It used to be that a man in a woman’s restroom was cause for arrest. Now, not letting a man use a women’s restroom will get you in hot water — and from the Obama Administration, no less.
Apparently, a woman’s right to safety and privacy takes a back seat to the rights of transgender men and women who will get their feelings hurt if they’re forced to use the bathroom assigned to their sex.
The fact that the Obama Administration would bother meddling bathroom rights is ridiculous in its own right, but its made even worse when you consider that the laws the administration claims are being broken don’t even exist.
Of course, that isn’t stopping Obama and his people from harassing employers who don’t subscribe to the president’s bathroom vision for America.
See who the administration is targeting on the next page:
US District Court Western District Texas Eure-v- Sage Nov 19 12014(“[W]e are constrained to hold that Title VII does not protect transsexuals”); Sommers v. Budget Mktg., Inc., 667 F.2d 748, 750 (8th Cir. 1982) (“Because Congress has not shown an intention to protect transsexuals, we hold that discrimination based on one’s transsexualism does not fall within the protective purview of [Title VII]”); Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293, 304 (D.D.C. 2008) (“[W]e are constrained to hold that Title VII does not protect transsexuals”); Sommers v. Budget Mktg., Inc., 667 F.2d 748, 750 (8th Cir. 1982) (“Because Congress has not shown an intention to protect transsexuals, we hold that discrimination based on one’s transsexualism does not fall within the protective purview of [Title VII]”); Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293, 304 (D.D.C. 2008)
ill be so glad when I don’t have to look at this evil brown face hope it dosent get replaced by they grinning criminall.
US District Court Western District Texas Eure-v- Sage Nov 19 12014(“[W]e are constrained to hold that Title VII does not protect transsexuals”); Sommers v. Budget Mktg., Inc., 667 F.2d 748, 750 (8th Cir. 1982) (“Because Congress has not shown an intention to protect transsexuals, we hold that discrimination based on one’s transsexualism does not fall within the protective purview of [Title VII]”); Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293, 304 (D.D.C. 2008) (“[W]e are constrained to hold that Title VII does not protect transsexuals”); Sommers v. Budget Mktg., Inc., 667 F.2d 748, 750 (8th Cir. 1982) (“Because Congress has not shown an intention to protect transsexuals, we hold that discrimination based on one’s transsexualism does not fall within the protective purview of [Title VII]”); Schroer v. Billington, 577 F. Supp. 2d 293, 304 (D.D.C. 2008)
Walter is in severe denial….
Fu–em.
Obama needs to be brought to justice. Can’t push his$#%&!@*life on citizens.
One Sorry Sick Bastard
Why do Republicans always have a fixation with genitals, sex and invasive government? Oh, yeah they don’t want you to remember who the real threat is. Federal Judge Thomas Durkin called Hastert, 74, a “serial child molester” and rejected a prosecutor’s recommendation of six months in prison on a banking charge that carries a maximum five-year sentence. The court also fined Hastert $250,000 and sentenced him to two years of supervised release after leaving prison. Hastert must register as a sex offender.
You should’ve know better than to vote for a Muslim for President even the FIRST time.
we the people need to stand up the longer we do nothing the harder it,s going to be to undo what he is doing to this country the time is now not later