There are people who see “MEN” and “WOMEN” above bathroom doors no differently than “WHITE” and “COLORED” over those same doors sixty years ago. They perceive no difference whatsoever.
Pictured here is Dr. Richard Levine, the state of Pennsylvania’s current Physician General. Every day, Dr. Levine awakens, does his hair, puts on makeup, lipstick, a dress or pantsuit and goes to work. Dr. Levine (Rachel as s/he now prefers) “identifies” as a woman.
Dr. Levine served as a professor at the Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center prior to appointment by Pennsylvania’s new governor, Tom Wolf (D), to his cabinet. Levine was confirmed to become the state’s new Physician General via a 49-0 vote by the Maryland state Senate.
People like Levine are now at the center of yet another cultural firestorm being wrought by the Obama administration. The central question: “Does Richard Levine have a right, a constitutionally-protected RIGHT, to use female bathroom or other hygienic facilities because he identifies as female?”
The Obama Department of Justice has announced that the federal government will (once again) sue one of its own states. North Carolina had the nerve to say, “No. The Richard Levines of the world do not have that right.”
Obama is already seeking to cut off federal funding to North Carolina but that’s not enough. Attorney General Loretta Lynch is also saying schools and other entities in North Carolina could face legal action or loss of funding for complying with their own state’s laws!
How did we get here?
President Obama and AG Lynch seek to force a state to recognize cross-dressing men as women and presumably cross-dressing women (if there are any) as men through a gross re-interpretation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The U.S. Justice Department is now doing what it said in 2006 it would not do. In 2006 (and prior) DOJ claimed that Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act, which bans sex discrimination, does not protect against workplace discrimination on the basis of “gender status.” Not “gender” but “gender status.” What, exactly, is “gender status”? There used to be no question about “gender status.” We were either one or the other.
That was then, this is now.
For unexplained reasons, what the DOJ saw as correct legal interpretation of our laws a few years ago, it has now pulled a complete 180 and shifted its view to the opposite end of the spectrum. That transformation began with a memo issued by former Attorney General Eric Holder in which he described the DoJ as assuming “the most strict interpretation of the law” possible.
Holder’s memo was part of a broader Obama administration effort to introduce entirely new categories of “gender status.” Such as “gender confused”, “gender unsure”, “gender transient”, “gender fluid”, “genderqueer”, “gender binary” and other thoroughly confusing such “statuses.”
This new interpretation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act means the federal government/DoJ will be able to bring legal claims on behalf of cross-dressing/transgender people who say they’ve been discriminated against.
A gender unsure/gender confused/gender-cross-identifying/gender transient man like Dr. Levine can run to the U.S. Department of Justice and say, “I believe I’m a woman and they won’t let me take showers in the woman’s showers!” The United States government can take up his case, drag you and your company into court, force you to spend heaven knows how much to defend yourself and in the end there’s a good chance you’ll lose as the 1964 Civil Rights Act is one strong, enduring piece of precedent. Good luck beating it even in this “re-interpreted” form.
Obama is trying to force a state to comply with his wishes and not allow the people of that (or any) state to govern themselves and make their own rules. If a state today, how long until everybody else — private employers, schools, churches, etc. are in like fashion brought under the thumb of our supreme leader?