Capitol 3 Conservatives: If Only Our Legislators Knew!

Gender Identity": If Only Our Legislators Knew!

April 15, 2007

LAKE OSWEGO, Oregon - If our legislators knew the Voter's opinion of adding 'gender identity' protections to current law, they would not, and could not, vote in favor of SB 2. That opinion is documented in Eugene, Oregon, one of the most liberal cities in America.

In a letter dated February 15, 2006, from the Lane Gender Task Force to the Eugene Human Rights Commission - organizations which clearly seek special rights and protections to homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals, and individuals with gender identity issues - the Task Force recommended that the HRC "refrain from recommending a code revision to the City Council" because it "would surely become a painfully divisive public issue."

And just How did the Task Force come to this Conclusion?

After working for nearly three years to persuade the community that 'gender identity' protection was warranted, they determined that Eugene's citizens were clearly NOT supportive of 'gender identity' protection. They found that if the Eugene City Council approved 'gender identity' protection, citizens were so opposed they would place the issue on the ballot. The LGTF, knowing the public would vote "NO", clearly did NOt want the public to vote on the issue.

Eugenians had learned that if 'gender identity' protections were approved by the City Council, a man, dressed as a woman could legally enter a woman's shower or locker room, as long as he kept his underwear on! How does this increase the 'safety' and 'privacy' of Oregonians?

So What Bearing Does This Have on Passage of Senate Bill 2?

'Gender Identity' includes any transgender individual, who could be "transsexual (have had surgery), crossdressers/transvestites, drag kings and queens, and anyone who breaks gender boundaries..." (This definition is from the Eugene Human Rights Commission, Research on Gender Identity, Sept. 20, 2005, pg. 1).

The sexual orientation definition in Section 1-6 of Senate Bill 2 includes 'gender identity.' Those who crafted the bill were careful not to elaborate that "public accommodations" would include bathrooms, locker or shower or dressing rooms, or public pool areas and public schools, because if passed, all of the above would be open to the mixing of sexes.

An individual could decide whether they wanted to go into men's or women's private rooms, regardless of biological gender. No documentation would be required and anyone who 'discriminated' against the individual, could be sued under SB 2!

Gender identity protection would end gender as we know it. A man or woman would no longer be identified by their biology. An individual could define their own gender and you would be forced by law to accept their decision and not question them. By law, their gender would be what they said it was.

This is Not what Oregonians want!

If the Lane County Gender Task Force and the Eugene Human Rights Commission concluded that granting protection (special rights) in the matter of so called 'gender identity' would "surely become a painfully divisive public issue", in Eugene, why would our legislators not conclude the same for the rest of the state?

If Eugenians were not and are not prepared to accept what would be required in their public bathrooms, pools, and schools, neither will the rest of the state should the legislature pass SB 2.

What will the Oregon Legislature Do?

SB 2 and HB 2007 (civil unions) are slated for a full House Floor VOTE in the Oregon House tomorrow morning in the 10AM Session. We will see if our legislators can be trusted to uphold the will of the people in Measure 36, and comprehend the damage they will do to all Oregonians, including themselves, if they pass these bills.

David Crowe
Executive Director

Click here for more information about Restore America

email: dcrowe@restoreamerica.org

http://www.restoreamerica.org