By Mario Gonzalez, Esq.
For more, visit www.gonzlawgroup.com
Biological males now protected as having a Constitutional right to bathe along with biological females in High School, so long as they believe themselves to be female, notwithstanding the presence of a distinctly male organ for all (biological females) to see or turn away from. This is the finding of Federal education authorities in Illinois against an Illinois school district seeking to honor the requests of parents who found the practice disgraceful. It’s only going to get worse unless the Church and other groups rally together and demand basic common respect.
Here’s an excerpt from my lecture series on the outcome of the Same-Sex Marriage Decision which foretold of this move. It is part of my section on “The Trojan Horse.” –
“Here’s the problem - Allowing people who identify as gay or lesbian to marry is a question of what the State does. It governs the conduct of state or governmental officials. However, how you treat alleged discrimination against people who identify as gay is another question altogether. This is a question that addresses the behavior of private actors - business owners, private employers, pastors, licensed teachers, public and private schools, licensed counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists and so on. Now we have a Supreme Court precedent that can be used to force people to act against their religious beliefs by claiming that simply acting on their faith is a discriminatory act.
As expected, WITHIN ONE MONTH OF THE DECISION, the EEOC in a 3-2 ruling (notice how close these rulings are – around 50% are AGAINST) held that discrimination against someone in employment for sexual preference is the same as sex discrimination (an established protected class) and is to be treated accordingly. This law basically proscribes disparate treatment of “similarly situated persons.” It essentially allows enforcement action by federal, state and local municipalities against private citizens, companies, or generally “actors” as an anti-discrimination effort.
By conflating the two issues (the right to marry and discrimination based on an individual’s personal sexual preference and/or preferred sexual identity) and by morally justifying homosexuality in its holding, Obergefell essentially established A NEW DE FACTO CIVIL RIGHT affecting an ever-expanding and as yet undefined group of people (LGBTQ…?). This decision not only forced states to ignore their democratically adopted domestic relations laws (family law) against the will of the people in those states, but it will now be used to demand equal protection for this as yet undefined group to engage in behavior considered by most as morally unacceptable for thousands of years, such as the unfettered use of restrooms or showers of one's choosing, irrespective of one's biological gender, based solely on a person’s claimed (and unchallenged) psycho-sexual proclivity or identity. This will be allowed and protected by law as a result of this holding irrespective of how morally repugnant the choice might be to others directly affected by it. For example, a young girl might now find herself in the same bathroom as an adult biological male with his organ in place and very much in working order.
In summary, based on this opinion, the Court has not only established itself as the Supreme Court of the land, but as a Supreme entity. It is no longer limited to merely interpreting the laws of the several States in light of the Constitution, but can now apparently confer dignity on what or who it sees fit. Look up the article in the New York times by clicking here: