Thread: Florida Conservatives Fight for Repeal of Transgender Restroom Rule

PayPal does business in 25 countries where homosexual behavior is illegal, including 5 where the penalty is death, yet they object to the North Carolina legislature overturning a misguided ordinance about letting men into the women's bathroom? Perhaps PayPal would like to try and clarify this seemingly very hypocritical position.

8 Questions for PayPal on Its Decision to Boycott North Carolina
Katrina Trinko April 06, 2016

Mr. Schulman,

On Tuesday, you announced PayPal, where you are the president and CEO, was no longer going to open a new operations center in Charlotte, N.C., because “legislation has been abruptly enacted by the state of North Carolina that invalidates protections of the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender citizens and denies these members of our community equal rights under the law.”

I have a few questions for you about PayPal’s decision.

1. North Carolina’s new law would ensure that public multi-occupancy bathrooms—not bathrooms controlled by private companies or individuals, such as the PayPal bathrooms—correspond to a person’s biological sex as listed on their birth certificates (which can be changed). Why does PayPal object to that? Does PayPal believe that providing LGBT Americans “equal rights under the law” requires allowing people who are biologically male to use women’s bathrooms?

2. What is PayPal’s response to sexual assault survivors like Janine Simon, a Washington state resident who talked with The Daily Signal about Washington’s new bathroom regulations that permitted people to enter bathrooms of sex he or she identifies with, not biological sex? She said: “I’ve had my first panic attack in 10 years now knowing in my state there are only certain bathrooms that I will be able to enter safely.”

3. What is PayPal’s response to Kaley Triller, another sexual assault survivor, who wrote in The Federalist last year: “Don’t they know that one out of every four little girls will be sexually abused during childhood, and that’s without giving predators free access to them while they shower?”

4. Does PayPal believe that Triller is a bigot? She also wrote: “I am not saying that transgender people are predators. Not by a long shot. What I am saying is that there are countless deviant men in this world who will pretend to be transgender as a means of gaining access to the people they want to exploit, namely women and children.”

5. In your statement, you spoke of PayPal’s “strong belief that every person has the right to be treated equally, and with dignity and respect.” Do you believe a rule allowing people who remain biologically male to enter a women’s bathroom treats Ms. Simon and Ms. Triller with dignity and respect?

6. The new North Carolina law also requires cities and localities to follow state rules regarding employment. As Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Hans Bader described it, such a law “is good for businesses, promotes freedom of contract, and prevents a confusing patchwork quilt of regulation that varies from city to city and county to county.” Does PayPal intend to not have company operations in any state with such a law, even if it is a liberal state?

7. You wrote in your statement that “the new law perpetuates discrimination.” Does PayPal intend to leave and/or not start company operations in states such as Oregon, where Aaron and Melissa Klein paid a $135,000 fine for not baking a cake for a same-sex couple, or New York, where Robert and Cynthia Gifford have been forced to change their wedding business because they won’t host same-sex weddings at their home? If not, why? What kinds of discrimination does PayPal oppose, and does it include discrimination that people of faith face in America?

8. Does PayPal welcome employees who believe that sex is a biological reality determined by birth or would it fire/not hire such employees who have or express those beliefs? What about employees who believe marriage is exclusively between a man and woman?

I look forward to your responses. Because right now, it seems like PayPal has decided it’s siding with extreme activists—and opposing those who believe that men shouldn’t be able to enter women’s bathrooms.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/04/06/8-...ampaign=thf-fb

http://www.allenbwest.com/michelleje...l-you-hear-why

Two days before he was set to play in Greensboro, N.C., Bruce Springsteen this afternoon abruptly announced via his website that he is canceling his show. It’s the latest attempt to punish the citizens of North Carolina for the state legislature’s new transgender “bathroom law.”

Via Time:

Bruce Springsteen cancelled his upcoming show in Greensboro, N.C. on Friday, citing “solidarity” in opposition to the state’s new law requiring transgender people to use the bathrooms that correspond with their physical sex at birth.

Springsteen announced that he was canceling his April 10 show in a statement on his website, calling the law “an attempt by people who cannot stand the progress our country has made in recognizing the human rights of all of our citizens to overturn that progress.”

He apologized to fans who had bought tickets, but said he felt it was his duty to cancel the concert in order to stand with the “freedom fighters” opposing the measure. “Some things are more important than a rock show and this fight against prejudice and bigotry — which is happening as I write — is one of them,” he wrote. “It is the strongest means I have for raising my voice in opposition to those who continue to push us backwards instead of forwards.”

The North Carolina law, which prohibits transgender people from choosing which bathrooms to use and prevents cities from passing anti-discrimination laws, has been met with widespread opposition from LGBT rights groups and businesses. The Obama Administration is considering whether the law makes North Carolina ineligible for federal funding. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/02/us...ral-funds.html

A lot of us are all for human rights — including the rights of women and girls not to have a person with the anatomy of a male standing next to them in a public restroom. As with so many issues in this country, the rights of a few seem to be overshadowing the rights of many others.

http://www.allenbwest.com/michelleje...l-you-hear-why


North Carolina Law May Risk Federal Aid
By MATT APUZZO and ALAN BLINDER APRIL 1, 2016

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is considering whether North Carolina’s new law on gay and transgender rights makes the state ineligible for billions of dollars in federal aid for schools, highways and housing, officials said Friday.

Cutting off any federal money — or even simply threatening to do so — would put major new pressure on North Carolina to repeal the law, which eliminated local protections for gay and transgender people and restricted which bathrooms transgender people can use. A loss of federal money could send the state into a budget crisis and jeopardize services that are central to daily life.

Although experts said such a drastic step was unlikely, at least immediately, the administration’s review puts North Carolina on notice that the new law could have financial consequences. Gov. Pat McCrory of North Carolina had assured residents that the law would not jeopardize federal money for education.

But the law also represents a test for the Obama administration, which has declared that the fight for gay and transgender rights is a continuation of the civil rights era. The North Carolina dispute forces the administration to decide how aggressively to fight on that principle.

The North Carolina law created a mandatory statewide anti-discrimination policy, but it did not include specific protections based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The law prohibits transgender people from using public bathrooms that do not match the sexes on their birth certificates.

Anthony Foxx, the secretary of transportation, first raised the prospect of a review of federal funding in public remarks on Tuesday in North Carolina. The Department of Transportation provides roughly $1 billion a year to North Carolina. The New York Times then asked other federal agencies whether they were conducting similar reviews.

A Department of Education spokeswoman, Dorie Nolt, said on Friday that her agency was also reviewing the North Carolina law “to determine any potential impact on the state’s federal education funding.” She added, “We will not hesitate to act if students’ civil rights are being violated.”

The agency said it provided $4.3 billion to North Carolina last year for kindergarten through 12th grade as well as colleges.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development said it was doing a similar evaluation. “We’re reviewing the effects of the law on HUD funding allocated for North Carolina,” said Cameron French, a department spokesman.

White House officials had no comment.

Any decision on federal aid would take time, experts said. Federal agencies have used the threat of lost money to pressure a handful of municipal governments in California and Illinois to change their policies and allow transgender students to use the restrooms of the gender they identify with. There is no recent precedent for the federal government’s applying similar pressure to address a state law that it sees as discriminatory.

“It would be a long process of negotiation,” said Jane R. Wettach, an education law specialist at the Duke University School of Law in Durham, N.C. “I think the federal government would be loath to do it and would give North Carolina every possibility, every chance to change their position, to change the law, to negotiate, to make some exceptions. I think they’d go back and forth for a while and try to come to a negotiated settlement.”

Mr. McCrory, a Republican who is seeking re-election, and other supporters of the law have been aware, but dismissive, of suggestions that the measure might endanger the state’s federal largess. Mr. McCrory’s office did not respond to messages on Friday.

Dan Forest, the Republican lieutenant governor and the president of the State Senate, said he expected that federal aid would continue. He noted that many states did not explicitly provide gay and transgender people with anti-discrimination protection. Neither does federal law.

“It would be wrong — even illegal — to single out North Carolina for unfavorable treatment,” Mr. Forest said in an emailed statement. He said the state complied with the Constitution and federal laws. “I’m confident that we will continue to receive this federal money despite the threats from a few in Washington, D.C.”

