South Carolina's "Bathroom Bill"

It’s no secret that I am no fan of our governor, Nikki Haley, but I did stand and give her props last week when she said, of Senator Lee Bright’s proposed Bathroom Bill to ban trans people from using a bathroom that coincides with their gender identity:

“I don’t believe it’s necessary. When I look at South Carolina, we look at our situations, we’re not hearing of anybody’s religious liberties that are being violated, and we’re again not hearing any citizens that feel like they’re being violated in terms of freedoms.”

Now, to be fair, Nikki Haley is looking at her political future when she says these things, and she knows the tide on LGBT hatred is turning, slowly, turning, but in light of all these Southern Republicans working to legalize hate, it was still nice to see one — or two, counting Louisiana Governor, and a Democrat of course, John Bel Edwards — stand up for LGBT people in general and trans people in particular.

But even with Haley denouncing the need for such a law, Senator Bright — and how I laugh at that name — is continuing his march into the history books as a giant dumbass. Bright is heading the hearings on this issue and a great many South Carolinians, trans and otherwise, spoke out about the bill:

Grayson, a thirteen year old trans male, sat right in Lee Bright’s face and told his story of having to go to the nurse's bathroom to avoid having to answer questions about his identity:

"All I want is to be able to use the men's restroom with the rest of my non-transgender peers, but this doesn't happen and it won't happen if this bill is passed. The people introducing this bill are victimizing the innocent. When I enter a men's bathroom, I just want to use the facilities, wash my hands and leave. I do not deserve to have my gender identity washed away like a fingerprint on a windowpane. I do not deserve to have the person I am replaced by someone I don't want to be. I do not deserve to be forced to use a restroom where I do not feel safe. We were brought into this world to live, not to be targeted by people who don't know what it's like to be born in a shell that doesn't match your interior spirit."

But Lee Bright will not be deterred because he said he’s had enough of tolerance — yes, he’s had enough of tolerance — if that means "men who claim to be women" going into a bathroom with children.

Bright also sat stone-faced listening to Deb Foreman, whose adult son is transgender, describe how her son has struggled because of others' ignorance:

"He still fears using a public bathroom because of societal hate and discrimination, and this legislation would make it even worse."

She then took on Lee bright personally, saying she had contacted his offices after the legislation was introduced to invite him to meet with LGBT groups in Spartanburg to discuss the issue; Bright never returned her call even though he is her elected official.

"With all due respect, Sen. Bright, you are ignorant to the issues of the LGBT community. There has been no outcry for this type of legislation. It would certainly cause more harm than anything else."

In addition, three high profile mayors — Columbia Mayor Steve Benjamin, Florence Mayor Stephen Wukela and Greenwood Mayor Welborn Adams —all attended the meeting, and all agreed that the proposed bill is unnecessary:

"I came here from Florence today to report to the Senate that in the city of Florence, our bathrooms are just fine, they don't require any state supervision or regulation whatsoever." — Stephen Wukela

Summerville resident Ross Scherer, who has a transgender daughter, said the bill's supporters are misinformed and hold misguided beliefs.

"I will not stand by while people put my child in harm's way. I will do everything in my power to see that this bill is not passed."

Bill Nettles, the U.S. attorney for the District of South Carolina, said there were no cases of a transgender person committing battery or assault and battery on a heterosexual person in a bathroom, and yet despite those facts Lee Bright remains committed to the measure:

"I have heard from an overwhelming number of people in the Upstate of South Carolina that have supported the bill. Businesses don't want to be burdened and forced to be told what accommodations they have to make in their restrooms."

What accommodations? Most businesses already have bathrooms, and most trans people have already used those bathrooms, oftentimes with others, and there have been no reports of any problems. But go on, Lee Bright; make a case where there is none.

Luckily, we have state Senator Joel Lourie, also a Democrat dontcha know, who has condemned the bill:

"I think this proposal is pathetic. I think it's mean-spirited. I think it's discriminatory, and on top of all that, economically it can be a disaster for South Carolina. We saw some incredible, brave people step forward today who gave some of the most moving testimony I've heard in my 18 years of public service.'

The testimony resumes today, and if the subcommittee votes in favor of the bill, it will likely go before the full committee sometime next week, though not without a fight from Joel Lourie:

"I will do everything strategically possible to make sure this bill never comes before the full Senate."

