A great volume of discussion is hitting the airwaves in Charlotte, NC recently. The debate began when the Charlotte City Council by majority vote instituted an open bathroom policy on February 22, 2016, The North Carolina General Assembly responded with a special session to pass House Bill 2. We need to ask first of all if these rules are necessary. Secondly we can ask what is the impetus of these laws. And finally we really need to look at whether these rulings provide the protections people are looking for. In short, it should be noted that House Bill 2 could actually endanger children in restrooms by exposing them to the very things feared by Christian parents.
For many years social rules of separation in restroom facilities has been understood and un-regulated. People with male bodies used the men’s restroom, people who were physically female used the women’s restroom. Restroom facilities were a haven for privacy.
These rules were unchallenged until 1930 when Lili Elbe underwent sex reassignment surgery in Germany. Since that time many others have undergone the process of hormone therapy and surgical procedures. The Surgery Encyclopedia estimates the number of gender reassignment procedures conducted in the United States each year at between 100 and 500.
This new technology has created ethical and moral issues which societies must work out according to their culture. The most conservative groups in our society believe sex change to be a sin. They say God created each individual by design and intention. They use scriptures such as Genesis 1:27-28; Deuteronomy 22:5; and Romans 1:26-27.
Likewise more liberal and transgender groups share a religious basis for their beliefs. They note many eunuchs underwent surgeries which changed their sexual abilities. Jesus said, “For there are some eunuchs, who were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, who were made eunuchs by men: and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.” (Matthew 19:12)
“For thus says the Lord: to the eunuchs who keep my sabbaths, who choose the things that please me and hold fast to my covenant, I will give, in my house and within my walls, a monument better than sons and daughters, I will give them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.” (Isaiah 56:4-5)
It seems we have come to a time when people are polarized and no longer understand how to coexist and care for one another. Parents oppose gender neutral restrooms out of concerned for their children’s innocence. Many adults are worried about invasion of privacy in the restroom. Some groups of people are concerned for pockets of people who face discrimination. And a few people exist to see what mores of society can be overturned. Upon hearing the discussions in the world today, it seems we do need definitive rules.
But what rules do we need. The obvious would be sexually segregated spaces would be reserved for people who are either male or female in appearance. But in a reading of North Carolina House Bill 2, we discover appearance does not matter. What does matter is what is stated on a person’s birth certificate.
If a person was born a female and by surgery was reassigned male characteristics, he would by law be required to use the female restroom. The end result is that by state law certain males will be required to use the women’s restroom. And the question could be asked: What parent desires their daughter to enter the women’s restroom only to find a man washing his hands.
We can ask the question, “Why was North Carolina House Bill 2 written?” If the law were written to protect privacy and guard against predators, it will in common usage be deemed a failure. If the law was written to enforce religious morals on the irreligious, it will also be found in the end to be a failure. The majority of people would be better served if Biological sex was defined as the current physical condition of being male or female rather than which is stated on a person’s birth certificate. In its current writing, there is nothing in this law which is either civil or right.