Bipartisanship is the best thing the HB2 repeal bill has going for it

Published February 24, 2017

[caption id="attachment_19634" align="alignleft" width="150"]Graphic by WRAL Graphic by WRAL[/caption]

Editorial by Fayetteville Observer, February 23, 2017.

It's heartening to see a bipartisan group of state representatives sponsor a bill to repeal the state's "bathroom bill," HB2. Unfortunately, bipartisanship is the best thing it has going for it.

The repeal has the backing of Rep. Chuck McGrady, a Henderson Republican who has worked on other repeal bills, and Rep. Ted Davis, a New Hanover Republican who supported HB2, as well as Democrats Marvin Lucas of Spring Lake and Ken Goodman of Richmond County (who also voted for HB2).

The measure would give the state regulatory authority over bathrooms with multiple toilets and locker rooms. It would expand a statewide nondiscrimination law, but still exclude protection for sexual orientation or identity.

And while the measure would allow cities to pass anti-discrimination ordinances that cover LGBT people, they would be required to hold a referendum if opponents gathered enough signatures. Submitting civil rights to a popular vote is not a wise precedent. Nobody should have to face discrimination because of who or what they are, and it's regrettable that this state won't stand up for that principle.

We hope members of both parties continue to seek ways to repeal this destructive law, but we're beginning to believe that in the end, federal courts will settle it.

http://www.fayobserver.com/opinion/editorials/our-view-this-is-not-the-way-to-repeal-a/article_e154c926-b63f-57d2-88a7-bff47100b2c3.html

Read More NC SPIN >>

February 24, 2017 at 4:52 pm
Norm Kelly says:

Absolutely amazing. If it weren't coming from a lib, I'd be surprised. But since this editorial obviously comes from a lib, it is exactly what is expected.

Again, libs proving that it's either their way or no way at all. Just like Roy, either HB2 goes completely, or else.

No such thing as compromise with libs. They've had their way for so long, they expect to be able to continue to do so. But if people were truly interested in libs being in total control (God forbid!), we'd have elected a majority of libs to the legislature. But we didn't.

So, compromise once again gets defined as both sides give up something and both sides get something. No more one sided 'compromise' cuz that ain't compromise, that dictatoring.

Protections for the entire state, or protections for less than 1/2 of 1%? Our legislature has decided properly, and RIGHTly, that the puny minority who feel uncomfortable don't have the right to invade the privacy of the rest of us. The puny minority do not have the right to cause others, such as school girls, to feel uncomfortable by having to share a locker room with an obvious boy who just 'feels' like using the girls shower room so he can gawk at them. And that WOULD be the result of the schemes desired by libs!

For all the concern libs CLAIM to have about immigration enforcement, and considering unintended consequences, why is it that when they want to foist stoopid schemes upon us, they don't want to even hear about potential unintended consequences. And those consequences are foreseeable, not so unintended!