Houston Mayor, and lesbian, Annise Parker, says that the overwhelming defeat (60-40) of her cause, allowing men in women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, is proof that Houstonians are discriminatory.
Ya.
Wapo- “This was a campaign of fear-mongering and deliberate lies,” Houston Mayor Annise Parker (D) — the city’s first lesbian mayor who said HERO was “personal” — said, as KHOU reported. “No one’s rights should be subject to a popular vote.”
Turn out was high among the black population, who largely rejected the measure. (I said it over and over again, remove the bennies on any issue and blacks are not progressives.)
Former Houston Astros star Lance Berkman, stoking fears on the bathroom issue, was one big name who weighed in against HERO. In a radio ad, he had few positive things to say about transgender women, calling them “troubled men.”
“No men in women’s bathrooms, no boys in girls’ showers or locker rooms,” Berkman said in the ad. “I played professional baseball for 15 years, but my family is more important. My wife and I have four daughters. Proposition 1, the bathroom ordinance, would allow troubled men to enter women’s public bathrooms, showers and locker rooms. This would violate their privacy and put them in harm’s way.”
Maybe the voters are smarter than they are “bigoted.” Read the referendum->>
“Are you in favor of the Houston Equal Rights Ordinance, Ord. No. 2014-530, which prohibits discrimination in city employment and city services, city contracts, public accommodations, private employment, and housing based on an individual’s sex, race, color, ethnicity, national origin, age, familial status, marital status, military status, religion, disability, sexual orientation, genetic information, gender identity, or pregnancy?”
Would you vote yes on this? It says nothing specifically about “transgenders.”
Voting yes would mean men could go into the ladies room, which is exactly what the left wants. The crave a breakdown of social norms that have largely been carved out by Judeo-Christian values.
Really, your rug munchingness? Racist? I seem to recall you weren’t upset to accept their support to put you into City Hall. I guess BFH is right–take away the bennies and Obamaphones and common sense has a fighting chance at success.
Am I understanding this correctly? Houstonians are so abysmally bigoted against GBLTs that they elected a lesbian mayor?
HAHAHAAAHAAAHAHAHAAAHAAA!
Great – now I’m hungry.
By the way, what do bacon sandwiches have to do with the Lebanese, anyways?
so tired of the word discrimination only having a negative connotation
discrimination is a good thing for sane people
this reminds me that drudge had a list of positive reports on the left side of his page today, the type that are showing that people are tired of crazy shit
“her cause, allowing men in women’s bathrooms and locker rooms”
wow, some women are so ugly they have to go some incredible lengths to get a guy to look at them naked. this plan is the best this carpet muncher could come up with?
she might as well go back to her trench coat flashing in the park.
Lesbian? I thought they said thespian. Aw, hell…
I really hate how they write things so you have no idea of the consequences unless you’re either clued in beforehand or learn too late.
I have passed on voting on things like this in Dallas because they are written so that you have no idea if yes or no is what you really want. Many are just straight up deceptive in wording. Like this one. Surprised they didn’t throw something in about puppies.
German BLTs?
Excellent. There’s “discriminating taste,” that just reeks of money and used to be used in Lexus ads. There’s “discernment,” which is quite a positive trait to have according to the Bible. There’s critical thinking that relies on discriminating good from bad.
I suspect Ms. Parker knows she’s gone in the next election as her opponents can certainly use this rant against her. What a twat.
And very few acknowledge that all the listed categories (except for the—TA DAH!—MISSING specific reference to transgenders) are ALREADY COVERED BY FEDERAL LAWS. Duh.
The Houston ads FOR Prop 1 were absolutely despicable and focused on people like vets who supposedly were turned down for jobs just because they were vets.
Sooooo glad I left that sewer behind.
Fortunately Houstonians are selecting a new mayor this week as Parker (D-Lezbo) is term-limited—–and after THREE terms too many she’s, thank you Jayzus!, on her way out.
Here would be an interesting experiment – put this measure on the Houston ballot in plain English and explain all of the ramifications, and then have only women vote “yea” or “nay.” Once you get to the explanation that “this measure will allow men who claim to identify as women use women’s restrooms and locker rooms without legal consequence,” my guess would be that this measure would be even more overwhelmingly defeated.
As I see it, these types of laws are “get out of jail free” cards for perverts and the mentally disfunctional. Men can wander into a female bathroom, and if challenged merely state “I identify as a woman – look, I am even wearing women’s panties.” Under Houston’s proposed measure, this state of mind would preclude even charging a pervert with a crime.
As a final thought, I wonder why feminists have not claimed that these types of laws are part of the “war on women” that Republicans are accused of waging. Basically, under the guise of equality, Houston is proposing to eliminate rights to privacy for women in using facilities restricted solely to women. I am kind of surprised some feminist has not objected to this.
The usual string – BGLT – has to be pronounced as letters. That’s awkward. So I swapped the first two letters to make it an acronym pronounced “giblets” which I find much more convenient.