Wait. This Administration REFUSES to withhold Federal Funds from so-called "Sanctuary Cities" who won't follow immigration laws - refusing to deport even those who commit violent crimes while in this country ilegally but will threaten to withhold them over THIS ?!

Originally Posted by Jolie Rouge

http://www.allenbwest.com/michelleje...l-you-hear-why

Two days before he was set to play in Greensboro, N.C., Bruce Springsteen this afternoon abruptly announced via his website that he is canceling his show. It’s the latest attempt to punish the citizens of North Carolina for the state legislature’s new transgender “bathroom law.”

Via Time:

Bruce Springsteen cancelled his upcoming show in Greensboro, N.C. on Friday, citing “solidarity” in opposition to the state’s new law requiring transgender people to use the bathrooms that correspond with their physical sex at birth.

Springsteen announced that he was canceling his April 10 show in a statement on his website, calling the law “an attempt by people who cannot stand the progress our country has made in recognizing the human rights of all of our citizens to overturn that progress.”

He apologized to fans who had bought tickets, but said he felt it was his duty to cancel the concert in order to stand with the “freedom fighters” opposing the measure. “Some things are more important than a rock show and this fight against prejudice and bigotry — which is happening as I write — is one of them,” he wrote. “It is the strongest means I have for raising my voice in opposition to those who continue to push us backwards instead of forwards.”

The North Carolina law, which prohibits transgender people from choosing which bathrooms to use and prevents cities from passing anti-discrimination laws, has been met with widespread opposition from LGBT rights groups and businesses. The Obama Administration is considering whether the law makes North Carolina ineligible for federal funding.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/02/us...ral-funds.html

A lot of us are all for human rights — including the rights of women and girls not to have a person with the anatomy of a male standing next to them in a public restroom. As with so many issues in this country, the rights of a few seem to be overshadowing the rights of many others.

http://www.allenbwest.com/michelleje...l-you-hear-why

Veteran E Street Band guitarist Steven Van Zandt declared Friday the best way to punish states passing “really vile and evil” religious freedom legislation is to “hurt them economically.”

After Bruce Springsteen announced he had abruptly canceled a show in Greensboro to protest North Carolina’s LGBT “bathroom law,” Van Zandt spoke to reporters about the band’s decision to pull the plug on its fans.

“It’s unfortunately the only way people understand. You have to hurt them economically in order to have them do the right thing morally, unfortunately,” Van Zandt told Rolling Stone Friday night backstage at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony in New York.

The musician and actor, 65, also told the publication he and the band’s other members felt the the issue was “just too important.”

“This really vile and evil discrimination is starting to spread state to state and we thought, ‘We better take a stand right now and catch it early,’” he said.

Van Zandt made similar comments when speaking to the Associated Press: “We always try to find middle ground, and we considered it … Should we go there and make a statement from the stage? You consider those things, and then you realize that’s just playing into their hands. That’s not going to hurt enough — you need to hurt them economically.”

Added Van Zandt: “This sort of thing is spreading like an evil virus around the country… We felt we better stop this, we should try and stop this early, and hopefully other people will rise up and join us.”

The Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act requires individuals to use the restroom of their biological gender and also prevents local governments from passing their own anti-discrimination laws.

In a statement explaining why he cancelled the Greensboro show, Springsteen said the “fight against prejudice and bigotry” was more important than playing music.

He also accused the new law of attacking “the rights of LGBT citizens to sue when their human rights are violated in the workplace,” adding: “To my mind, it’s an attempt by people who cannot stand the progress our country has made in recognizing the human rights of all of our citizens to overturn that progress.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywo...-economically/

comments

Little Steven you make millions of dollars and are in a band selling 250$ tickets. Stop acting like you're for the downtrodden. You're a good guitarist but that's about it. I hope what's left of your fan base abandons you, stops going to your concerts and hurts YOU economically.

I hate limousine liberals

..

Normal people have a normal desire to enjoy reasonable privacy in public restrooms and locker rooms. We also wish our children to be safe and secure. That means keeping male deviants out of lavatories where little girls go to do their business. What is it about this subject that these leftist perverts fail to understand?

