Supporters of Houston’s “Equal Rights” Ordinance (HERO) are predictably crying foul after voters resoundingly rejected their ballot measure last week. Apparently it lost only because bigots poisoned the debate with “misinformation.” Sore losers that they are, its proponents can’t accept that the voters understood what was at stake and voted accordingly.
The ordinance prohibited discrimination based upon a number of protected categories, most of which were uncontroversial and already covered by state and federal laws. That was the window dressing. The real issue concerned banning discrimination based on the amorphous social construct known as “sexual orientation” and the even more problematic “gender identity.”
Particularly galling to HERO supporters was the opposition’s succinct slogan: “No Men in Women’s Bathrooms.” Once voters understood the issue in those terms the ordinance was doomed. HERO’s supporters count the slogan as one of the most egregious “lies” told in a vicious smear campaign. The only problem is that it happens to be true.
A little background on HERO would be appropriate here. The original HERO legislation debated in the Houston City Council in 2014 explicitly stated that any person would be allowed to use “public” restrooms consistent with his or her “gender identity.” In plain English that means that dudes would be allowed into ladies’ rooms—provided that those dudes believe in their heart of hearts that they were born with incorrect body parts…or simply claim to. Women changing into their sweats at a Curves gym might look up and see a guy standing there in all his naked glory; and as long as that guy proclaims himself to be a woman, the law would indulge his delusion.
But this version of the bill was not meant to be; so Mayor Parker, liar that she is, decided to drop the explicit bathroom language from the bill while assuring supporters that the change had zero impact on the law’s effects. According to the Houston Chronicle: “The proposed amendment would remove that paragraph [concerning bathrooms] of the expansive ordinance. Transgender people barred access to a restroom still would be able to file a discrimination complaint to the city’s Office of Inspector General under the process outlined for all protected characteristics, such as race and veteran status.” Mayor Parker later tweeted: “To my trans sisters/brothers: you’re still fully protected in Equal Rights Ordinance. We’re simply removing language that singled you out.”
How can her tweet be interpreted as anything other than an admission that her supposed compromise on the bathroom issue was in fact a smokescreen? She clearly understood that the people of Houston would never swallow this bitter pill without first being lulled into believing that it has nothing to do with creepy dudes in ladies’ rooms—which it does. Both sides know HERO is about bathrooms but only one side wants to talk about it. Stealth is the Left’s watchword.
Predictably, the Houston Chronicle also ran an article bemoaning the intransigent opposition. The subtitle of the article shouted: “Compromise suggested for city ordinance not enough for some GOP, faith leaders.” Oh, those stubborn conservatives, when will they ever learn the value of compromise?
Perhaps conservatives didn’t want to “compromise” with the homofascist mayor because she’d already admitted that the exclusion of bathroom language didn’t alter the law one iota. A compromise without concessions from both sides is no compromise at all. That’s just caving. And why should HERO opponents cave when they have the voters behind them?
It should come as no surprise that the Houston Chronicle endorsed HERO twice. Nor should it surprise anyone that the same Chronicle reporter, Jayme Fraser, wrote both articles—the one that essentially admitted that the new HERO was the same as the old HERO, and the one that portrayed conservative leaders as rigidly opposed to any compromise. Fraser can’t claim ignorance. She knew that Mayor Parker’s compromise was bogus and yet she still wrote a ludicrous article implying that the anti-HERO camp was stubbornly refusing to meet HERO supporters halfway.
Liberals are generally pretty bad at compromise and the homofascist subset is absolutely incapable of it. This is the Civil Rights Movement all over again and you’re Bull Connor. Ergo, they get everything and you get nothing. They don’t always get their way because sometimes they just lose; but they never settle for half a loaf and they absolutely never give up.
On occasion, they’ll offer a faux compromise of the variety that Parker proposed. Other times they try the incrementalist approach—“settling” for a partial victory, only to return shortly thereafter wanting to renegotiate the deal. After three or four partial victories they find that they’ve achieved everything they wanted. But most of the time the LGBTQXYZ activists don’t even do that. They concoct phony hate crimes, they riot, they sue, they get people fired from their jobs, and occasionally they even murder people. When they finally taste sweet victory they run the rainbow banner up the flagpole and declare #Lovewins!
If you want to know how averse the tolerance bullies are to compromise, consider the pickle that suburban Palatine, Illinois has found itself in trying to accommodate a delusional high school student who thinks he’s a girl. The boy has made a plethora of demands to which his high school has readily acceded including the use of feminine pronouns. The school has even allowed him to join girls’ sports teams and to use the girls’ locker room. The final stumbling block to a copasetic agreement is that the school wants him to disrobe behind a curtain for the sake of the other girls’—which to say the actual girls’—privacy.
Not. Good. Enough.
The gender dysphoric student sued the school with the support of the ACLU and the Obama Administration. According to an AP story: “The district could lose up to $6 million in federal funding if it can’t reach a deal with the [Department of Education Office of Civil Rights], which has said the privacy curtains are discriminatory unless all the girls are required to use them.” Actually, none of the girls are required to use them. The only one who has to use a curtain is the boy who refuses to change in the appropriate locker room.
Officials at the Department of Education appear to share the boy’s mental illness. “Unfortunately, Township High School District 211 is not following the law because the district continues to deny a female student the right to use the girls’ locker room,” said a spokesperson.
Uh…not exactly. This isn’t a story about a female student not being allowed to use the girls’ locker room. It’s not even a story about a male student not being allowed to use the girls’ locker room. It’s a story about a male student with full access to the girls’ locker room but who still isn’t satisfied because he has to change behind a curtain.
I must admit though that I understand why he cannot accept even this tiny compromise. The curtain will always be a reminder that the school is humoring him. They’ll only go so far in treating him like one of the girls—because he isn’t. Intolerable! Everyone must be forced to believe the Big Lie. This is a “civil rights issue” and nothing less than total capitulation will suffice. We wouldn’t meet Jim Crow supporters halfway, would we?
We lost the last war with the homofascists because we tried to accommodate them. We thought we could offer them civil unions—all the benefits of marriage without the word. They weren’t satisfied. We thought we could let them do their thing and it would never affect us, but soon they were forcing us to be unwilling participants in their sham weddings, demanding to use church-owned property for their ceremonies, and dismantling long-standing codes of conduct for teachers at religious schools. There is no “live and let live” with these people. It’s absolute servility or pitched battle, nothing in between.