Action Center
Flyers for Friends
Bill 23-07
- Text of Bill 23-07
- Impact and Fines
- No Exemptions
- Female Impersonators Covered?
- Exploitation by Voyeurs?
- Am. Psych Ass. Statements
- Are You A Bigot?
- Duchy's Aide
- Bathrooms
- Kids
- Church Participation
- Religious Liberty
- Who voted for this?
- Council Arrogance
- Anti-Discrimination
- Talking Points
- Victory Pictures
What Others Say...
|
"We salute CRG for being willing to speak out on behalf of the people of Montgomery County and our young people who will be affected by this propaganda. We urge our friends to assist CRG in gathering signatures for this referendum."
Peter Sprigg |
Mailing Address
Maryland Citizens for Responsible Government
(MCRG-Repeal Bill 23-07)
PO Box 84055
Gaithersburg, MD 20883-4052
ANTI-DISCRIMINATION?
Our opponents will claim that this is “just an anti-discrimination” bill which protects transgender people. Actually we have no problem with an anti-discrimination bill for transgenders. However, as our Montgomery County Bill 23-07 stands now, it discriminates against the 500,000 women and children in Montgomery County by asking them to sacrifice their privacy rights. Women and children should be able to expect that they ONLY people sharing their bathrooms and locker-rooms also share the same biological sex. Most of the other gender identity bills which have been passed across the US have recognized this issue and addressed it. Our county council did not.
What we are primarily asking for is an explicit amendment to Bill 23-07 to protect the privacy of women and girls in changing areas. Bill 23-07 gender identity code, as signed into law, covers public accommodations (swimming pools) and their facilities (bathrooms). Please check the bathrooms page or our talking points for a full discussion. If you want the full legal analysis, read the AFF Letter, or our response to Ike Leggett.
Is this intolerant? No, this is common sense.
On the federal level, a gender identity non-discrimination bill was proposed and failed. Before it failed, Barney Frank proposed the following amendment to exempt areas of shared nudity to the Federal ENDA:
3) CERTAIN SHARED FACILITIES- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to establish an unlawful employment practice based on actual or perceived gender identity due to the denial of access to shared shower or dressing facilities in which being seen fully unclothed is unavoidable, provided that the employer provides reasonable access to adequate facilities that are not inconsistent with the employee's gender identity as established with the employer at the time of employment or upon notification to the employer that the employee has undergone or is undergoing gender transition, whichever is later
Barney Frank, the new religious right? Apparently so, in Montgomery County...
AUTHORITY: MARYLAND CITIZENS FOR A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT CORPORATION-REPEAL BILL 23-07; RUTH M. JACOBS TREASURER.