Owatonna, MN Correspondent-The libertarian in me always winces whenever anyone suggests that one group of individuals should be forced to do something in order to accommodate another group of individuals. The progressive in me thinks installing family restrooms to accommodate transgenders makes sense. The conservative in me thinks enough is enough with society bending over backwards to accommodate any minority whatsoever who complains loudly enough about some sort of discrimination.

The base problem is, once a law is enacted, the lawbreakers come out in force to take advantage of whatever protection that particular law offers. A good argument can be made that if transgender people are allowed to use the restroom of their choice, child molesters who are male may disguise themselves as transgendered females in order to gain access to young females in the privacy of a restroom. Schoolchildren may do a similar thing but only think of it as a harmless prank designed to have a laugh or embarrass another student.

No public institution or private entity such as a business should be forced to accommodate transgendered people, mainly because to do so would add a burdensome cost and inconvenience to a small businessperson. Consider the owner of a small retail shop that has restrooms for customer convenience that are rarely used. The shop may have no space for a third room designated solely for transgendered individuals, and adding on to an existing structure may not even be possible.

And what of a small town with, say, an elderly population that has no transgendered residents? Should the businesses and public institutions in that small isolated town be forced to provide accommodations that will never be used?

Individual school boards should make a policy based on the wishes of the community as a whole. They should do so only when the issue arises in their district because to provide a transgender-designated restroom when no transgendered students attend school in that district is a waste of space and money. Alternatively, perhaps the school board could designate one restroom per building for transgendered students to be used if and when transgendered students attend that particular school.

My solution: let individual business owners and leaders of government at every level decide if they wish to accommodate transgendered individuals. If no such facilities are provided, then transgendered individuals should have the right to choose which restroom to use for relieving themselves without being questioned, harassed, insulted, or denied use of whatever restrooms are available. The bottom line is that no one should be denied use of a public restroom if he or she legitimately needs to use the facilities.

Prescott Valley, AZ Correspondent-According to a July 2014 government report by the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS), 1.6 percent of Americans identify themselves as gay or lesbian, and 0.7 percent identify themselves as bisexual. A Gallup poll of September 2012 found that that about 3.4 percent of American adults identify themselves as being LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender). With those kinds of figures in mind, it is apparent that transgender individuals make up a very small percentage of the American population. Country-wide restroom accommodations should not be made for that limited number of individuals.

Transgender individuals should be required to use restrooms that correspond to their sex at birth. Unless a transgender has gone through reassignment surgery and is either completely a man or completely a woman, he or she should use the designated restroom for their current sex, whether they think they are a woman or a man.

A number of schools and businesses already have unisex bathrooms, and many businesses have both unisex and family bathrooms that could accommodate any sexual persuasion, or those with other medical issues that require privacy. People with colostomy bags, incontinence issues, and other medical conditions that necessitate a closed, single-occupancy and locked restroom door would have guaranteed privacy without complaints or suits from non-transgender students or straight individuals frequenting a business.

The main problem with the transgender bathroom issue is the openness and acceptance of the leniency involved with sexual persuasion issues, and the harm it can bring towards normal children and adults. The pressure brought by special interests, the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and other legal organizations for the advancement of sexual persuasion issues has elevated the transgender bathroom situation to new heights.

The allowance of transgender restrooms in schools, and particularly more public places will only continue to fuel the fire of the bathroom debate. The possibilities of sexual attacks and other perverse behaviors will likely escalate with the manipulation by the special interests. If situations arise where transgender individuals are going to seek out unisex and family restrooms simply to attract others of their persuasion, difficulties will follow.

Business owners, law enforcement, and attorneys will all be caught in the resulting disorder over the use or misuse of a bathroom, and straight individuals will end up footing the bill and enduring the side effects of the whole issue. The next demand by the special interests will be for protection of transgender individuals in the unisex, family or other bathroom areas. Then that action will lead to police or security personnel having to apprehend and stop the more degenerate bad actors in the transgender bathrooms who try to initiate sexual acts with unsuspecting individuals.

It all has to culminate somewhere, but without an end to political correctness, the demands of special interests, legal organizations and court decisions, the twisted double standard over bathroom rights will continue, all to the detriment of normal, everyday Americans.

Sheffield, Jamaica Correspondent-…Sigh. All in all, this has been a very pressing issue and quite a sensitive one at it. While we all need to carefully consider the sentiments of transgenders, whether male or female at birth, we also need to give thought to those around them and how they’ll be impacted. As much as it is traumatizing for transgenders, it’s also harsh for our kids who have to share restrooms with these individuals. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not opposed to transgenders, but let’s face it, this is an issue that concerns us all.

If these individuals are males at birth, I say let them use restrooms designated for males. This is due to the fact that there is a great discrepancy in the genitals. We do not want to condone these things as we’d be exposing our girls to “you know what” at a tender age. The same applies for female transgenders.

On the other hand, there’s actually a safe option for transgenders. Let them immerse or get acquainted with family restrooms. These areas are designed specifically for the “family” and can accommodate any sex, including babies. This is also cost effective for businesses, as it’s more economical to have a larger restroom (with compartments of course) rather than two. That way, males use their designated stalls and the female likewise. However, there’s also a drawback to this implementation. Over the years, there has been a growing concern for safety. Almost anyone can be harassed in these restrooms. Truly, we just cannot look at a person’s countenance (be it male or female) and deduce perversion. Restroom users can be harassed at any given time. In my estimation, these should be tackled with discretion.

If it was left up to my doing, there would be separate restrooms for males and females. Those who are transgenders would have to get comfy with restrooms that actually have a bearing on their gender at birth.

Gastonia, NC Correspondent-Here in my hometown of Charlotte, the city council just recently passed a sweeping anti-discrimination bill with dozens of provisions protecting folks from discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation and everything short of whether or not they think Justin Bieber should be horsewhipped daily (he should).

Naturally, the ONLY part of the bill that got any play in the local media was the “bathroom provision,” allowing people to use the bathroom that fits their gender identity. The right-wing nutters were out in force, growling about letting “perverts” in with the kids in the bathrooms and how their precious snowflakes might be scarred forever if they saw someone with a moustache wearing a skirt going into the ladies’ room. On the left, the usual assortment of colorful characters were arrayed, calling those who opposed them everything from “Nazi” to names not fit to print here.

First off, a hard fact: The vast majority of child molesters are heterosexual males who identify as straight. The likelihood that a transgender person is also prone to being a molester is vanishingly small.

Second, there’s a simple solution to the whole sorry mess: Make all restrooms unisex! Put stalls in all of them, and post ordinances against leaving the stall with your naughty bits exposed. If the issue is that little Sally or Billy might see something they shouldn’t, then that will fix the problem.

Come to think of it, when is the last time you saw anyone walking around in a restroom with their wares displayed? This is “the sky is falling,” the potty version. Unisex restrooms are becoming ever more common in workplaces, and they are the solution to which neither side can raise a convincing negation.

As a side benefit to the female (and female-identifying) members of the community: The situation where the ladies’ room has a huge line and the men’s room doesn’t will be a thing of the past.