Missoula, Montana just passed a legitimate (read: one that The John and St. Barney will at some point have to rationalize out of discursive existence) civil rights ordiance.
Not surprisingly, anti-constitutionist theocrats were hyperbolic beforehand and are apoplectic now.
And, of course, the (so-called) Concerned (rarely, though seemingly more frequently now that they’re continually called on it) Women (cough, hack) for America is among the hyperapoplectic.
Note, however, what Alvin McEwen noticed:
Concerned Women for America is another religious right group which opposes any and all pro-lgbt non-discrimination ordinances and the organization does like to use the “men in women’s bathrooms” claim. But [CWFA prez Wendy] Wright, while defending the usage of this claim in an article with the Missoulian (while attacking a pro-lgbt ordinance in Missoula), demonstrated a degree of candor in her comments about this claim:
Even one of the most staunch opponents of those laws can’t point to increases in frivolous lawsuits or sexual predation. Still, Concerned Women for America president Wendy Wright said such ordinances lead the country down the wrong track.
“We have a constitutional protection for religious freedom in our First Amendment,” Wright said. “There is not a constitutional protection for sexual orientation, and yet judges and city councils and others are acting as if sexual orientation trumps religious freedom.”
. . . Wright couldn’t point to places that have counted increases in sexual offenses because of such laws, but she said such data is beside the point.
“It doesn’t go back to numbers,” Wright said. “It goes back to the issue that people will have legal rights that will trump other people’s rights. The right of a woman or a girl to feel safe in a fitting room, a locker, a restroom, their rights will be trumped by a person who is claiming their sexual orientation right has legal protection.”
While there should be some appreciation of Wright’s admittance that the “men in womens bathrooms” argument is without proof, she shouldn’t be able to get away with claiming that the lack of proof is beside the point, mainly because the lack of proof is the point.
But, of course, she will.
When the pushers of the Cassie Bernal myth were confronted with the reality that the ‘she said yes’ story that they were marketing in all likelihood could not have happened, one actually said it didn’t matter because it was still a worthwhile parable. [Note: I’m still looking for a link on this, but I saw it on the telly not long after the money-making, er…, ‘christian’ witnessing began in earnest about 10 year ago]
We’re living in Vorshtein America, folks. Facts simply do not matter; and neither does being called out on the fact – the fact-fact – that what one is saying/pushing is total bullshit. There are no consequences – NONE! Forget the spectre of having to defend what one says in a libel action; hell, there aren’t even follow-up questions. At this point, we should all be amazed that people like Wright aren’t claiming that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, is a muslim and is both a socialist and a fascist.