2&2 Slider To Leyritz
Well-known member
You seem to be conflating rights, laws, and need and then wrapping it in the bow of sexual privacy. Which makes for a messy argument.
Like everyone else, transgender people don't have the right to sexual privacy in the bathroom. However, as you stated, it was working pretty well to have transgender people use the bathroom of their expressed gender. So Charlotte decided to codify that working system.
And then Conservatives in Raleigh flipped out and decided that what had been working for years was actually the wrong way to do things.
I'm not conflating anything, I am simply asking for the justifiction for the Charlotte ordinance, which does bring together all of those issues. Government (especially a body whose primary activity is granting zoning variances, not civil rights issues) doesn't codify things simply because they "work well" they codify them because a right needs protecting or because the alternate choice/action is undesirable for some reason. Mustard on hotdogs works well, but it isn't codified. Not pissing on the toilet seat works well, but that aspect of bathroom decorum isn't codified.
In this instance, if there is no right to sexual privacy as you claim, and there is no Charlotte bathroom safety issue, then what was the justification to codify the status quo other than political grandstanding?