Does there really have to be a law?

One of the most overused phrases in the English language is: There ought to be a law.

There ought to be common sense, but these days that seems entirely uncommon.

Perhaps that is why Assemblywoman Vicki Dooling believed it necessary to introduce Assembly Bill 375, which would enact into state law the dictate that public school facilities — such as restrooms, locker rooms and showers — designed for gender segregation be used only by persons of the designated biological gender.

The bill is being pushed by Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Family Alliance, who says she discovered that two Nevada school districts — Clark and Washoe — had been contemplating adopting school policies that were basically cut and pasted from an online model policy by the National Center for Transgender Equality.

Here are a couple excerpts from the model policy:

“Students shall have access to all restrooms that correspond to their gender identity consistently asserted at school. Any student who has a need or desire for increased privacy, regardless of the underlying reason, should be provided access to a single user restroom. However, no student shall be required to use such a restroom because they are transgender or gender nonconforming. …trans

“The use of locker rooms by transgender students shall be assessed on a case-by-case basis with the goals of maximizing the student’s social integration and equal opportunity to participate in physical education classes and sports, ensuring the student’s safety and comfort, and minimizing stigmatization of the student. In most cases, transgender students should have access to the locker room that corresponds to their gender identity consistently asserted at school, like all other students. …

“All students shall be permitted to participate in physical education classes and intramural sports in a manner consistent with their gender identity.”

The accommodation of one is paramount over the discomfit of everyone else in this society in which the rule has become: Be tolerant or we’ll the beat the crap out of you.

Witness the pummeling death of two bills in the Nevada Legislature under the rubric of restoring religious freedom.

Will a bill with language such as this survive?

“For any pupil who asserts at school a gender that is different than the pupil’s biological sex, a public school shall provide the best available accommodation that meets the needs of the pupil, but such accommodation must not include access to a school restroom, locker room or shower designated for use by persons whose biological sex is different from the pupil’s biological sex.”

That’s discrimination!

Or have we forgotten that the original definition of discrimination was the ability to understand that one thing is different from another thing.

“It still comes as a surprise to many parents that there are people advocating to allow boys in the girls bathroom,” said England in a press release. “But, of course privacy opponents rarely are so blunt about their intentions. They lobby for open bathrooms and locker rooms claiming that open bathrooms actually provide more privacy and safety.”

The various draft policies stress the privacy of the “transgender” or “gender nonconforming” student to the point that it appears teachers and administrators would be prohibited from discussing with the child’s parents his/her or her/his behavior at school.

Philip K. Howard’s 1995 book “The Death of Common Sense” was prophetic.

The innocence of childhood lost.



39 comments on “Does there really have to be a law?

  1. Steve says:

    New rules:

    Transgender bathrooms.
    Transgender locker rooms.
    Transgender sports.
    Transgender Olympics.

    After all, in reality, we have created a third sex.

  2. Athos says:

    “We” haven’t created anything, except cowards and morons. Back when I was a young man, the APA recognized sodomites as having a mental disorder. As for anyone wanting to mutilate their private parts, what state of mind would countenance that kind of decision?

    But then again, we had a lot more common sense back then. It used to be the mark of a true man to call ’em as he sees ’em. Speaking the Truth, how passe!

  3. nyp says:


    Add homophobia to Athos’s documented record of racism.

  4. Steve says:

    An example of today’s liberal one way “interpretation” of “tolerance” proudly displayed by Nyp.

  5. nyp says:

    Yes, I am intolerant of people — like Athos — who calls Gay Americans “sodomites,” and suggests that they suffer from a “mental disorder.”

    Just as I am intolerant of people — like Athos — who suggest that black Americans are genetically inferior to White Americans.

  6. Steve says:

    So you advocate the application of hate speech on these groups of people.


  7. nyp says:

    Trying to wrap my mind around the notion that it is “hate speech” to denounce bigoted statements by people like Athos.

  8. Athos says:

    It would appear that we are not the only generation to be populated with buffoons. Love the quote from Thomas Gray, “Where ignorance is bliss, ‘tis folly to be wise.”

    Hat tip, Mitch!

  9. Steve says:

    What many call hate speech others call “bigoted statements”
    Depends on the point of view, doesn’t it?

    Living up to all the things today’s modern liberal establishment claims it wants is much more difficult than it seems.

