rule aside for 24 or 48 months so that the legislature can address it.  You can hear Mr. Bryant’s statement below:

00:00
00:00

If you are a member of the Associated Press, you can contact the Governor’s office at 360-902-4111 where he would apparently be happy to answer your questions about this issue.  Please do ask, because the rest of us would like to know.

Everyone else can use that number to share their thoughts about this issue with the Governor.  If you do, please be respectful. He needs to hear from you, but not if you’re angry.  That only hurts the cause.   Besides, the person answering the phone is not the Governor.  It’s just someone doing their job who probably hasn’t ever done anything mean to you.  But if you’re kind to them, they’ll be happy to relay the message.

You can also email the Governor by clicking here.

————————————————————————-

HOW THE CITIZEN’S OF HOUSTON GOT THE HOUSTON’S EQUAL RIGHTS ORDINANCE (HERO), ORDINANCE TO THE VOTERS..

 

FIRST THEY GATHERED APPROXIMATELY 55,000 SIGNATURES
Opponents of Equal Rights Ordinance sue Mayor Annise Parker, city of Houston
Posted On 6 Aug, 2014 – By John Wright
“Indeed, approximately 55,000 signatures were turned in, and the Coalition itself verified over 31,000 signers were properly registered to vote,” the lawsuit states. “Unfortunately, however, even though Defendant Russell certified the result, the ERO Referendum Petition was wrongfully rejected.
As expected, opponents of the ordinance filed the lawsuit against Mayor Annise Parker and the city after officials announced that a petition to repeal the measure didn’t have enough valid signatures to qualify for the ballot.

Read the lawsuit, along with Russell’s memo from last Friday, below.

 

Anti-HERO Petition Lawsuit by HERO Petition
The lawsuit was filed in state district court by former Harris County GOP Chairman Jared Woodfill and anti-gay activist Steven Hotze, along with Pastor F.N. Williams Sr. and Pastor Max Miller. The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction forcing the city to suspend the ordinance and place a repeal on the ballot in November. The Houston Chronicle reports that a hearing on the request was held late Tuesday.

————————————–
Houston voters reject LGBT nondiscrimination ordinance
USA Today Network KHOU-TV, Houston 9:33 a.m. CST November 4, 2015
The ordinance was initially approved by the Houston City Council in May 2014
BUT A LAWSUIT TO HAVE RESIDENTS VOTE ON THE MEASURE EVENTUALLY MADE IT TO THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT, WHICH IN JULY ORDERED THE CITY TO EITHER REPEAL THE ORDINANCE OR PUT IT ON THE BALLOT.
HOUSTON – Voters have said a resounding no to Houston’s controversial equal rights ordinance. Prop 1, failed by a margin of 62-percent to 38-percent.
Opponents of the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance branded it “the bathroom ordinance,” playing up the argument that it would allow men dressed as women to use women’s restrooms. A television ad featured a little girl being cornered by a man in a restroom.
Why LGBT Advocates Think They Lost in Houston Election
dailysignal.com/…/why-lgbt-advocates-think-they-lost-in-houston-electio…
Nov 4, 2015 – Failing to pass the Houston Equal Rights Protection Ordinance Tuesday night … who have won recent victories at the U.S. Supreme Court and beyond. … Opponents focused on that angle, branding HERO as a “bathroom bill. … ordinance would have allowed,” Jonathan Saenz, president of Texas Values, …

Dave Welch, executive director of the Houston Area Pastor Council, another group that’s been fighting the ordinance for the past 18 months called the outcome a “victory of common decency.” In an email to The Daily Signal, he said:
The victory of common decency in defeating this ordinance is a reminder to pastors across the country that together and united, our voices can make a difference, even when outnumbered by a massive propaganda campaign and vastly outspent. These ordinances that are part of a national campaign of the Human Rights Campaign in their attempt to force their radical anti-faith, anti-family, anti-freedom agenda on local communities can be defeated, so we hope this encourages pastors and citizens around the country.
Ultimately, the people in Houston decided against the measure by a 62-38 margin. That margin, supporters say, is an honest reflection of the city’s values.
“What the left cannot handle is that the election results are an accurate representation of the values of this city,” Saenz said. “Faith, family, and freedom.”

Comments are closed.