PDA

View Full Version : 'Schwarzenegger signs law banishing 'Mom & Dad'



Natalie
10-22-2007, 11:03 PM
//
Gilby
10-22-2007, 11:10 PM
Hehe... I wonder how many guys are signing up to use the girls locker room. Seems like every teenage boys dream come true.
Natalie
10-22-2007, 11:50 PM
Hehe... I wonder how many guys are signing up to use the girls locker room. Seems like every teenage boys dream come true.

LOL. I'm pretty sure they just mean boys who identify themselves as girls.
CurtisLow
10-22-2007, 11:53 PM
Man Schwarzenegger is crazy.... I knew he was a nut and this confirms it.
axiomata
10-23-2007, 12:27 AM
I have a hard time believing this. Wow.
leipo
10-23-2007, 11:35 AM
What a homophobic article.
Wendi
10-23-2007, 01:08 PM
The real problem has nothing to do with the words "mom & dad," let alone homosexuality issues. The real problem with this law is that it specifically allows male students - and presumably staff - to use female restrooms and vice versa in our children's schools. I don't care what your sexual orientation is or what sex you identify with - if you have a penis, you use the men's room and if you have a vagina you use the women's room. Especially when we're talking about children's restrooms, in a place that is supposed to be safe.
inibo
10-23-2007, 03:55 PM
In case anyone cares, the text of the law is here (http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_0751-0800/sb_777_bill_20071012_chaptered.html).

I would suggest you read it before you make any pronouncements one way or the other.

One thing that is a personal peeve of mine--not related to the issues of sex and sexuality--is the attempt to legislate language:


Existing laws relating to education refer to "handicapped
pupils," "handicapped adults," "physically handicapped pupils,"
"physically handicapped adults," "the handicapped," and "handicapped
persons."
This bill would change these terms to "pupils with disabilities,"
"adults with disabilities," "pupils with physical disabilities,"
"adults with physical disabilities," and "persons with disabilities."

What difference does it make? Why is one set of words more or less offensive than the other? I don't get it.

Years ago the term was "crippled." For some reason that became offensive so we started using "handicapped." Since the same phenomenon was being described eventually "handicapped" came to have the same connotations--good and bad--as "crippled." How could it not? Now we have to do away with "handicapped." If fact, we are not even allowed to use an adjective at all.

Keep your laws of my language!

I'm so mad I could write a poem.
kylejack
10-23-2007, 03:58 PM
Not this crap again. Please read the legislation, people.
cjhowe
10-23-2007, 04:09 PM
The real problem has nothing to do with the words "mom & dad," let alone homosexuality issues. The real problem with this law is that it specifically allows male students - and presumably staff - to use female restrooms and vice versa in our children's schools. I don't care what your sexual orientation is or what sex you identify with - if you have a penis, you use the men's room and if you have a vagina you use the women's room. Especially when we're talking about children's restrooms, in a place that is supposed to be safe.

Again, like in the other thread, it appears that the boys using the girls bathroom is based on using hyperbole coming from nondiscrimination based on sex, which was already the law. It's the law everywhere...you cannot discriminate on the basis of gender!
Nefertiti
10-23-2007, 07:42 PM
The mom and dad and husband and wife stuff seems to have been removed from the final bill. But if you look at the whole thing the gender identification stuff applies to the public universities as well.

The thing I find so disturbing about this is that they say that they now prohibit religious discrimination. Yet by recognizing self-identification of gender and imposing males in female locker rooms, bathrooms or dorms etc. they are violating the religious rights of students who do not wish to have their bodies exposed to the opposite sex.

And I don't know how they can have such a rule where one can identify one's sex by whatever one wants to choose in schools. Where will that lead? I mean if gender is just what one calls themselves, where does it end? Will we have males marrying females and calling themselves wife and husband respectively on the marriage certificate? Will we have people self identifying as the opposite sex to get cheaper health insurance because of the gender?

I mean the type of people who support this sort of law are the kind that will brand religious people as backwards about these sorts of issues but the authors of this law just threw out scientific facts about biological gender as if they didn't exist. That's backwards!
Nefertiti
10-23-2007, 07:44 PM
Again, like in the other thread, it appears that the boys using the girls bathroom is based on using hyperbole coming from nondiscrimination based on sex, which was already the law. It's the law everywhere...you cannot discriminate on the basis of gender!

No it's not; here is the definition:

"Gender" means sex, and includes a person's gender
identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not
stereotypically associated with the person's assigned sex at birth.

Now sex is simply something "assigned." It is no longer scientific fact!
GeorgiaRPFan
10-23-2007, 07:48 PM
On a Catholic Drudge-report style site (http://www.spiritdaily.com) I frequent, they are commenting on how the massive wild fires in California coincided with the signing of that bill. The site also made a point to mention the lightning strikes during Rudy's explaining his pro-abortion stance during one of the debates.