And the monetary backlash has begun; despite the fact that the bill hasn’t passed the House and that our governor says we don’t need it, Uphold, an international financial services company with U.S. headquarters in Charleston, has announced it would move its offices to Los Angeles to protest the proposal.

But all that aside, I must say that I am proud of South Carolinians; I am proud of our Democratic representatives, though they are few and far between, and Nikki Haley, for seeing this bill for what it is and denouncing it. And I am doubly proud of the trans South Carolinians who are standing up, and stepping into the spotlight, to condemn this bill for what it is: hate.

And I am hoping that South Carolinians remember this, and remember Lee Bright’s hate speech about trans people, and the LGBT community, when it comes time to reelect him in the fall.

Send Lee Bright home; he has no business representing the people of this state.

WIS-TV

Go Upstate

South Carolina: It's Not The Heat It's The Stupidity: Lee Bright Proposes Anti-Trans Bathroom Bill

Well, it looks like it’s South Carolina’s turn …

Senator Lee Bright — how’s that for an oxymoron … South Carolina Senator Bright — has introduced a bill just like that hate-filled one up in North Carolina law that prevents local governments from passing laws expanding the use of gender-designated public restrooms to transgender people … because fear.

Bright is saying his constituents asked him to do this:

“There’s a segment of the population that believes that you ought to be able to use whatever restroom you identify yourself as being. So they think it’s OK for a man to use a woman’s bathroom if he thinks he’s a woman. From a safety issue, we don’t need men going in women’s bathrooms.”

Keep calm, Bob; save the f-bombs.

First up, Senator Bright, these are not men using a women’s bathroom; these are trans women using the bathroom that matches their gender identity so get it straight. Secondly, there has not been one single instance of anyone being harmed by having a trans women in the bathroom because, and let’s see if this sticks, trans women use the bathroom because they want to pee.

If a man dresses up in women’s clothing, calls himself a woman, goes into a woman’s bathroom and ogles her, or gropes her, or goddess forbid, sexually assaults her, then he is a straight male criminal, not a trans woman.

But Senator Bright says he wants to protect the schools and this bill, like every single one of these hateful, discriminatory bills, would direct South Carolina’s public schools, public universities and government agencies to require bathrooms or locker rooms be designated for use only by people based on their biological sex. He does say that government entities could provide single-stall bathrooms for either gender, but multi-stall restrooms would remain exclusive for the gender matching the person’s birth certificate; private businesses can adopt their own bathroom policies.

Now, on a slightly more positive note, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley said, of this proposed bill:

“In South Carolina we are blessed because we don’t have to mandate respect or kindness or responsibility in this state. I don’t know of any example that we’ve had a problem of. South Carolina is going to continue to focus on ethics and roads and jobs because we think we have that part covered.”

Lovely sentiment, governor, but I need you to say the words: we will not legislate hate in South Carolina. You stood fast against marriage equality, so I’m not so sure I believe in your bran of “respect” or “kindness,” thankyouverymuch.

I do agree with one of Senator Bright’s most vocal colleagues, a Democratic state Senator, Joel Lourie, who has come against the bill:

“The world has watched what happened in North Carolina and the severe economic implications that can follow. I can see no logical reason why we would entertain such a ridiculous measure. We don’t need to join in this national conversation that can result in serious economic problems for this state.”

Good enough, but more so than the economic impact of such legislation, let’s ask ourselves if South Carolina wants to go back to the days of segregation? We’ve traveled that road before, why try again? Why spread hate and fear?

Bright’s bill has already received support from two more Republican Senators, Kevin Bryant and Larry Martin, who said he doesn’t want his granddaughter sharing a bathroom with a person who is “confused” over their gender or “cross-dressers”:

“I don’t want to belittle folks. But I do understand the concerns that you don’t want to put young people in that type of environment where a man dressed as a woman can go into a women’s bathroom.”

He doesn’t want to belittle folks, like trans women, but then goes ahead and suggests they might be child molesters or confused or cross dressers.

Get an education, asshat; learn what trans means; stop this nonsense. And if nothing else enters your tiny brains today, think on this:

You may have very well already used a bathroom with a transgender person and you didn’t know it.

