Christians and American patriots turned out to protest the addition of “sexual orientations,” historically known as “mental illnesses” and part of the judgment of God upon idolaters (Rom. 1:18-27), with regards to the legal use of gender-designated bathrooms by those who profess to be “transgender.”
The issue was first addressed in 1992. At that time, the council voted 7-4 against the measure.
The proposal before the Charlotte City Council on Monday was narrowly defeated by a 6-5 vote following hours of debate and comments from both supporters and opponents.
The Charlotte Observer reports:
Before the final vote, council members had removed the section of the ordinance that would have allowed transgender people to use the bathroom of the gender they identify with. That issue drew the most vigorous opposition from dozens of speakers.
“All over the world, there are restrooms for men and restrooms for women,” said (Ed) Driggs, a Republican. “It does not place an unreasonable burden on them and it does not stigmatize them.”
But even with the bathroom portion removed, Council remained divided. Several council members had said they were opposed to removing that part, which would also have applied to locker rooms and showers, because it weakened the ordinance.
“I will not and I cannot support an amendment that does not protect all of our citizens,” said (Lawana) Mayfield, a Democrat.
Mayfield and Autry, also a Democrat, voted against removing the bathroom section, and both voted against the final bill because they couldn’t support a half measure.
Sadly, people like Mayfield and John Autry try to twist this into a perverted view of protection and justice. In other words, they want to protect those who are mentally ill enough to think they are a man when they are actually a woman and those who are a man, but think themselves to be a woman. These individuals want to allow the mentally ill to be protected to the point that they can enter into bathrooms of those who are actually the opposite gender. That isn’t protection. It’s opening up the innocent for sexual assault, which is criminal and should not be protected.
Autry claimed, “The struggle will have to continue. Justice delayed is justice denied.”
Actually Mr. Autry, nothing in this proposal is justice. Justice has to do with being lawful and meeting out punishment for breaking the law. As it stands, bathrooms have been gender designated to protect the privacy of those genders that use them, not for the purpose of letting the sexually deviant and mentally ill impose themselves on the innocent of the community.
Ely Portillo said he had never seen such a crowd gathered for a meeting like this, tweeting out:
— Ely Portillo (@ESPortillo) March 2, 2015
City Councilman Ed Driggs, a Republican who opposed the ordinance said, “All over the world, there are restrooms for men and restrooms for women,” said City Councilman Ed Driggs, a Republican who opposed the measure, the Charlotte Observer reported. “It does not place an unreasonable burden on them and it does not stigmatize them.”
Kenny Smith, a Republican, said the ordinance was motivated by a political agenda to “impose the progressive left’s new morality on our citizens,” not a desire to end discrimination.
Of course, the ordinance is not about justice or discrimination. It is exactly as Kenny Smith said, imposing an agenda. Interestingly enough, that agenda has already been defined in the homosexual manifesto, which is part of the congressional record. This is just a step in that direction. Thankfully, there are enough people who showed up to bring some sense of reason and morality to the issue.
Jeanette Wilson told the council, “This mama bear is frustrated. … Homosexuals want those who disagree with them to be defeated. I will not be silenced. A man’s right to choose the lady’s room is ridiculous and it’s dangerous.”
Adam Tennant echoed Wilson’s sentiments as he said the issue is a moral one.
“It is evil to allow men into women’s restrooms,” he said. “You’re going to stand before a holy God on the Day of Judgment.”
Of course, those that want to cover for men who dress up like women and put on wigs and makeup as those looking to prey on children in the bathroom said such claims were a “red herring.”
One lesbian from Charlotte, Crystal Richardson said, “I stand before you as someone who can be thrown out of a Charlotte hotel for who I am.”
No, Ms. Richardson, you would be thrown out for what your behavior.
One sick-minded individual, Laura Levin, a Concord pediatrician, who claims he is a female, yet all he has to show for it is a mutilated body, but retains all the DNA and chromosomes of a male, referred to those in opposition of the ordinance as the “bathroom inquisition.”
However, Jason Jimenez hit the nail on the head when he said, “To support this law is to be a bully. We as adults in this city have a right to protect our children. … This process is corrupt. We are telling the City Council: We know your dirty business.”
Houston’s lesbian mayor and the city council have tried to ramrod a similar ordinance down the people’s throats and even engaged in criminal activity against the people (besides the fact that Annise Parker’s behavior is criminal in and of itself) by attempting to alter the count of a public petition to put the measure on the November ballot and later claimed it was never validated, even though it was. She even went so far as to claim the pastors, whose sermons were subpoenaed and later that subpoena was dropped, had no right to a jury trial. Of course, the pastors claimed she had been deceptive “every step of the way” in defending the illegal bathroom ordinance.
Houston didn’t take it standing down and now it seems that Charlotte isn’t going to take it either.