Stopping Edu. Funds for Disabled Students over Bathroom Laws

[Geilinor]

Several court cases have decided it includes trans people.

Citation, please.

Also, when does a person become "trans"?

A person becomes trans when they realize that their gender identity differs from their birth sex (as far as I understand it). It becomes sex discrimination when you start policing genitals.

[Linux and the X]

Several court cases have decided it includes trans people.

Citation, please.

Also, when does a person become "trans"?

The major three are Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, Glenn v. Brumby, and Grimm v. Gloucester Cty. SB.

[Atheist Collective]

The funding isn't going to be lost, but this will end up going to the Supreme Court which could rule that North Carolina is violating the Civil Rights Act.

Who knows, with republican intransigence regarding filling the supreme court, they probably will come down to another tie. Which would make whatever the lower court's ruling was stand. So in essence, the court is basically useless right now.

[Threlizdun]

Several court cases have decided it includes trans people.

Citation, please.

Also, when does a person become "trans"?

We honestly aren't sure when one "becomes" trans, but people definitely realize it at certain stages in life. I recognized I felt more comfortable expressing as female than male when I was around four, but suppressed that side of me and forgot those memories until the middle of my teenage years. After the onset of puberty I hated myself and my body for reasons I couldn't understand. I suffered from severe depression and practiced self harm. I felt wrong, like the entirety of me wasn't what it was supposed to be. Eventually I learned more about trans issues and a light sort of went off in my head. Everything I was reading fit what I was feeling. I decided to alternate between presenting as male, female, and androgynous to see what made me most comfortable. I found I felt wonderful as a girl and still felt terrible as a boy. I've lived as a woman ever since and my life has been exponentially better. I've known people who only discovered their gender identity in their fifties. Then I have friends whose son is around five and insists on being addressed as male and was assigned female at birth. It's different for different people.

[Lunalia]

Why is everyone looking at this as the Obama administration's fault?

When you're in a contract, you have to do what the contract says to give you the things the contract entitles you to.

The law the NC legislature enacted violated the terms of the contract for their education funding. The Obama administration is, frankly, being nice, by telling them that if they don't repeal the law their funding will be cut. They could have pulled the funding right away, as soon as NC breeched the contract, because that is how contracts work.

No one forced the NC legislature to violate the contract they had to get the education funding. They decided that the law they wanted to enact was more important than the funding. If they hadn't, they wouldn't have broken the contract.

You can't just get a job which says you have to do tasks x y and z, and in return you're paid such and such a month, and get so many benefits, and then say that you don't want to do task x. And then whine when you're fired because you aren't doing one of the tasks that your employment contract says you would be doing, that you agreed to when you got the job.

Show me the person who put a gun to the legislators' heads and forced them to sign the law that broke the contract, and I will acknowledge the fact that that person has the responsibility for stopping education funds for disabled students. But the only people I see here who hate disabled students enough to let them be pawns in their game are the NC legislators who knew they were breaking the contract which helped those students before they did it.

Person has dying family member who could be saved with a highly expensive, simple cure. Person steals the money to pay for treatment. Person is caught, and the money is returned to whoever it is stolen from. Even though it sucks, "but if you take the thing I stole back, they will die! You're killing my loved one!" is not a valid excuse. Just as "You can't deny funding even though we broke the contract that gave us funding because think of the children!" is not an excuse. And that's not really a good analogy, because the disabled students are a completely unrelated third party that is being held hostage by the state.

[Conserative Morality]

It's funny that the same people who bitch about welfare leeches want their money with no strings attached.

[Lady Scylla]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some-embrace-obama-administration%e2%80%99s-transgender-directive-others-vow-to-fight/ar-BBt1gSS?ocid=spartandhp

So, President Obama is willing to throw disadvantaged and disabled kids under “under the bus”, by cutting off Federal education dollars, for the sake of anti-sexual-segregation of school restrooms.

Personally, I find the notion of holding disadvantaged and disabled kids hostage to a social experiment downright despicable. I’m sure that there are probably enthusiastic supporters on the other side of the issue, however I also find it cowardly.

You surely have noticed that the Commander-In-Chief didn’t send this new proclamation to the U.S. Armed Forces, didn’t you? He doesn’t have the clout to make such a change to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) in the time that he remains President and likely couldn’t get it through Congress. Once again, he’s acting like an Emperor and not a President.

But that’s just my two cents.