Try it – you’ll like it. Bonus: it annoys the GBLT collective.
okay we have all been there. A couple gets to a public place, they both head to the restroom, he goes in men’s room does his thing comes out in a few minutes or less. Then he stands there and waits while she waits in line for the women’s room. So what guy in his right mind wants to wait extra long to pee? Wait I answered my own question. A guy who needs to pee in a woman’s bathroom is not in his right mind.
As an engineer I have proposed that all public places have twice as many stalls for women as men, and it would equal out the wait time and everyone would benefit.
“No oes’ rights shouldbe subject to popular vote”.
Unless its the right not to listen to a man jerking off in the next stall because he likes to dress in drag and listen to women pee. Then your rights should be subject to majority rule.
So what? This homo radical is discriminatory against straights…err…NORMAL people.
The lesson here is that any society which allows the insane to seek and hold public office, is not long for this world.
Save America: Put the homosexuals back in the insane asylums where they belong, before they destroy what is left of the country.
Feminist don’t care what is good or bad for women, only what is good or bad for the progressive cause. The left is very good at hijacking causes, organizations and foundations and using them to further their agenda.
What shocks me is 40% supported this. I guess I just have to believe they worded it to confuse people, or a lot of men voted for it. I can’t picture any sane women voting for it.
I can’t wait to go back to school!!!! This share the bathroom thing interests me….
I like that 60 point ratio, but worry about the 40 percent of people who voted for Annise’s way. Goodbye, Annise, and may your dildo give you a UTI, with all due respect.
Proud of you Houstonians!!! As for you Annise, No shit, Sherlock!
If Her Highness is SOOOOO interested in transgender bathroom equality, I wonder if “she” would mind if a bunch of men kept traipsing through both her private house bathroom and her public office bathroom to use it, especially if she were in there using it at the same time?
I like “giblets” , but Bacon Guacamole Lettuce and Tomato is my go to!
And to think they elected her after she masticated in public.
Shakespeare was right.
About first killing the lawyers.
Out government turned to dung because it is all lawyers.
Next time she goes to the bathroom, I hope she sits on a seat that a ‘gender confused’ male forgot to raise when he urinated.
That might drive a point home for that dumb rug muncher.
Chalk one up for proper thinking people!
And I helped!
100,000 TUs for both . and bitterclinger!
Here in Minnesota, many of these types of measures on ballots state in the final sentence whether “saying yes or no to this will increase your taxes” (or whatever fits, as in this case “voting yes to this will allow men to enter woman’s bathrooms.”
This must have been something developed when the Rs controlled the MN congress!
The accepted bastardization of the unpronounceable acronym is “Gilbert.”
Just like you don’t hear them carrying on about discrimination against women in Muzzie countries.
Feminists will only open their mouths for/against whatever supports their agenda. I consider them the worst of lib hypocrites.
I’ve actually proposed TRIPLE the number of stalls for women. That seems pretty much in keeping with reality.
But nevermind. Don’t you see that the men in dresses can’t use the men’s room because it makes them “uncomfortable?” So instead of fixing the problem, the solution just transfers THEIR discomfort to US.
This is why I hate progs.
Not that I have any love lost for lawyers, but the Shakespeare quote is almost always taken out of context. To Shakespeare, eliminating all of the lawyers helped pave the way for despots.
But it is not the lawyers turning this nation to crap. To quote Pogo “we have met the enemy, and it is us.” Whenever something happens that affects one of us, we demand that the government do something – pass a law, prosecute someone, enact some regulations, ban something, stop it. Gradually, as we are doing now, we abdicate personal responsibliity in favor of government answers to everything. We are continually offended by many things, but instead of ignoring what we can effectively ignore or just get over it, we demand that government put stop to this offensive thing. Government has turned into mom and dad, and mom and dad have a duty to make everything all better.
Lawyers actually do benefit all of these laws and regulations, because it is virtually impossible to pass anything that can be uniformly applied to millions of people all of the time, and lawyers get paid to argue both sides. Oh, but you say “what about murder, for example? Isn’t murder always wrong?” Yes, but then again, what is murder? If I kill someone in self defense, is this murder? What if I kill someone who is threatening someone else – is this murder? What if I am ordered to kill someone, is this murder? What if I don’t try to stop someone else from committing murder, am I also responsible? All of a sudden, something that seems straight forward isn’t.
But just because lawyers benefit from our penchant of insisting that the government fix everything, this doesn’t mean lawyers are responsible for this – we are. And do you really want a system where the government is the sole arbiter of whether or not someone has broken one of the many, many rules we now have in place? No, you need lawyers to argue with the government, and you need courts to sort these things out as fairly as they can. We already cede a lot of power to the government, and I believe it would be a huge mistake to eliminate what is our best opportunity to non-violently challenge governmental dictates.
Society is messy. Small societies are somewhat messy, and the larger the society, the messier it is. But we insist on imposing more and more rules and regulations applicable to 300 million people, which has always proven to be a impossible task and just makes things messier.
One of her platform type thingies, was she would not use her faggot-ism while in office and would not push her controlling licking ability to help her loveys agenda. OH WELL???