Houston voters reject transgender bathrooms, pro-sodomite “rights” legislation November 4, 2015Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, disaster, error, General Catholic, horror, paganism, rank stupidity, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, SOD, Victory.
The article at the link is calling the victory against Houston Mayor Anise Parker’s transgender bathroom proposal huge, a stomping, but I would hope that more than 61% of the people could see through the sodomite-sexular pagan rationale and find it hideous. But so many souls are lost in sins of sexual immorality themselves these days. About 15 years ago, Texans passed a constitutional amendment against same-sex marriage 75-20. Now a similar issue is down to 61%. Still good, but not near where it should be.
And this proposal was really, really nasty, as the text below explains:
An ordinance in Houston that provided far-reaching nondiscrimination rights for gay and transgender people went down in flames on Tuesday night — and it wasn’t remotely close.
The Houston Equal Rights Ordinance — Proposition 1 on the local ballot would have extended bans on employment and housing discrimination based on race, religion, sex, national original and other classifications to gay people, bisexual people and transgender people.
Foes of the law focused like a laser beam on the transgender aspect of the law. They characterized it as the “bathroom ordinance,” saying it would allow men who wear women’s clothes — and sexual predators — to use public women’s bathrooms. They also said the ordinance would conflict with religious liberty and generate a raft of litigation against Houston’s small businesses.
By the wee hours of Tuesday morning, 95 percent of the ballots had been counted and 61 percent of voters opposed Proposition 1, according to The Texas Tribune.
Proposition 1 found its way onto the ballot in America’s fourth-largest city this summer when the Supreme Court ruled that the expansive law — which had been briefly in effect — required the say-so of the actual citizens it would affect.
The Texas Supreme Court reached its decision because five pastors had brought a lawsuit after Houston’s taxpayer-funded city attorneys, led by Houston Mayor Annise Parker, attempted to subpoena their sermons…….
……..Proposition 1 found its way onto the ballot in America’s fourth-largest city this summer when the Supreme Court ruled that the expansive law — which had been briefly in effect — required the say-so of the actual citizens it would affect.
The Texas Supreme Court reached its decision because five pastors had brought a lawsuit after Houston’s taxpayer-funded city attorneys, led by Houston Mayor Annise Parker, attempted to subpoena their sermons. [Among other acts of chilling repression. And yet I just love it when our proggie friends tell us how their sodomite agenda hasn’t caused even one Christian even the slightest inconvenience. As with everything else, they lie.]……..
…..George Washington Law School professor John Banzhaf noted that Houston’s attempt to grant the right of bathroom choice to transgender individuals infringes on the privacy rights of everyone else who wants to use the bathroom. [As well as being hideously immoral and disgusting! For MANY reasons I don’t want to find women in the restroom with me!]
“Many women would feel very uneasy, and suffer what they regard as an invasion of their sexual privacy, if they were forced to share restroom, shower, and other facilities with anatomical men, regardless of what the men claim,” Banzhaf told The Daily Caller. [And it is shattering to think we actually have to debate this, to vote on it! We treat ourselves and each other like cattle. That’s what hundreds of years of anti-Christian rationalist, endarkenment thought have reduced us to. Animal rutting and such a total loss of reason that we have to fight about whether even the most private acts must be sacrificed on the altar of sexular paganism!]
“According to what my students tell me, the problem with coed restrooms isn’t privacy as much as it is physical safety,” the law professor explained. [Well then your college students are insane, but go figure] “Female students who might not hesitate even a moment to share a restroom with male students during heavy-use time during the day are concerned that, if they have to go at night, a guy could be lurking there — completely lawfully under the Houston ordinance — intent on sexual assault or rape when she could literally be caught with her pants down. With traditional men’s and women’s rooms, the woman would immediately exit the restroom she was entering if she saw a man inside, and probably call the police. But, under the new ordinance, nothing could be done if the man claims that he believes himself to be a woman trapped in a man’s body, and so she would have no choice but to share a restroom with a male stranger.” [And in fact her registering of a complaint could get HER prosecuted for discrimination. But sheesh are these college kids wacked out today if college girls think sharing a bathroom with men is just A OK! Do we really want to know this much about each other?!? I’m as straight as they come but the thought of sharing a bathroom with a woman is just like blech! There is absolutely no sense of propriety and decency anymore.]
Banzhaf also observed that Houston’s failed law would not provide equal treatment but, instead, an affirmative accommodation. [And this is the key, behind all the pro-sodomite ordinances and laws of late]
“Blacks, Jews, and even gays do not require or even seek separate restrooms or other different treatment; they ask simply to be treated like everyone else,” he told TheDC. “But transgender people demand a special accommodation, not available to others, because of how they feel, and regardless of how typical women might feel about a person with a penis sharing their restroom.” [Well sodomites arguing to be “treated like everyone else” is false, too, because they’re not like everyone else, are they? They are a tiny minority practicing acts that have long been considered – in almost all societies – absolutely shocking, even unmentionable. And yet they, with the backing of their powerful leftist friends, insist on changing, and likely ruining, the fundamental building blocks of society so they can get that affirmation they so desperately crave, but which never quite comes, no matter how many “victories” they win. And saying that pagan Greece and Rome tolerated sodomy (which examples are overwrought by a huge measure, generally) as some kind of example is hardly an uplifting example, is it? Those societies were just one level removed from barbarism themselves.]
The vote on Proposition 1 brought national attention to Houston. Politicians including Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden urged residents to vote in favor of the ordinance. Religious figures and some famous athletes urged Houstonians to reject it.
Well, thankfully they did, but I fear the younger generation – the “Millenials,” or whatever – has been so thoroughly indoctrinated in sexular paganism, left so thoroughly unable to think for themselves, and is so given over to porn use, self-abuse, and base animalistic rutting, that I have little confidence we shall be able to stave off further advances down the road to out and out debauchery and publicly endorsed (and quite likely, enforced) immorality of the basest kind. The quotes above certainly don’t give me much hope. Young people are not just morally lost, they are completely without a moral compass whatsoever, by and large. They cannot distinguish right from wrong on any other basis than “if it feels good, do it” and the basest kind of sentimentality. They are more than half-barbarian themselves.
Forgive my negativity, but barring an enormous moral and cultural miracle, I don’t see a happy ending to any of this without a civilizational collapse occurring first. Then it will simply be a matter of 5 or 10 centuries of rebuilding, after the utter insanity of the leftist paradigm has been made too obvious, by ruin, suffering, and death, to ignore.
So Houstonians, did the Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston or any priest down there bother to make a statement against this ordinance, to your knowledge?