Thankfully, two cents doesn't get very far. Things are expensive. State passed a law that could be used, and abused, to curtail around already set precedent. I see no issue with the Fed playing hardball -- if you have a problem with states' rights, you can take a look at 1860-1865.

[MightyQuinn]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some-embrace-obama-administration%e2%80%99s-transgender-directive-others-vow-to-fight/ar-BBt1gSS?ocid=spartandhp

So, President Obama is willing to throw disadvantaged and disabled kids under “under the bus”, by cutting off Federal education dollars, for the sake of anti-sexual-segregation of school restrooms.

Personally, I find the notion of holding disadvantaged and disabled kids hostage to a social experiment downright despicable. I’m sure that there are probably enthusiastic supporters on the other side of the issue, however I also find it cowardly.

You surely have noticed that the Commander-In-Chief didn’t send this new proclamation to the U.S. Armed Forces, didn’t you? He doesn’t have the clout to make such a change to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) in the time that he remains President and likely couldn’t get it through Congress. Once again, he’s acting like an Emperor and not a President.

But that’s just my two cents.

Thankfully, two cents doesn't get very far. Things are expensive. State passed a law that could be used, and abused, to curtail around already set precedent. I see no issue with the Fed playing hardball -- if you have a problem with states' rights, you can take a look at 1860-1865.

So, you're willing to go to war over this!?!?! What a totalitarian.

[Linux and the X]

They could have pulled the funding right away, as soon as NC breeched the contract, because that is how contracts work.

No, they couldn't. 20 USC § 1682 provides "that no such [termination of funding] shall be taken until the department or agency concerned has advised the appropriate person or persons of the failure to comply with the requirement and has determined that compliance cannot be secured by voluntary means."

[The East Marches]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/some-embrace-obama-administration%e2%80%99s-transgender-directive-others-vow-to-fight/ar-BBt1gSS?ocid=spartandhp

So, President Obama is willing to throw disadvantaged and disabled kids under “under the bus”, by cutting off Federal education dollars, for the sake of anti-sexual-segregation of school restrooms.

Personally, I find the notion of holding disadvantaged and disabled kids hostage to a social experiment downright despicable. I’m sure that there are probably enthusiastic supporters on the other side of the issue, however I also find it cowardly.

You surely have noticed that the Commander-In-Chief didn’t send this new proclamation to the U.S. Armed Forces, didn’t you? He doesn’t have the clout to make such a change to the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice) in the time that he remains President and likely couldn’t get it through Congress. Once again, he’s acting like an Emperor and not a President.

But that’s just my two cents.

Thankfully, two cents doesn't get very far. Things are expensive. State passed a law that could be used, and abused, to curtail around already set precedent. I see no issue with the Fed playing hardball -- if you have a problem with states' rights, you can take a look at 1860-1865.

Some things it is better to let the states handle. I am uncomfortable with playing political games with K-12 educational funds. While they do have the right to do this, that does not make it ok. Everybody would be screaming bloody murder if it were used in the opposite manner. The levers of power work for both sides, I prefer not to open paths that can't be closed again.

[Linux and the X]

Thankfully, two cents doesn't get very far. Things are expensive. State passed a law that could be used, and abused, to curtail around already set precedent. I see no issue with the Fed playing hardball -- if you have a problem with states' rights, you can take a look at 1860-1865.

Some things it is better to let the states handle. I am uncomfortable with playing political games with K-12 educational funds. While they do have the right to do this, that does not make it ok. Everybody would be screaming bloody murder if it were used in the opposite manner. The levers of power work for both sides, I prefer not to open paths that can't be closed again.

How do you mean "opposite manner"?

[The Black Forrest]

we'll see what happens but I am proud of my president standing up for the weak against the bullies.

People who will not protect individual rights cannot claim to champion minority rights.

*shrugs* Protecting "Christian" rights isn't the problem.

[The Black Forrest]

the right to pee without getting beaten up

A right to privacy.

As in?

[The Black Forrest]

It's funny that the same people who bitch about welfare leeches want their money with no strings attached.

But it's different!!!!!! *nods*

[MFrost]

I would just counsel the schools to shut down the bathrooms and bring in porta potties until such time the bathroom can be made to be single use.

1. No need for a gender identity crisis.
2. There is no sharing of facilities ,eliminating the fear of "my daughter is in the same restroom/shower as a what physically appears to be a boy.
--- I am assuming this extends to the usage of showers and girls locker room for any boy identifying themselves as a girl
3. It basically keeps the whole situation neutral and boys or girls identifying as the opposite sex can keep their own privacy without it being disclosed or becoming a gossip item for the whole school.

