Transgenders should use the restrooms according to their gender

"The Daily Wire one seemed to have no real problems with it. However, one could point out that if this were a commonly occurring problem (creeps claiming that they were transgender to get into women's restrooms), they would give a statistic instead of telling lots of details about isolated incidents. If it were a commonly occurring problem, they would actually say how many people in total had tried or succeeded in doing this. So essentially, all that I got from that article was, "Over the course of several years, in places all over the United States, a country that has 318,900,000 people, there have been five incidences of sexual harassment or voyeurism by people who claimed to be transgender." So you obviously didn't know what you even read. If "Over the course of several years, in places all over the United States, a country that has 318,900,000 people, there have been five incidences of sexual harassment or voyeurism by people who claimed to be transgender." Is what you got out of the article then you obviously have low critical thinking skills. Those 5 incidences are some of MANY incidences that have been happening for a VERY long time. The article was basically saying that if it's this bad now imagine how bad it'll be if this bathroom law is bad. Sexual harassments in women's restrooms would DRASTICALLY increase. That's not a good thing. "Next, I look at the title. It says, "Top Twenty-Five Stories Proving Target"s Pro-Transgender Bathroom Policy Is Dangerous to Women and Children." The funny thing is that, first of all, none of these twenty-five stories actually have anything to do with Target." It's not supposed to be about target. The title says Top Twenty-Five Stories Proving Target"s PRO TRANSGENDER BATHROOM POLICY Is Dangerous to Women and Children. They were talking why the pro transgender bathroom policy is wrong that's why they brought out those sexual assult stories to prove how dangerous target's bathroom policy was. So the article is about the bathroom policies in general....not target. So this kind of proves that you have bad reading comprehension skills too. "The even funnier thing is that only five of these twenty-five stories involve people taking advantage of transgender bathroom laws to carry out malicious activities. The other twenty are just stories of people sneaking into women's bathrooms. So only 20% of the stories they list actually have anything to do with gender-neutral bathrooms, yet in the title they claim that all of their stories are to prove that gender-neutral bathrooms are bad. This article is therefore misleading at best." No. The article proves that there are PLENTY of predators waiting to prey on the women and children in the restrooms. This law will allow the 80% of the people in that article (people like them) to freely enter the women's restroom and prey upon them. This bathroom law is like a golden ticket for bathroom predators. The article still remains valid. They won't have to sneak in the restroom anymore if the law is passed. So the article is still valid. "So, because of these five stories that they list, they say that we should ban gender-neutral bathrooms, right? But, even though 80% of their stories are incidents involving gender-specific bathrooms, I don't see them suggesting that we ban gender-specific bathrooms. The irony of this article is killing me." Ummm.....we're not discussing about gender neutral bathrooms, nor was the article about gender neutral bathrooms. What are you even talking about? Am I missing something? "I would like to point out that the current situation involves men and women using the bathroom of the gender they identify with." See that's the problem. You can identify as anything you want, but that doesn't make so. I can identify to be a kangaroo, but that doesn't make me a kangaroo. Your logic goes like this. Right now I'm identifying to be a panda bear and I want to go to the zoo and live with my panda brother's and sisters, but there's one problem....the zoo keepers won't allow to live in the zoo with my panda siblings, so therefore they're breaking my 14th amendment rights and are being totally unequal to me. This is basically the logic you're using. No one's rights is being broken because we don't let them use the restrooms that they aren't supposed to use. Transgenders have ALWAYS had rights...they've had the right to use the restrooms according to their biological gender....LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. What they want now are EXTRA rights. What about the women and the children who aren't comfortable with seeing men in women's restrooms? What about their rights huh? Why does the 99% have suffer and have their rights violated for the .3%? This doesn't make much sense. " Secondly, if it were perfectly constitutional, why would the federal government be suing the state of North Carolina? The country's top legal experts and constitutional scholars--people who know the Constitution better than you, better than me, and better than most of the rest of us--are saying that this law is unconstitutional. Why should you know better than them?" Are you talking about the same government that's been trying to "Change" our Constitution? Just 8 months ago (before the transgender hooplah) you libs where complaining that the Constitution is old and doesn't apply to today's issues.. Now, you are trying to use it to further your narratives. Take a side already, you guys flip flop like.. like a flip flop! Also, the Countries top legal experts are from the private sector. I personally know people that have memorized the Constitution & it's entirety. given that those same idiots are changing the constitution itself, I have to disagree with you. Honestly, it's their life and yeah, I think they should live how they want, no matter how screwed up I find it to be (I am well aware that their choices shouldn't and don't affect me). However, I find it ridiculous to change the constitution to fit 0.3% of the population. Not to mention that due to the 14th ammendment, IT WAS NEVER ILLEGAL