We live in ever changing times. Traditional values and moral standards are being tossed aside.
In December 2015, in Washington state, a group of five people, appointed by Gov. Jay Inslee’s administration, decided that males and females who “think” of themselves as the opposite sex should have the right to use the restrooms, locker rooms and showers of the sex they “identify” with rather than being required to use the facilities associated with their physical equipment. This group made no allowances for predators. They also chose not to go to the Legislature so lawmakers have yet to take any action. A non-elected group of appointees, not accountable to the public, have entirely changed the rights of people.
Subsequently the LGBT community (which is less than 2 percent of the entire U.S. population) has gotten the federal government (the Obama administration through Attorney General Loretta Lynch) and the U.S. Department of Education to issue new “guidance” telling school districts across the nation that they must allow full access to all facilities to everyone. This new “guidance” has no force of law. What is the new “guidance?” It says that transgender students must be allowed to access the facilities they mentally associate with at that day and time. These are not students who are undergoing surgical procedures to alter their genitals to match their mental image. These are students whose plumbing doesn’t match their mental image of their sexuality. Their image could change and thus they could switch between facilities.
The federal government is legally forbidden from controlling or directing education at the state and local level. However, the fed’s provide about 10 percent of the local funding through various programs and grants. They have been using the “threat” of withholding funds if states and school districts don’t follow their “guidance.” Thus, though they are legally prohibited they do indeed “direct” education in full violation of the law, because school boards (assuming they disagree with the federal actions — which they may not) are afraid of losing money they desperately need.
On May 23, 2016, we attended the Battle Ground School Board meeting to specifically determine whether the directors agreed with and supported the new federal “guidance.” About 10 days prior to the meeting we emailed each of the directors a link to the new “guidance” and told them we would attend their meeting and ask for their position. During the first public comment period (limited to 3 minutes) we asked what their stance was. The president of the School Board said the subject was covered in their Policy section. We asked what policy that was and he didn’t know. He then asked the district communications director which policy it was — Policy #3210.
If you take the time to read the policy it discusses assuring no student is discriminated against. The Battle Ground directors have chosen to use this policy to deal with the “gender identity” topic.
Question: What percent of students in the United States are transgender?
Answer: There is no data. In the general population (according to a New York Times story in 2015) 0.3 percent self-report as transgender which equals about 700,000 people out of 312 million.
Question: If, as the Battle Ground School Board says in their Policy 3210, the goal it to prevent discrimination are they not actually discriminating against the 99.7 percent who are not transgender by forcing the 99.7 percent to have their rights removed? How is telling the 99.7 percent they are wrong and cannot exercise their rights and choices or that they must go somewhere else or have their values, privacy and preferences thrown out to accommodate the 0.3 percent?
In the end each person needs to decide for themselves what’s right, fair and reasonable. Is telling the 99.7 percent they must give up their rights and freedoms so the 0.3 percent are treated “fairly” the answer?
As for the Battle Ground School Board directors position, the president agreed that by using their Policy 3210 to address the transgender access topic they do indeed agree with and support the federal government’s “guidance.” The board only admitted this when pressed and preferred not to make their position public. Where does your local school board stand on this?
Dick Rylander ran for Battle Ground School District director, lives in Battle Ground and runs a blog found at www.swweducation.org.