  10. Credit where credit is due: Vin Suprynowicz sent me that link about the filters.

  11. nyp says:

    Gee, Mr. Mitchell, you don’t have to apply any sort of filter at all. But when bigots like Athos take to your blog to denounce gay citizens as “sodomites” and to contend that black Americans are genetically inferior, it is telling that you cannot bestir yourself to utter a word of disagreement, much less condemnation. After all, you regularly engage with your commentators when they say terrible things –such as suggesting that the Estate Tax on upper income families isn’t such a bad thing. But homophobia and racism? You can’t be bothered.

    Personally, I think that is because you agree with the sentiments that Athos expresses. You treat him as your Mini-Me.

  12. Winston Smith says:

    Dang, I was hoping to be Tom’s Mini-Me!

    Or maybe Vin’s…

  13. Winston Smith says:

    Gee, DARPA, I don’t think anyone here fears homosexuals…oh, sorry…gays. They just believe that according to the Bible, it is a sin. Sorry, just a fact of life that many people of the older persuasion haven’t been entirely overran by political correctness and refuse to buy into the latest MSM/government/corporate PC pronouncements.

    I guess they’ll be first taken to the re-education camps…

  14. Athos says:

    I sure miss Vin’s editorials! The Sunday RJ isn’t the same, is it?

  15. Athos says:

    petey, what’s the matter with the term Sodomites? Too Biblical for ya?

    That is what they do, after all! Or didn’t you know that?

  16. Vin sure shook things up. You should read his novel. It has a really surprising ending.

    He blogs occasionally at:

  17. nyp says:

    “Back when I was a young man, the APA recognized sodomites as having a mental disorder…. But then again, we had a lot more common sense back then. It used to be the mark of a true man to call ’em as he sees ’em. Speaking the Truth, how passe!”

    That’s the sort of sentiment that Thomas Mitchell has no problem with.

  18. Winston Smith says:

    DARPA, haven’t you figured out that yet that most people posting here don’t care about your attempts at PC guilting them? They’ve been around long enough to recognize the games you play and not give them a second thought. Praps you’re more successful with the other places you haunt, but here you’re just an amateur…

    BTW, if you don’t like “sodomite”, I’m sure I could come up with some more descriptive terms…

  19. nyp says:

    I completely understand that people like you and Mr. Mitchell do not mind someone calling gay Americans “sodomites” and saying that they have a “mental disorder.” Or stating that black Americans are genetically inferior. That is what conservatives say to one another when they have the cloak of anonymity.

  20. Athos says:

    “Gay American”? You mean like Kate Smith? Annonymity petey? You care to give us all your name? And for your information, I’ve never worked for the APA!

  21. Winston Smith says:

    Just love your generalizations about conservatives, DARPA. I guess I can generalize too:

    When “liberals” have gotten together over the last 50 years or so, they said they were going to destroy our Christian culture, by mainstreaming abortion and homosexuality through the media. By promoting pre-marital sex and drug use. By spreading socialism under the rubric of superior compassion. By mocking religion and morality in television and movies. By destroying parental authority with government intrusion. By encouraging racial turmoil with a divide-and-conquer mentality. By bringing in millions of illegal aliens with no understanding of our history to eventually replace our Constitutional republic with a social(ist) democracy.

    And yes, these “liberals” have attempted to replace free thought with political correctness, so that anyone opposing their Hegelian machinations will be accused of a hate crime and be verbally and sometimes physically attacked.

    How’s that for generalizations?

  22. Athos says:

    That pretty much sums it up nicely, Winston. It’s a shame you’re not running for President.

  23. Athos says:

    But then again, politicians have a hard time speaking the truth, don’t they?

  24. nyp says:

    You have no problem with someone calling gay Americans “sodomites” who suffer from a “mental disorder,” nor with someone who calls black people genetically inferior. Your only response to such racist, homophobic statements is to denounce those who denounce them. Mr. Mitchell, of course, has no problem with such sentiments being expressed on his blog. No one else here will bother to call a racist homophobe a racist homophobe. So my generalization about how conservatives talk to one another under the cloak of anonymity is more than a generalization; it is rooted in empirical observation. You think you are bravely bucking “political correctness.” In reality, you are just expressing your core racism, homophobia and fear of losing your privileged positions in the social order.

