Liberty. The practical meaning of the word is that you don't have to like me or what I choose to do with my property (which includes my body, thoughts, money, business, etc.), you just may not infringe on my rights; you may not dictate to me what I shall and shall not do with my property.* You may not dictate what I eat, what sex I think I am, my religious beliefs, and an almost endless list of other personal, adult decisions I make for and about myself. By extension, neither does the government that represents you.
This newest iteration of the "Bathroom Bill" still protects private citizens from the dictates of local governments as to whom may use their restrooms, changing rooms and showers. This was always the fly in the soup. Charlotte's ordinance dictated to private citizens that they must open their facilities to anyone "identifying" as a particular "gender," regardless of the sex organs they actually have. Some believe the General Assembly should have left the matter to the courts, but as this was a clear, unmitigated violation of private property rights, I don't believe the citizens of Charlotte should be forced to "fight city hall" and incur the huge legal bills that would necessarily generate. Sparring citizens from that was an appropriate and good use of state legislative power. After all, the primary responsibility of elected officials is protect the rights of citizens. That is the standard, not whether you can afford to go to and win in court.
This seems clear but if you disagree I urge you to explain your thinking in the "Comments" section.
What are others saying on this issue?
- NC Lawmakers Cave on Principle in Face of NCAA Threat
- Did the General Assembly and Roy Cooper just put a for sale sign on our state?
- How they vote
- Statement on HB 2 Repeal
- HB2 Repeal a Classic GOP Move
- VIEW FROM THE LEFT: What changes (and what doesn't) in HB2 replacement
*of course we're talking about competent, adult citizens and decisions that don't infringe the rights of others