...

Yes. These laws are about upholding the civil rights of the 99.9% of the citizens who are not sexually perverted or mentally confused

..

To accommodate the perceived wishes of a very small number of people, the federal government and many states are placing women and girls at risk of rape and assault in restrooms. There are about a mere 700,000 self-identified transgender individuals in the U.S., or 0.3% of the adult population. That makes them almost as rare as unicorns.

Bryan Adams cancels Mississippi show, citing state's new law
20 hrs ago

BILOXI, Miss. — Canadian rocker Bryan Adams is canceling a performance this week in Mississippi, citing the state's new law that allows religious groups and some private businesses to refuse service to gay couples.

Adams said in a statement Sunday night that he was canceling a show Thursday at the Mississippi Coast Coliseum in Biloxi.

The singer says he can't "in good conscience" perform in a state where "certain people are being denied their civil rights due to their sexual orientation."

The move comes after Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band canceled a Sunday show in Greensboro, North Carolina, because of the state's new law blocking anti-discrimination rules for the LGBT community.

The Mississippi law will take effect July 1. Supporters say it offers protection for Christians who adhere to traditional views of marriage and gender roles.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/music/news/...id=ansmsnent11

Any business should be able to reserve the right to refuse service to any one - at any time - for any reason. Rules of the Marketplace will prevail. Do it too often or for stupid reasons, then you get a bad reputation and no one will want to buy your product or use your services. Now - I do not want to spend my $$ to attend a Springsteen or Adams concert. Why ? They have shown that even if I purchase a ticket in good faith, they are likely to cancel a show to provide themselves with publicity and political posturing. Bad reputation. Are they still using gas from the Middle East ? Gays are routinely put to death in those countries - for no other "crime" then their lifestyle. THAT is a "Human Rights" violation.

Sexual predator jailed after claiming to be ‘transgender’ to assault women in shelter

TORONTO, March 4, 2014

A biological man claiming to be ‘transgender’ so as to gain access to and prey on women at two Toronto shelters was jailed “indefinitely” last week after being declared by a judge a “dangerous offender.”

Pro-family leaders are pointing out that this is exactly the type of incident they warned of as the Ontario government passed its “gender identity” bill, dubbed the “bathroom bill,” in 2012.

Christopher Hambrook, 37, leaned on the ever expanding legal “rights” offered to people who “identify” with the sex opposite their biology. Under the name “Jessica,” he was able to get into the women’s shelters, where he sexually assaulted several women in 2012, the Toronto Sun reports.

Court heard how one woman awoke to find Hambrook assaulting her on her bed. “Her tights had been pulled down past her bottom and her bathing suit had been pulled to the side,” court documents reveal. “She yelled at the accused, demanding to know what he was doing. He simply covered his face with his hands, said ‘Oops!’ and started giggling.”

Court also heard evidence of Hambrook terrorizing a deaf woman living in the shelter. “The accused grabbed the complainant’s hand and forcibly placed it on his crotch area while his penis was erect,” court heard.

The same deaf women reported that Hambrook would peer at her through a gap between the door and its frame while she showered.

Justice John McMahon imposed the “indefinite” prison sentence due to Hambrook’s long history of committing sex crimes.

Hambrook was a former stripper and escort from Quebec before moving to Toronto in 2009 and posing as a woman. While in Montreal he served four years in jail for a 2002 sexual assault of a five-year-old girl who was a family friend and for raping a mentally challenged 27-year-old woman while on bail for the first crime, reports the Toronto Sun.

The prosecution successfully convinced the judge that Hambrook’s out-of-control sexual urges put the public at great risk and that an indefinite jail sentence was the only way to protect the public.

“I am satisfied there is no reasonable expectation that a lesser measure would adequately protect the public from Christopher Hambrook,” said Judge McMahon.

Ontario amended its Human Rights Code to make “gender identity” and “gender expression” prohibited grounds for discrimination in 2012. The bill’s sponsors said at the time that the so-called “Toby's Law” would open the door to “social change” in Canada.

