American politics 2016: Lawyers, Guns, and D-Money

Merritt Kopas wrote her MA thesis and some related talks on restrooms and gender regulation, incidentally, but I've only skimmed her thesis:

http://mkopas.net/files/KOPAS_UW-thesis-2012.pdf

http://mkopas.net/files/Kopas_AGREAA-Trans-Studies_2012_text.pdf

last time the gop was filibustering, people said the dems in power didn't abolish it because senators like to keep power in the senate. is that still the conventional wisdom?

I don't see any good reason to gender single-user restrooms

I agree with this completely.

As for multi-user restrooms, I would imagine that rape victims might have some qualms about abolishing gender distinctions entirely, but I am not a rape victim and cannot speak for them.

Only reason I can see to gender single-user restrooms is that men are disgusting and make huge messes and women should not be subjected to that.

Only reason I can see to gender single-user restrooms is that men are disgusting and make huge messes and women should not be subjected to that.

Ha ha, you have never had to clean women's restrooms for a living.

That ... is true. Are there typically puddles of urine in women's restrooms?

fetuses everywhere iirc

I do want to reiterate that this is a side question (there is currently no movement to abolish gendered bathrooms); the real issue is that conservatives are invoking an imaginary problem to further stigmatize an already marginalized group of people. It really isn't much different from nineteenth century laws against crossdressing.

I don't see any good reason to gender single-user restrooms

I agree with this completely.

I'd agree with this if women didn't fear sexual assault from men.

don't think segregating single-user restrooms really has anything to do with that

Single-user bathrooms almost always have locks on their doors to ensure privacy.

So it looks like Lambda Legal, the ACLU, and Equality NC are filing suit against the North Carolina law: http://www.advocate.com/politics/2016/3/27/equality-groups-filing-suit-against-north-carolinas-anti-lgbt-law

excellent RS article, relating this non-issue to the cynical calculus of an election year is a good lens to use imo

http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/03/28/breaking-nathan-deal-will-veto-georgias-religious-liberty-bill/

someone noticed the sound of a bunch of organizations tentatively scratching georgia off their list of places to hold events

i mean, yeah.

There are a thousand levers that can influence human behavior; it's interesting to see which move whom and when.

hollywood does alot of business in georgia due to sweet sweet tax incentives and they threatened to bail on the state if this went through so I'm not surprised

http://gov.georgia.gov/press-releases/2016-03-28/transcript-deal-hb-757-remarks-0

In light of our history, I find it ironic that today some in the religious community feel it necessary to ask the government to confer upon them certain rights and protections. If indeed our religious liberty is conferred by God and not by man-made government, we should heed the “hands-off” admonition of the First Amendment to our Constitution. When legislative bodies attempt to do otherwise, the inclusions and omissions in their statutes can lead to discrimination, even though it may be unintentional. That is too great a risk to take.

Some of those in the religious community who support this bill have resorted to insults that question my moral convictions and my character. Some within the business community who oppose this bill have resorted to threats of withdrawing jobs from our state. I do not respond well to insults or threats. The people of Georgia deserve a leader who will make sound judgments based on solid reasons that are not inflamed by emotion. That is what I intend to do.

As I've said before, I do not think we have to discriminate against anyone to protect the faith-based community in Georgia of which my family and I are a part of for all of our lives. Our actions on HB 757 are not just about protecting the faith-based community or providing a business-friendly climate for job growth in Georgia. This is about the character of our State and the character of its people. Georgia is a welcoming state filled with warm, friendly and loving people. Our cities and countryside are populated with people who worship God in a myriad of ways and in very diverse settings. Our people work side-by-side without regard to the color of our skin, or the religion we adhere to. We are working to make life better for our families and our communities. That is the character of Georgia. I intend to do my part to keep it that way.

aside from Hollywood, GA wants the Super Bowl - that paragon of moral fibre - in a few years as well.

good speech, Deal.

headline should be A New Deal

shit they need to reboot New Coke as well

these religious exemption bills are insane. it seems like the very reason the first amendment was written was to prevent these. when a court case is decided down the road, they will literally be defining what is Christian religion. the first amendment seems written to forbid that?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;

i guess they lean on the "prohibiting the free exercise" bit. which is dumb. cos it says FREE exercise. as in nobody is being oppressed, nobody is wielding power over another. that is FREEDOM.

it seems like the very reason the first amendment was written was to prevent these.

There's some double negative paradoxical circular logic to them. We did not have freedom of religion, so it was added as part of the bill of rights, thus protecting our right to practice our religions, which is being infringed upon by those exercising their right *not* to practice our religion. Therefore we need our religion further protected from those whose protections infringe upon our rights to practice our religion, which infringes on their protected rights. So the solution is the lessen their rights to better secure ours. Etc.

also pretty sure 'it is a sin to do anything for and/or be nice to gay people' is not in the bible

have you read the bible backwards? *metal salute*

But they are taking away my right not to be nice to people, which is an implicit precept of the Bible.