  25. Steve says:

    “No one else here will bother to call a racist homophobe a racist homophobe.”

    You, incorrectly, called someone a misogynist. I made the correction to possible homophobe.

    You are and always will be, wrong trying to make your one sided “tolerance” work.

  26. Winston Smith says:

    Oh DARPA, I only denounce “liberals” for their attempts to destroy Christianity, our liberty and our Constitutional Republic.

    You claim that some of us are racist, because we openly discuss certain things that you apparently find irritating:

    Are these “racist” scores a result of nature or nurture? Am I a racist for even wondering?

    When I was young, Wilt Chamberlain and Hank Aaron were among my heroes, just as Ken Griffey Jr. and Russell Wilson are now. And Ken Hamblin, Thomas Sowell and Walter E. Williams. You see, I try to judge a man (or woman) by their character, just as Martin Luther King, Jr. suggested.

    And yes, I believe homosexuality is a sin before God, despite the PC brainwashing that is shoved in my face on a consistent basis. This is not a phobia, it is a stark acknowledgement of moral values going back three millennia. That doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate what Tammy Bruce says, or Elton John plays, despite their chosen sexuality.

    Now, if I didn’t think you are simply a govbot (or bots) working diligently to change the opinions of weak-minded people across the internet, I’d actually give a shit about showing why I’m right and you’re wrong, but as (liberal icon) Upton Sinclair said: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

  27. nyp says:

    “homosexuality is a sin before God”

  28. nyp says:

    “You claim that some of us are racist, because we openly discuss certain things that you apparently find irritating.”

  29. Winston Smith says:

    Oh DARPA, if you disagree with Judeo-Christian values as outlined in the Bible, just say it, we won’t judge you…or force you the change…

    Are the ACT scores racist or not? And can we not discuss them without hurting your feelings?

  30. nyp says:

    Yes, I disagree with the “Judeo-Christian values, as outlined in the Bible,” that homosexuals should be stoned to death. For that matter, I also disagree with “Judeo-Christian values, as outlined in the Bible,” that people who work on Saturdays should be put to death. Similarly, I disagree with “Judeo-Christian values, as outlined in the Bible, that sons who disobey their parents should be stoned to death. And for that matter, I disagree with disagree with “Judeo-Christian values, as outlined in the Bible,” that human slavery is a good thing, and that it is acceptable to beat slaves. And I disagree with disagree with “Judeo-Christian values, as outlined in the Bible,” that adulterers and brides who turn out not be virgins should be put to death.

    I disagree with all of those Judeo-Christian values as outlined in the Bible, just as I disagree with the disagree with “Judeo-Christian value, as outlined in the Bible,” that homosexuality is a sin.

  31. Winston Smith says:

    Wow, nice response. You seem kinda riled, eh?

    And how about those ACT scores, racist or not?

  32. nyp says:

    I know that Athos’s contention that black people are genetically inferior is as racist as one could possibly get.

  33. Winston Smith says:

    You’re dodging…

  34. Athos says:

    Well now! petey being petey (Leftist Champion in today’s Degenerate World!).

    I must interject a quote from a particularly corrupt individual that inadvertently gets something right (like the proverbial stopped clock!) :

    “in things racial we have always been and I believe continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards”

    But don’t ask petey about the disparity of ACT scores.

  35. […] and administrators. Though proponents of the law are doubtlessly correct that left-leaning local  educrats are too easily gulled, cowed and manipulated by LGBTQ lobby, despite the concerns of the vast majority of parents who […]

  36. K. Martin says:

    God says this to the evildoer: “How can you declare my commands, and talk about my covenant? For you hate instruction and reject my words. When you see a thief, you join him; you associate with men who are unfaithful to their wives. You do damage with words, and use your tongue to deceive. You plot against your brother; you slander your own brother. When you did these things, I was silent, so you thought I was exactly like you. But now I will condemn you and state my case against you! Carefully consider this, you who reject God! Otherwise I will rip you to shreds and no one will be able to rescue you.

  37. […] A bill that would have required public schools to provide gender-neutral facilities for boys who think they are girls and girls who think they are boys was scoffed at and went nowhere. […]

  38. […] April: One of the most overused phrases in the English language is: There ought to be a law. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s