Family advocates argued at the time that the NDP sponsored bill would create a legal right for a man who calls himself ‘transgender’ to use rooms and facilities intended for women so as to exploit women.

The bill was subsequently dubbed the “bathroom bill” by its critics. Allowing a man who calls himself ‘transgender’ to enter a woman’s area has already proved problematic in the United States.

In 2012 a college in Washington state decided it would not prevent a 45-year-old man who presents himself as a transgender “female” from lounging naked in a women’s locker room in an area frequented by girls as young as six. Teenage girls on a high school swim team were using the facilities when they saw "Colleen" Francis deliberately exposing male genitalia through the glass window in a sauna. Police told one outraged mother that the university could not bar the biological male from the premises.

Brian Rushfeldt, president of Canada Family Action, told LifeSiteNews that Hambrook’s method of gaining legal entrance into the woman’s shelters proves gender identity legislation is inherently flawed.

“The Ontario law is dangerous. It is unacceptable that any country would allow a law which puts citizens at risk. It proves the law was ill planned and executed, and the government should be held legally responsible for these crimes.”

Jack Fonseca of Campaign Life Coalition told LifeSiteNews that it “didn’t take a brain surgeon to predict that letting men into women’s bathrooms and other private spaces would eventually lead to sexual assaults.”

“I wish we didn't have to say 'I told you so,’ but Ontario's party leaders and MPPs were warned that the transsexual ‘Bathroom Bill’ endangered women and needed to be defeated.”

“Of course this lunatic law could only make it easier for rapists and peeping toms to prey on female victims while masquerading as ‘transgendered.’”

Fonseca called for a repeal of the law.

“If this dangerous law is not repealed, we will only see a rise in male predators attacking women in spaces where they deserve the right to privacy like bathrooms, change rooms and women’s shelters.”

Fonseca took aim at Progressive Conservative leader Tim Hudak for supporting the bill, saying that he should take “personal responsibility for the attempted rape of those poor women in the shelters.”

“Hudak cannot escape blame: He supported this nonsensical law.”

QMI Agency’s Christina Blizzard wrote in an opinion piece last week that women have a “right to protection.”

“This is a bad law that allows heterosexual predators access to women in their most personal moments. Extra care should be taken to protect at-risk women in vulnerable situations, such as homeless shelters.”

Ezra Levant said that the gender identity law in Ontario has made the province become a “magnet for rapists.”

“Instead of women being protected in Ontario, instead of the law protecting women, the law serves up women to a rapist named ‘Jessica,’” he said on his show The Source.

A federal version of the “gender identity” bill currently sits in the Senate after failing to pass its third and final reading in August after the Conservatives shut down Parliament for a summer break.

Fonseca said that the federal legislation puts Canadian women at risk.

“We urge all concerned Canadians to phone, email and write Canada’s Senators pointing out that the Ontario version of this law allowed Mr. Hambrook to sexually assault two women, and to ensure that Senators do not make the mistake of granting legal cover to would-be rapists at the federal level.”

“Tell the Senators to vote NO to Bill C-279 when it comes up again.”

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/se...der-to-assault

University Of Toronto Backs Off On Gender Neutral Bathrooms After Men Record Women Showering With Cellphones
Andrew Mark Miller
April 11, 2016 

One of the most talked about issues in the country today is the question of whether or not men should be allowed to use women’s restrooms if they “identify” as women.

Some states have passed laws saying that men and women should use separate bathrooms and liberals have not taken too kindly to that.

We are hearing the usual cries of boycotts and resistance from celebrities and the media has failed to even remotely report the very real concerns that people have with bathroom free-for-alls.

One of the biggest concerns people have is the obvious likelihood that men will enter into female restrooms and locker rooms with bad intentions. And that’s exactly what is already happening at the University of Toronto.

From Hot Air:

Considering how widespread these stories are across the United States these days, an incident in Canada may prove instructive for those debating the SJW’s demands for genderless public facilities and the intersection between those policies and traditional privacy concerns. The University of Toronto recently went down the same path being forced into place on American campuses, instituting unisex bathrooms, locker rooms and showers. What could possibly go wrong? They found out in short order. (The Daily Wire)


The administration at the University of Toronto was recently enlightened on why two separate washrooms are generally established for men and women sharing co-ed residencies.