North Carolina's attorney general has announced that his office will not be defending HB 2. His remarks focus on the law's likely damage to the state's economy and reputation: https://mobile.twitter.com/dominicholden/status/714839764180938752

But also touch on what was really the standout point of Kennedy, J's opinion last year in the marriage equality case, which is that enshrining discrimination in the law is both unconstitutional and repugnant to the national character

Andi McClure on twitter: "Reminder that North Carolina SB2 exists more or less entirely as part of McRory's gov reelection campaign & his opponent is the atty general"

Now another bill protecting homophobic and transphobic discrimination is past the Mississippi House, and likely to make it through the Senate tomorrow:

https://mobile.twitter.com/chasestrangio/status/714966131723919361/photo/1
https://mobile.twitter.com/chasestrangio/status/714966131723919361

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CewR6GyW4AA9QaE.jpg

"Male (man) and female (woman) THE LORD created them, referring to their immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at birth"

So do we know who's written these laws? ALEC? The Family Council? Someone Koch-related?

I think it's the Family Research Council:
http://www.frc.org/transgender

That brief concludes by presenting trans people's identities as delusions, and transphobia as a matter of conscience:

A person's sex (male or female) is an immutable biological reality. In the vast majority of people (including those who later identify as "transgender"), it is unambiguously identifiable at birth. There is no rational or compassionate reason to affirm a distorted psychological self-concept that one's "gender identity" is different from one's biological sex.

Neither lawmakers nor counselors, pastors, teachers, nor medical professionals should participate in or reinforce the transgender movement's lies about sexuality--nor should they be required by the government to support such distortion.

Along similar lines, the Republican Party resolved a few months ago to challenge the Obama administration on Title IX: http://www.advocate.com/transgender/2016/2/25/republican-national-committee-endorses-anti-trans-bathroom-bills

Enshrining those three particular religious beliefs into law is so clearly a First Amendment violation under Lemon, but I wouldn't trust the conservative wing of this Supreme Court to give even a passing nod to it at this point.

when some people are so fervently supporting legislation affecting a relatively tiny subset of the population, who they likely do not even know, it's some suspicious shit

Wider stakes: rolling back the whole concept of gender as a social construct, feminism, unwifely behavior, and other products of the cultural Bolshevik infiltrators. If sex roles are god-given then government has no business giving any legs up to women in the workplace, controlling their own bodies, etc. etc.

(And,obviously, any recognition of trans, intersex, and genderqueer people as people, going far beyond bathrooms.)

NC Attorney General Roy Cooper is not a particularly inspiring candidate, but he's raised a shitload of money and also has refused to defend both this law and Amendment One (NC's anti-gay marriage law which was ultimately struck down in court), so here's hoping he gets into the governor's mansion to act as a check on our insane legislature.

what are roy's negatives, asking as an out-of-stater

He's a long-time member of the Democratic political establishment in rural eastern NC who served almost 20 years in the legislature. Not necessarily the most dynamic, out-of-the-box-candidate. Plus the Democratic-controlled state government was often accused throughout the 90's of shortchanging urban areas in road and education funding and instead funneling their tax money to rural and over-represented districts. There's not a lot there-- he's just an old face.

feel like people in NC can't complain much when a non-blue dog dem has a serious shot to win governor

well this is different: tying your attacks on minimum-wage increases to food truck popularity:

A higher minimum wage is no way to solve the problem of poverty

Contains the bit:

Big Brother can mandate a $15 hourly minimum wage, but Big Brother cannot mandate that firms hire workers. As minimum wages have risen, cashiers have vanished from drug stores and food trucks have replaced restaurants. Few would have thought 10 years ago (when the national minimum wage was $5.15) that food trucks would line the streets in the D.C. downtown area and people would line up for their lunch...

Food trucks have existed since forever and most of the current crop charge as much as a restaurant, if not more.

also assume that food truck quality was pretty piss poor 10 years ago and the only ones lining up to them for lunch were construction workers

the DC food truck trick is to offer you $7 entrees that are only 2/3 of a full meal. in the heat of the moment you just add on a $4 side to avoid afternoon stomach grumbles.

Update on the anti-LGBT bill HB1523 in Mississippi: the state Senate voted 31/17 to pass it with amendments, so it'll be going back to the House. @EWagsterPettus and @arielle_amara have been livetweeting the proceedings, if you want more details, and @aclu_ms and @chase_strangio are also useful for context.