Govt flushes away Labour’s Bathroom Bill

A continued push by Labour MP Louisa Wall to include ‘gender identity’ as a prohibited ground of discrimination under the Human Rights Act has been rejected – firstly by her own party colleagues and others on the Select Committee, and now by the Government.

Good job. And congratulations to Associate Justice Minister Simon Bridges.

This is a great decision for families and is welcomed. Among the implications of the proposal – dubbed the “bathroom bill” in overseas jurisdictions – is that sex-specific facilities, including gyms like Contours and swimming pools who have dedicated times for females only, plus the use of men’s and women’s public toilets and changing rooms, could no longer be limited on the basis of a person’s actual biological sex. A biological male who feels he identifies as a female would demand the right to use the female changing rooms or toilets.

But the expectation of parents and families is to see people of the same gender in places like public toilets and changing rooms, and for toilets and changing rooms in schools to be specific to the biological sex of the students.

Of most concern was that the Labour MP was pushing the amendment under the shadow of the Statutes Amendment Bill (No 4) which is a bill which deals with ‘technical, short, and non-controversial amendments to a range of Acts’. This proposed amendment is anything but non-controversial.

This is great news for families. Those with gender dissatisfaction must have the same rights as all New Zealanders, but should not be given special rights which place others at risk.

It appears this proposal was simply a stunt with the intention of attempting to sneak some highly contentious legislation through Parliament via the back door.

The politicians were right to flush it away.

An example of the madness:
Michigan gym reportedly bans woman over gender identity complaint
Fox News 8 March 2015
A Michigan gym reportedly canceled a woman’s membership after she refused to stop telling other members that “a man” was using the women’s locker room.
https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2015/03/woman-opposes-a-man-being-in-female-changing-room-she-gets-banned/