Post and Courier

ISBL Asshat of the Week: SC Senator Lee "Not So" Bright

So, we’ve been watching our state Senators and Congressmen debate the Confederate flag this week; some want it down, some want it to stay put. Some — like Senator Vincent Sheheen … a democrat who represents  my neck of the woods — spoke eloquently about the flag’s place in the history of both the state and the country, but made it clear that the flag has no place in our future.

Others used their time in the spotlight to read from the Scriptures — do not get me started on that — while one senator used the time to introduce his family that was visiting from out of town; apparently he thought he was at a Congressional mixer and not a serious debate.

But one wingnut was especially wingnutty; and that would be the awkwardly named senator from the Upstate, Lee Bright.

Bright, a Teabagging loon who ran against Republican loon Lindsey Graham in the GOP primary and lost, and is now state co-chair of Ted Cruz’s presidential campaign — so you know exactly what kind of nut he is — took  to the floor of the Senate this week and didn’t speak very much at all about the flag; he wants it to stay put, go figure, but talked instead about the sin of same-sex marriage.

Seriously. Now, to anyone with a brain firing on all cylinders, these two topics have no relation so why, in a discussion about the removal of a flag, would one choose to talk marriage equality? Well, Lee Bright claimed in a Facebook post that the recent marriage equality decision by the Supreme Court has taught us that “states’ rights are under attack more than ever” and he called the removal, or the efforts to remove, the Confederate flag a “Stalinist purge.”

Let me make this queer, Senator “Not So” Bright; the discussion is about a flag, not marriage equality, and you cannot equate the two. The fight for the rights of gay and lesbian Americans to marry, just as everyone else in this country can do, is not at all like the flying of a flag that represents a time in this country when Southern states took it upon themselves to secede, took it upon themselves to own people; took it upon themselves to defy the federal government, and then lose the battle.

Yeah, lose; the South lost. Get over it. And get over that flag being our heritage; I live here, and it’s not my heritage. As an American it’s part of our history — and should be remembered lest we make similar mistakes in the future — but it is not to be celebrated or admired and raised or flown on a government property that represents all of the people.

I know you’re a Teabagging loon, Senator, and I know you have pressed your lips firmly to Ted Cruz’ Teabagging loon ass but the time has come for that flag to come down from the statehouse and put in a museum where it belongs.

RightWingWatch

South Carolina Legislators Say The Flag Could Come Down As Early As Next Week

You know, before the shooting in Charleston, I wasn’t holding my breath on this whole #TakeDownThatFlag movement. Since we moved to South Carolina, there have been petitions and request and newspaper articles about removing the Confederate battle flag from the state capitol grounds, but that was it; the requests came, and then nothing happened.

Now, however, I am cautiously optimistic. And our state lawmakers are saying they are actually confident that a bill to remove that flag could be on Governor Nikki Haley’s desk by the end of next week. My fingers are crossed.

Vincent Sheheen, a Democratic state Senator who represents the part of South Carolina where we live — you just know I couldn’t live in a ‘Red’ county — sponsored the bill, which is expected to pass the Senate by next Tuesday, and then go to Haley by Thursday.

But … and ain’t there always a but? … House Speaker Jay Lucas, and he’s a Republican of course, says he will refer flag bills to the House Judiciary Committee “where they will go through the appropriate process” that might take weeks. Jay Lucas has not shared his opinion on removing the flag, so yeah. Hmmmmm.

And holding off any kind of vote, much less a resolution, could be dangerous. This past Monday night, after pro-flag and anti-flag protestors clashed at the capitol, one man was arrested after shots were fired. And someone threw a red-paint filled balloon at the statue of Ben Tillman, a white supremacist who was a governor and U.S. senator.

“It’s July and hot, and the world is watching. “It will only get worse. If we don’t act, we are encouraging problems.” — House Minority Leader, and Democrat, Todd Rutherford

And we still have some loon, and bigots, and out-and-out anti-LGBT asshats in the legislature, most notably state Senator, and Republican, of course, Lee Bright, who has started an online petition to keep the flag on the State House grounds because, he says:

“I hate how these creeps have misused these emblems.”

Creeps. South Carolinians who want a divisive symbol of racism and hate removed from state property are “creeps.” And if that doesn’t tell the people who voted for Bright — and there’s a misnomer if I ever heard one — that it’s time to vote him out, I don’t know what does.