Since the fed is mandating this I would hope the fed is also funding the reconstruction of these facilities at the schools so they can easily comply with this order and avoid any potential class action lawsuits from parents should their daughter need therapy/psychiatric help due to being traumatized by being subjected to a loss of privacy and being forced to share facilities with what they perceive to be the opposite sex. Attorneys are going to have a field day with this one. 10-20K per parent in a semi-liberal state, if they get lucky, in a really conservative state down south x10 for this amount? Add in emotional distress, and a blatant disregard for the well being of a minor. will it be worth it?

So schools will need to weigh in the potential of law suits from parents who may have a phobia, warranted or not. and loss of federal funding. Sort of like a Cost risk analysis for the area the school is located in. Would they lose more thru lawsuits coming from parents or more if they lost federal funding. They would also need to weigh in the potential of a loss in students as more go to homeschooling therefore losing a portion of their state funding . What is the return on investment in complying vs. not complying. Do they want to wage the long legal battles against angry parents? Especially if they are in a district and state where they know a judge will side with the parents?

just some basic common sense being applied. my daughter has one more year of high school left and if they do this at her school and it stresses her or she comes home crying because of this i will not show mercy to the school district for subjecting her to conditions she did not agree to be subjected to. Under such circumstances I would reach out to just about every parent I could to join me in a multi-million if not billion dollar lawsuit. I would seek a lifetime worth of therapy to ensure her well being. Considering she is a minor and the depth and breath of the trauma caused is unknown. 1 mil x 2000 or so parents i do not know but this could get really expensive really fast. If they think they can just pay off and settle the state would still be looking at a few thousand schools. So how do you pay off a million angry parents demanding their children not be subjected to this?

Their best bet is to provide porta-potties and single person showers perhaps on a mobile trailer if need be. If they get state and federal funding then they can restructure and meet compliance with the law. i won't accept shortcuts and a statement of you will just have to live with it Hahahahahahaha too bad.

[United Marxist Nations]

>the most important issue the state could think of was how to best codify bathroom courtesy
Where did everything go so wrong?

[Kelinfort]

Thankfully, two cents doesn't get very far. Things are expensive. State passed a law that could be used, and abused, to curtail around already set precedent. I see no issue with the Fed playing hardball -- if you have a problem with states' rights, you can take a look at 1860-1865.

Some things it is better to let the states handle. I am uncomfortable with playing political games with K-12 educational funds. While they do have the right to do this, that does not make it ok. Everybody would be screaming bloody murder if it were used in the opposite manner. The levers of power work for both sides, I prefer not to open paths that can't be closed again.

So let the state's handle their own matters... With federal money.

Uh...

[MFrost]

Some things it is better to let the states handle. I am uncomfortable with playing political games with K-12 educational funds. While they do have the right to do this, that does not make it ok. Everybody would be screaming bloody murder if it were used in the opposite manner. The levers of power work for both sides, I prefer not to open paths that can't be closed again.

So let the state's handle their own matters... With federal money.

Uh...

and how will you stop parents from suing the school districts??? which one will a state chose, how many billions does the fed provide vs. paying off a million or so angry parents in a large state like California, New York or Texas? Will the fed indemnify them from these lawsuits or pay for the legal expenses?

This is about daddy's girl coming home crying because some naked boy jumped into the shower with them... it is not a matter of if but when and how often...
Alternately some boy peeked over the stall and stared at them while they were going to the bathroom. Just how upset do you think Daddy is going to be?

[USS Monitor]

If the states are so concerned about this money, and they need it so bad, they can just comply with the federal law about the bathrooms.

[Liriena]

So let the state's handle their own matters... With federal money.

Uh...

and how will you stop parents from suing the school districts??? which one will a state chose, how many billions does the fed provide vs. paying off a million or so angry parents in a large state like California, New York or Texas? Will the fed indemnify them from these lawsuits or pay for the legal expenses?

This is about daddy's girl coming home crying because some naked boy jumped into the shower with them... it is not a matter of if but when and how often...
Alternately some boy peeked over the stall and stared at them while they were going to the bathroom. Just how upset do you think Daddy is going to be?

Trans women have been going into women's restrooms for decades, and there have been no recorded cases of sexual harrassment in schools perpetrated by trans students or cisgender students posing as trans in any of the jurisdictions where trans people have been allowed to use the restrooms corresponding with their gender, or the jurisdictions where their right to do so has been recognized by law.

