• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

NY Governor bans Travel to NC, Really?

Skwim

Veteran Member
Some oxen need goring. Given the prevalence of sexual harassment in the heterosexual community, this is a non-issue.
So some transgendered people need to be "gored." Interesting.


But, again, are you going to need some professional proof saying you're transgendered, not just some pervert that wants to watch little girls pee?
.
If that's what it takes, then so be it. Transgendered people will need to carry "proof" with them.

And, if it is the legal for males to be in female's bathrooms,
Legal for transgendered males . . . .

how can I be arrested for just standing around in a dress?
Easily. Go to a state where men are not permitted to be in women's restrooms.

Trespass. There’s a strong argument that a man entering a ladies’ room is a person who has, without authorization, entered a building of another and so is guilty of first-degree trespass. G.S. 14-159.12. One might argue that a restroom is not a building but a room within a building. However, it may qualify as a building under G.S. 14-159.11, which defines the term as “any structure or part of a structure . . . enclosed so as to permit reasonable entry only through a door.” Supporting that interpretation is Com. v. White, 538 A.2d 887 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1988), where the court affirmed a conviction for criminal trespass after the male defendant entered the women’s restroom of an athletic club. The court ruled that the restroom was a “separately secured or occupied portion” of the building that was reserved for women’s use. Update: See also In re S.M.S., 196 N.C. App. 170 (2009) (affirming an adjudication of second-degree trespass after a boy entered a girls’ locker room, and stating that “[t]he sign marked ‘Girl’s Locker Room’ was reasonably likely to give respondent notice that he was not authorized to go into the girls’ locker room”).
source


.
 
Top