The University is temporarily changing its policy on gender-neutral bathrooms after two separate incidents of “voyeurism” were reported on campus September 15 and 19. Male students within the University’s Whitney Hall student residence were caught holding their cellphones over female students’ shower stalls and filming them as they showered.

Melinda Scott, dean of students at the University of Toronto, told The Daily Wire that campus police had been contacted immediately and worked with residence staff to “support impacted students and ensure the safety of the Residences.”

Wow. What a shocking surprise.

It’s really strange that no one is concerned about the safety of the women who are now just expected to share bathrooms with men based on nothing more than what that man is wearing.

Scary times we live in and it appears that political correctness and feelings are about to earn another huge victory over common sense and morality.

http://www.youngcons.com/university-...ism-incidents/

So Paypal and Bruce Springsteen can refuse to do business in NC
( And Bryan Adams in MS ) because they don't agree with a law there...
But Christians are NOT allowed to refuse to participate in a celebration of homosexuality?

So who exactly is being denied Equal Protection Under the Law ?

An Open Letter to Bruce Springsteen and His Band
By Michael Brown Published on April 10, 2016

Dear Bruce,

As a resident of North Carolina since 2003, I read with interest that you decided to cancel your April 10th concert in Greensboro because of HB2, the Public Facilities Privacy and Security Act.

In your statement you explained that, in your view, the bill is “an attempt by people who cannot stand the progress our country has made in recognizing the human rights of all of our citizens to overturn that progress.”

You added that it was time for you and your band “to show solidarity for those freedom fighters” (speaking of transgender activists), and you ended your statement with these powerful words: “Some things are more important than a rock show and this fight against prejudice and bigotry — which is happening as I write — is one of them. It is the strongest means I have for raising my voice in opposition to those who continue to push us backwards instead of forwards.”

I also read that your guitarist, Steven Van Zandt, has likened HB2 to an “evil virus” that is spreading through the United States in the form of similar legislation.

These are strong words, and they represent strong convictions. So, let me first commend you and your band members for putting your principles before your livelihood, even to the disappointment of your North Carolina fans. I have read that you regretted not performing at the 1985 Live Aid concert in Wembley, and perhaps this is your way of saying, “I do care and I’m here to make a difference.”

Whatever your motivation, I admire anyone who puts morality before money. My question to you and your band is simply this: In boycotting North Carolina and siding against HB2, did you really side with morality? Are you truly standing with “freedom fighters”?

I’m assuming you read HB2 for yourself and you’re not just listening to media reports attacking the bill or, worse still, getting your talking points from biased lobbyist groups like the Human Rights Campaign. (If you’re not really familiar with the bill, then click here and here and here.)

So, please allow me to ask you some questions.

First, how do you know if someone is really “transgender” or not? Is it determined entirely by how they feel about themselves? If so, do you think that it might be hard to make laws based entirely on how people feel? Did you ever stop to consider that?

Second, what’s the difference between someone with “gender dysphoria” (or, as it used to be called, “gender identity disorder”) and someone, say, with schizophrenia or “multiple personality disorder” or some other psychological condition? In other words, if a man is a biological and chromosomal male but believes he is a woman, is he actually a woman, or does he have a psychological disorder?

If he does have a psychological disorder, should we try to treat that disorder or should we celebrate that disorder? And is it right to call biological males who feel they are women and biological women who feel they are men “freedom fighters”? Perhaps that’s not the best use of the term?

If you are deeply offended that I would dare suggest that many transgender individuals are dealing with a psychological disorder, could you kindly point me to the definitive scientific literature that explains that these biological males are actually females and these biological females are actually males?

I’m not saying they don’t deserve compassion. To the contrary, I’m saying that’s exactly what they deserve: compassion, not celebration.

But perhaps I’m being too abstract here, so let’s get really practical. Let’s say that a 6’ 4” male who used to play professional football and who has secretly agonized over his gender identity for years finally determines that he must be true to himself and live as a woman.