If all you have is wild speculation of a sudden surge of bigoted helicopter parents filing frivolous lawsuits, then we have little to discuss.

And while we are at it... who are you?

[The East Marches]

Some things it is better to let the states handle. I am uncomfortable with playing political games with K-12 educational funds. While they do have the right to do this, that does not make it ok. Everybody would be screaming bloody murder if it were used in the opposite manner. The levers of power work for both sides, I prefer not to open paths that can't be closed again.

So let the state's handle their own matters... With federal money.

Uh...

They did the same shit before over the drinking age. As I said before, they should have expected the Federal Government to do this. Its not the first time its happened. However, that doesn't make it right or a good idea. Watch what happens if we get a crazy get elected.

[The East Marches]

Some things it is better to let the states handle. I am uncomfortable with playing political games with K-12 educational funds. While they do have the right to do this, that does not make it ok. Everybody would be screaming bloody murder if it were used in the opposite manner. The levers of power work for both sides, I prefer not to open paths that can't be closed again.

How do you mean "opposite manner"?

If somebody else gets into power who doesn't recognize transgender people's rights. They can threaten to cut certain funding for the states too. I'm sure some legal wizard can dream up justification for it. They've done worse on less basis before.

[Linux and the X]

and how will you stop parents from suing the school districts???

By making it clear that complying with federal law does not incur civil liability, and any such lawsuits will be dismissed with the plaintiff responsible for all legal costs?

This is about daddy's girl coming home crying because some naked boy jumped into the shower with them... it is not a matter of if but when and how often...

Well, unless over 40 years of precedent is unreliable, the answer to that is "never".

If somebody else gets into power who doesn't recognize transgender people's rights. They can threaten to cut certain funding for the states too. I'm sure some legal wizard can dream up justification for it. They've done worse on less basis before.

That'd b pretty surprising, since Title IX prohibits discrimination.

[Arumbia67]

It's nothing more than bullying and pure extortion. Can we get a law passed to keep the feds from pulling this kind of shit? Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the bathroom rule only apply to private businesses? There's a simple solution. If you don't like segregated bathrooms, DON'T SHOP AT STORES THAT HAVE THEM. Why is that so difficult?

[MFrost]

and how will you stop parents from suing the school districts??? which one will a state chose, how many billions does the fed provide vs. paying off a million or so angry parents in a large state like California, New York or Texas? Will the fed indemnify them from these lawsuits or pay for the legal expenses?

This is about daddy's girl coming home crying because some naked boy jumped into the shower with them... it is not a matter of if but when and how often...
Alternately some boy peeked over the stall and stared at them while they were going to the bathroom. Just how upset do you think Daddy is going to be?

Trans women have been going into women's restrooms for decades, and there have been no recorded cases of sexual harrassment in schools perpetrated by trans students or cisgender students posing as trans in any of the jurisdictions where trans people have been allowed to use the restrooms corresponding with their gender, or the jurisdictions where their right to do so has been recognized by law.

If all you have is wild speculation of a sudden surge of bigoted helicopter parents filing frivolous lawsuits, then we have little to discuss.

And while we are at it... who are you?

However this is going to go nationwide, and not to some small percentage of the general population. different areas have different cultural values, they also have different moral standards.
Are the bathrooms you are talking about monitored, under what conditions were the transgendered children allowed to use the restrooms? were they cleared out first or just adhoc usage?
What measures did the school take to protect not only the transgendered child but the other children potentially using this bathroom? Girls can be vicious too if they feel threatened.

i am stating the above because the directive exponentially and dramatically increases the odds of an adverse event occurring especially if a school does not take proper precautions. This is not limited to just non-transgender students. But is inclusive of transgender students being targeted, bullied, beat up.

Do you honestly think the football jock down south in Texas or in the bible belt is going to let some transgender kid walk into the bathroom his cheerleader girlfriend just walked into? give it a moments thought what is the culture like down there, how were they raised, what are their morals and beliefs? Putting yourself in that persons shoes or just picturing it from the outside looking in, what do you think is about to happen. A happy go for it slap on the back or something else? So when some transgender kid winds up dead because of this who will the parents look to for enforcing this policy and setting their kid up? It must be safe the school said it was ok to do so... the policy just destroyed the lives of two kids because of cultural indifference.

I honestly do not feel this directive was well thought out.

who i am is unimportant to the discussion, just new member who found this to be an interesting topic.