credit: montanafamily.org

credit: montanafamily.org

‘If the law supposes that…the law is a ass…’

Mr. Bumble (Oliver Twist, by Charles Dickens)

Federal education authorities, staking out their firmest position yet on an increasingly contentious issue, found Monday that an Illinois school district violated anti-discrimination laws when it did not allow a transgender student who identifies as a girl and participates on a girls’ sports team to change and shower in the girls’ locker room without restrictions.

Education officials said the decision was the first of its kind on the rights of transgender students, which are emerging as a new cultural battleground in public schools across the country. In previous cases, federal officials had been able to reach settlements giving access to transgender students in similar situations. But in this instance, the school district in Palatine, Ill., has not yet come to an agreement, prompting the federal government to threaten sanctions. The district, northwest of Chicago, has indicated a willingness to fight for its policy in court.

This case, of course, refers to the 72nd Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of choice in bathroom usage for all, as well as the 71st Amendment, which secures the right to have one’s way in all things, particularly if that way is in opposition to the realities of nature and culture, and the 70th Amendment, which guarantees the right never to be uncomfortable or distressed, particularly if the stressor doesn’t actually exist.

What’s that you say? There are no 70th, 71st or 72nd Amendments?! Then where did the Feds get the authority for this decision? Oh. Right. It’s the Obama Administration. They don’ need no stinking authority!

In a letter sent Monday, the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Education told the Palatine district that requiring a transgender student to use private changing and showering facilities was a violation of that student’s rights under Title IX, a federal law that bans sex discrimination. The student, who identifies as female but was born male, should be given unfettered access to girls’ facilities, the letter said.

“All students deserve the opportunity to participate equally in school programs and activities — this is a basic civil right,” Catherine Lhamon, the Education Department’s assistant secretary for civil rights, said in a statement. ‘Unfortunately, Township High School District 211 is not following the law because the district continues to deny a female student the right to use the girls’ locker room.

There is a famous aphorism in constitutional circles: “My right to swing my fist ends where your nose begins.” Are some people born into the wrong body? I don’t know; no one does. Are some people merely confused, suffering from some delusion or psychiatric ailment that makes them think they are the opposite gender, or something else? Yes. There is no doubt about that. There is also no doubt about this: no parent in their right minds wants someone sporting a penis and testicles showering with their adolescent daughter. I suspect adolescent daughters might well agree with their parents on this if nothing else. What that person thinks themself to be or “identifies as” isn’t the point.

The article does not specifically state it, but obviously, this student has not had gender reassignment surgery. Were that the case, no one might know he was once male and this wouldn’t be an issue.

Obviously, the school district must have been blatantly prejudicial and did nothing to accommodate the transgender student? Not quite:

Daniel Cates, the district superintendent, said in a statement Monday that he disagreed with the decision, which he described as ‘a serious overreach with precedent-setting implications.’ In an interview, Dr. Cates said district officials had ‘worked long and hard’ to develop a plan that the district believed would balance the rights of everyone involved. That plan entails having the student change beyond privacy curtains in the girls’ locker room. [skip]

Officials in the Palatine district, which serves more than 12,000 students, have framed their position as a middle ground. The transgender student in question plays on a girls’ sports team, is called ‘she’ by school staff and is referred to by a female name. But the district, citing privacy concerns, had required her to change clothes and shower separately.

The district went out of its way to accommodate the transgender student. They call her by the pronoun “she,” allow her to play on a girl’s sports team, and to change and shower in the girl’s locker room, but behind a privacy curtain, because regardless of what “she” believes herself to be, she is anatomically, biologically male, and for some unfathomable reason, young women don’t want to be naked around a naked man for whom they have no romantic feelings. They must be bigoted or something.  This, of course, is not enough for the enlightened elite:

What our client wants is not hard to understand: She wants to be accepted for who she is and to be treated with dignity and respect — like any other student,’ said John Knight, the director of the L.G.B.T. and H.I.V. Project of the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois, who is representing the student. ‘The district’s insistence on separating my client from other students is blatant discrimination. Rather than approaching this issue with sensitivity and dignity, the district has attempted to justify its conduct by challenging my client’s identity as a girl.

Let’s engage in a bit of logic apparently out of the grasp of the director of the ACLU in Illinois. Their client is male. No wishes or fairy dust can change that. That he wishes to think of himself as female and wear the outward trappings of a female identity does not change his DNA and chromosomal makeup. Being treated with “dignity and respect” does not entail granting every desire a given student might have, regardless of how sincerely they might wish it. This particular student is separated from their fellow students only when all are naked. Could there be a more reasonable and rational accommodation or is there a constitutional right to be naked and to force anyone you choose to be naked with you?

In the 14-page letter outlining their findings, education officials said they remained open to negotiating a settlement with the school district but could take enforcement action if an agreement did not materialize.

Dr. Cates, the superintendent, said parents had made it resoundingly clear that they favored ‘maintaining some measure of privacy expectation’ in the locker rooms. He said the district would continue settlement negotiations with Education Department officials, but added, ‘We do stand on the position that we have not violated any laws.

This would be because the district has not violated any laws.

Demoya Gordon, an attorney at Lambda Legal, which advocates for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rights, said the Palatine case was unusual for how vocal the school district had been.

This would be because most districts automatically cave in to the demands of the members of any trendy victim group, regardless of how perverse and unreasonable. No doubt Lambda Legal, conditioned to the schools they attack immediately retreating and begging for mercy, was surprised.

Forgotten in this situation is the reality that this transgender student is a part of an adolescent school community. Regardless of how understanding and adult school officials might be, such understanding and tolerance cannot be expected of all adolescents, and perhaps, not all of their parents. Challenging the moral fabric of the community and of individuals is a foolish and dangerous thing. Forcing a nude boy into female showers simply so he can feel he is more fully female is plainly waving a flag in front of a wild bull. Should he be taunted or injured, imagine what the ACLU and Lambda Legal would try to do to the school district.

The rest of the students of this school district have rights as well, and no one has an absolute right to do whatever they want, when and where they want to do it. In this case, the rights of the rest of the students, particularly the girls, greatly outweigh the rights of the student in question.

One might sympathize with him—or her—and his desire to live life as a female, but no one else is obligated to surrender their rights to make that happen. And no law or regulation can make him female, or make others accept him or his desires. God help us when it can; America will no longer exist.

That, of course, is what the Obamites want. That is what normal, mundane Americans must absolutely oppose.

Advertisements