Still, the 123-member House voted 103-10 and the 45-member Senate voted 42-3 to debate the flag, and those numbers indicate there is the two-thirds support required in the House and Senate to take down the flag.

But, it’s quite clear, by the number of South Carolinians who support removal, by the number of our legislators who support removal, by our Republican governor, who supports removal that the time has come to take down that flag.

Put it in a museum, where artifacts and relics from the past belong. It does not deserve a place on honor on state grounds.

Plus, and this would just be delicious, the Ku Klux Klan has scheduled a pro-flag rally for July 18. Wouldn’t it be rich to have the flag down before they ever showed up?

The State

A Tale of Two South Carolina's

Boy, there are days when South Carolina surprises me, and days when South Carolina acts like, well, I think it has always acted, and so now I’ll present to you A Tale of Two South Carolina’s.

In the first one, we have Republican — you read that right — State Senator Larry Martin, the head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who is pushing new legislation bringing sweeping reform to the state’s domestic violence laws by creating a tiered system of offenses, increasing penalties and barring batterers from possessing guns.

Yes, people, gun control, of a sort, in South Carolina.

The bill, if adopted, would change the state's domestic violence laws for the first time in a decade, and, among other things, it would:

Restructure criminal domestic violence laws into a tiered system of degrees based on the severity of the crime, with escalating penalties ranging from 30 days in jail to 10 years in prison.

Bar those convicted of domestic violence offenses or facing protective orders from possessing firearms or holding a concealed-weapons permit. Batterers would face up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $1,000 if caught with a gun.

Require those charged with criminal domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature to attend intervention programs and bar them from having firearms or ammunition as a condition of bail.

Allow courts to grant permanent no-contact orders to prevent abusers from harassing victims. Police could arrest violators without a warrant and the offender would face a felony carrying up to five years in prison.

This bill is in response to state statistics that show over 300 women have been killed in the last decade from domestic violence — one murder every twelve days. South Carolina currently ranks Number Two in the nation for the rate of women killed by men, and has topped the list three times in the past decade, most recently in 2013.

Now, because it’s South Carolina, the gun provision will likely face the stiffest opposition in our GOP-dominated Legislature, with many Republicans saying the issue is already addressed by federal law and a state measure is an unnecessary duplication that could infringe on gun rights.

Or is it just the rights of men who batter women to carry guns? See, while federal law bans those convicted of domestic violence from buying or possessing guns, South Carolina has no legislation to enforce that prohibition, meaning, yes, batterers can keep their guns, and conceal their guns. And let’s keep in mind that the overwhelming weapon of choice in domestic killings is a gun; guns have been used in 65% of all domestic homicides of women. But let’s worry about infringing on the batterers right to bear arms, and not on the rights of victims of domestic violence not to die.

Still, in South Carolina, of all places, it’s nice to see anyone, much less a Republican, put forth any kind of legislation that might be called gun control, even one that makes sense like this one.

On the flip side of Reasonable Republicans in South Carolina, we have Republican State Senator Lee Bright — the name does not suit him at all — who is on a mission to expand the right of South Carolinians to discriminate against LGBT people.

In keeping up his cred as a bigot and hater and, well, a moron, Bright filed a bill last week that would exempt any employee who works for the State of South Carolina … the State of South Carolina … from having to do their job by issuing a marriage license to a same-sex couple.  If Not-So-Bright’s law passes, those state employees, aka Bigots Who I Pay With My Tax Dollars, merely need to say they have a sincerely-held religious belief against same-sex marriage and they can deny the license.

Now, to be fair, that gay couple can simply walk to another window, or wait for a more enlightened, educated, humane, truly Christian person to issue their license, but the point is that a state employee will be allowed to not do their job because they hate The Gays.

That gets me thinking that maybe I’ll get one of those jobs, then declare myself a Satanist and deny issuing licenses to religious couples because of my deeply held, sincere religious belief. Or, better yet, go in as an Atheist and deny licenses because there is no God y’all. Man, watching those Baptists heads explode might be worth it.

But here’s the deal, plain and simple: you people who work in a state licensing department work for the state, which means me, and so if you wanna deny me the right to legally do what I am entitled to do because, you say, your God don’t like no gay marriages, then step out of your office and head to unemployment and get on line looking for new work.