Do you think it might be traumatic for a little girl using the library bathroom to see this big man walk into her room wearing a dress and a wig? Should we take her feelings into account, or is she not important? What if that was your granddaughter? Would you care if she was traumatized? And when you speak of “the human rights of all of our citizens” does that include little girls like this?

I understand that this gentleman will have difficulties should he decide to dress and live as a woman, but that is still a choice he is making, and it is not fair to impose his struggles on innocent little children, is it?

And what if this same man, whom we’ll assume is not a sexual predator, wants to share the YMCA locker room with your wife and daughter, standing there in his underwear as they come out of the shower stalls wrapped in towels. Is this fair to them?

Let’s take this one step further. If any man who claims to be a woman can use women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, then how do we keep the sexual predators out? I’ve asked people to watch this short video, giving examples of male heterosexual predators who donned women’s clothing to get into the ladies’ rooms, and I’d encourage you to watch it too. Without HB2, rapists and voyeurs and pedophiles would have free access to our women and daughters in the safety of their own bathrooms and locker rooms.

Since you don’t like HB2 — indeed, your guitarist called it an “evil virus” — what’s your plan to keep the predators out? How can we tell the difference between a “genuine” transgender person and a sexual predator? Since everyone knows you as “The Boss,” what would you do to keep the ladies and children safe?

And one final question.

When you booked the concert in Greenboro, the laws in North Carolina were just as they are today: In public facilities, people had to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that corresponded to their biological sex. Why, then, did you agree to come in the first place? Why cancel the concert when things today are just what they were six months ago?

Again, I appreciate your sincerity, but I question your judgment. In your zeal to do what is right, you have actually done what is wrong.

https://stream.org/open-letter-bruce-springsteen-band/

(If you’re not really familiar with the bill, then click here and here and here.)

http://townhall.com/columnists/frank...1010/page/full

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...l-common-sense

If any man who claims to be a woman can use women’s bathrooms and locker rooms, then how do we keep the sexual predators out? I’ve asked people to watch this short video, giving examples of male heterosexual predators who donned women’s clothing to get into the ladies’ rooms, and I’d encourage you to watch it too. Without HB2, rapists and voyeurs and pedophiles would have free access to our women and daughters in the safety of their own bathrooms and locker rooms.

When you booked the concert in Greenboro, the laws in North Carolina were just as they are today: In public facilities, people had to use the bathrooms and locker rooms that corresponded to their biological sex. Why, then, did you agree to come in the first place? Why cancel the concert when things today are just what they were six months ago?

A new petition on Change.org is defending rocker Bruce Springsteen and his decision to cancel a concert in North Carolina due to a controversial new law.

The petition is the work of Dennis Burgard, a 51 year-old real estate broker and investor from Jacksonville, NC. It argues that Springsteen refusing business with North Carolina is no different than bakers refusing gay wedding clients based on deeply held religious convictions.

"Springsteen acted in the exact manner a baker did in refusing to bake a cake due to deeply held personal beliefs, yet they were fined and he is celebrated," Burgard told CNSNews.

On April 8, Springsteen posted a message on his Facebook page explaining why he had cancelled the show April 10 due to HB2, a North Carolina law that requires people to use the bathroom that assigned with their biological gender. Critics have decried the law as anti-transgender.

Burgard's petition, which has gathered 93 signatures (the White House requires 100,000 Change.org signatures before an issue can be addressed), reads as follows:

Bruce Springsteen has a right to his deeply held beliefs. He has a right to control his business and refuse to do business with those he disagrees with. He exercised that right when he refused to serve ticket holders in Greensboro NC, for a concert he agreed to perform on April 10th. 2016. He cancelled the concert just days before he was to perform, and did so specifically because he disagreed with the beliefs of the people of North Carolina. He has that right, and so should every business person. He did so, even though he knew it would cause financial harm to those who had non-refundable hotel reservations and non-refundable airline tickets. He did so, even though he knew he was causing financial harm to people who had no control over a decision he disagreed with. Rock on Bruce! You exercised your rights as a business person and we support your right!

Sign this petition, and support the right of Bruce Springsteen and ALL American's in their right to control their own business!!