Same-sex marriage is legal, marriage is not a religious institution, and you cannot inflict your religious perversions on me just because you feel like.

Now sit down and keep quiet.

SC Senators Propose GunBan, Stiffer Domestic Violence Laws

SC Senator's Bill Would Legalize Religious Anti-Gay Discrimination

ISBL Asshat of the Week: South Carolina's Own, Lee Bright

Lee Bright is a South Carolina state senator and he is challenging our state’s US Senator, Miss Lindsay Graham in this year’s Republican primary.

I once thought it would be good to get Graham out of Congress but not by replacing him with Bright.

See, Lee Bright met with a group of Teabaggers and told them that Congress should impeach any and all federal judges who rule in favor of marriage equality in order to intimidate other judges into doing “the right thing.”

The right thing being deny same-sex couples equality, naturally:

“Congress ought to stand up and do its job and impeach one of these federal judges. And I think when you do that, being a federal judge is a pretty good gig, and I think if you’ll impeach just one, the rest of them will do the right thing. And they’ll do it out of necessity, because self-preservation is an instinct that so many folks have.”

Bright contends that, while The Constitution grants lifetime appointments to federal judges “during good behavior” the mere act of ruling in favor of marriage equality is “bad behavior.” And Congress has impeached some judges for their bad behavior, but that behavior is mostly committing criminal acts or neglecting their job.

Bright continued to rant about, well, everything, though some of what he said was typical GOIP nonsense, like when he said, “[T]here  are institutions that can put you in a room that you can’t harm yourself but you’re not free, and I would rather take the risk and be free.”

Huh? What?

But that was apparently the preamble to the topic of gun laws, on which he said the United States ought to follow Israel’s lead and put “teachers with machine guns on playgrounds.”

"You look over at Israel, and that’s an armed group of folks over there. I mean, they are teachers with machine guns on playgrounds, because you got terrorists over there that would choose to harm children and whose teachers are there to protect them. When you’ve got folks that are armed and able to defend themselves, the threat of terrorism goes down drastically.”

Wow. What a load of sh—

There is no proof anywhere that Israeli teachers walking around playgrounds with machine guns but Bright says it to promote fear in people, to try and persuade people to his narrow-mined, gun-toting, gay-hating point-of-view.

This is enough to make Lee Bright the ISBL Asshat of the Week.

source

Lee Bright: Another South Carolina Political Asshat

Oh South Carolina, you and your politicians.

First, Mark "Hiking The Appalachian Trail To Argentina So I Can Bone My Mistress" Sanford is trying to make a comeback by running for his old Congressional seat--the one he held before being Governor and Latin Boner. And, well, don't get me started on Nikki Haley.....

But let's add South Carolina state Senator Lee Bright, a Republican, of course, because they breed like rabbits on Viagra down here, who is famous for suggesting  that South Carolina explore coining its own currency in the event of a breakdown of the Federal Reserve System, and who is now attempting to exempt South Carolina from federal firearms regulations, has also filed legislation that would have South Carolina schools offer a class in firearms marksmanship as an elective.

Yeah, he did.

The course, called the South Carolina Gun Safety Program, would teach firearm operations, history of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and “the role of firearms in preserving peace and freedom.” Students would be taught to fire a gun at moving and stationary targets and would successfully complete the course by safely discharging a firearm.

Bright says, “I asked around to some of my colleagues in the legislature if schools could offer a course like this and it wasn’t concisely expressed whether they could. I figured I’d sponsor this bill and give schools that option.”

Teachers armed, students armed. What could possibly go wrong?

Is this what our legislators  need to focus on? Not our enormous unemployment rate? Not the rise in the numbers of HIV?AIDS cases? Not rising unemployment and increased poverty? Not funding for education--without weapons--and health care, or a host of other actual issues?

Of course, had Bright--and let's not talk about the oxymoron that is his name and his legislative choices--failed to speak to educators in his own district, who would be have to implement his proposal if it ever came into being--which, like most of his proposals, it won't. 

Spartanburg District 5 Superintendent Scott Turner: “I believe there are commercial agencies that are better suited for this. We have more than enough curriculum and not enough time to cover it now. I am not in favor of adding more.”

Don't teach kids how to read or write, teach 'em how to aim and shoot.

That's South Carolina, Wingnut Central.

source