back to article PayPal freezes 400-job expansion in North Carolina over bonkers religious freedom law

PayPal has abandoned plans for a new global operations center in Charlotte, North Carolina, after the US state passed a "religious freedom" act that allows discrimination against employees on the grounds of gender identity and sexuality. "The new law perpetuates discrimination and it violates the values and principles that are …

Page:

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

      Re: Non Issue

      But if they have been sharing toilets in Europe for 50 odd years with no problems, is there really an issue?

      Not in the countries that do this. But what does that have to do with legislation in North Carolina?

  1. dncnvncd

    Does anyone remember it all started with "get the government out of my bedroom"?

    In my last retirement I drove an 18 wheeler across America for over 10 years. As such, it meant there were a lot of visits to bathrooms from customers to truck stops to rest areas. There were some states that had closed rest area bathrooms after a certain time for "safety" concerns. Some had a reputation for homosexual activity. North Carolina always had clean rest areas with an attendant on duty and in some cases a state police sub-station. It is also home to the Great Smoky Mountain National Park, Billy Graham Assn., Duke University, the Research Triangle, numerous foreign trade zones and industrial parks and home to NASCAR. In all that PayPal with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies biting at their heels feel some great economic leverage over taxpayer financed investment and 400 jobs? The practical effect of this is that restrooms are being constructed or revamped to be closed individual stalls and eventually each will need a lock so the proprietor won't get sued. But who listens to a person so confused they don't know what sex they are?

  2. evilhippo

    No this is nothing like Jim Crow Laws

    How about the state minds its own business and lets anyone "discriminate" on any grounds they want? Don't like a company's policies? Then don't work for them or do business with them.

    People saying this is a Jim Crow Law are 100% wrong: Jim Crow Laws were the Democrat Party passing laws that MANDATED discrimination (it was illegal NOT to discriminate against blacks in certain legally specified ways).

    What this law does is says it is not up to the STATE to decide who people choose to associate with.

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If you want immoral and distasteful

    Read your bible

  4. RonWheeler

    Genuine question

    So the entire team of highschool male jocks decides to wander into the female showers and get naked in front of the naked females. That is now okay/legal as long as they claim female is their sexual identity?

    Not trying to be reactionary and would in-an-ideal-world- like everyone to go to the bathroom they choose. But - just want some sort of safeguards against regular heterosexual pervs.

    1. Bloodbeastterror

      Re: Genuine question

      "highschool male jocks" is so far beyond the bounds of probability (or possibility) that it's an invalid proposition - and is in any case already covered by various privacy/decency laws. No need to make things worse by taking the stupid NC path.

    2. A K Stiles

      Re: Genuine question

      In the spirit of non-reactionary discussion...

      I think the same safeguard that existed a forthnight ago - societal mores and trained staff who are well aware of whether any of those 'jocks' had displayed any sense of gender discrepancy up to that point in time (preference for female clothing, etc.) and, if it's truely a newly emerging factor for one or more of them, the option to utilise a separate facility away from either birth-gender group, who are more likely to make the trans-individual uncomfortable than the other way round.

      What are you aiming to safeguard against? Is it sexualisation of some attendant individuals by one or more others present?

      Would it be more of an issue for you to have a trans-gender individual share facilities with their identified gender or for a homosexual person to share the facilities with others of the same birth-gender?

      How about the post-surgery trans-female who, according to this law now has to share the showers with all the hairy-arsed jocks, despite the fact that they now have defined breasts and lack a scrotum and penis?

      Perhaps the end-solution is unisex facilities with individual, lockable toilet stalls and shower cubicles rather than the mass open-plan options we've all faced at school and elsewhere. It might help prevent some of the endless bullying that seems to have gone on in schools for time immemorial.

      1. RonWheeler

        Re: Genuine question

        Define trans-gender individual? Not baiting here - what is to stop a (statistically mode) normal bloke walking into the female showers then claim to be trans-gender?

        1. x 7

          Re: Genuine question

          "what is to stop a ..... normal bloke walking into the female showers then claim to be trans-gender?"

          there might be the problem of a visible erection? That would be a bit of a giveaway

          1. RonWheeler

            Re: Genuine question

            So if a gay man gets an erection in the male showers he should be punished?

            1. x 7

              Re: Genuine question

              "So if a gay man gets an erection in the male showers he should be punished?"

              no, he'd probably enjoy it.

              in reality its a difficult question that needs a lot of chewing over, though my initial reaction is to kick his head in.

    3. HausWolf

      Re: Genuine question

      As tolerant as the jock culture is, I'm pretty sure a whole team of trans claiming female identity does not exist.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Reg - keep your politics to yourself

    Reg - if you expect me to get pummeled by your puerile politics to read tech news, you're going to be disappointed. My politics are not bonkers.

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Can't we all just get along?

    If this makes it past the censors at El Reg, I'll be Amazed!* (see below)

    Seriously.

    Here's why this whole layer of shitcake sticks in my craw. And Yeah, I *AM* an American. Born in Tennessee, raised in Florida, and holy shit, I believe in equality for all people. Except pedophiles. They serve no purpose in society except to teach the current generation how to tie and use a noose properly.

    It isn't the gay/lesbian/trangender/whatever-gender-you-are-today mess that bothers me.

    It's the fact that this is based on a religious superstition. It's about giving bible-thumping nutballs the excuse to discriminate, and the permission to rednecks to beat on a drag queen that has to pop a squat, but doesn't want to suffer the horror that is the women's restroom.

    It says, "If you are an Old School Christian, you don't have to do anything for poofters or Nancy's in a blouse, or blokes in trousers."

    Really? Is this the mid 1800's? (or the mid 1990's in the middle east?)

    I honestly can't *WAIT* for some middle eastern push-or-pull-start indian to deny one of those christ-spouting-holier-than-thou imbeciles the 'privilege' of purchasing a tank of gas because they're hardcore old-school Muslim, and the preacher's wife had the *audacity* to not only be in public without being wrapped in an area rug that has only eye holes cut in it, but *SPOKE ALOUD* in the presence of the all-controlling-I-know-better-than-you-ever-will Menfolk. That offended their 'religious sensibilities' (insane as they can be), and now that sort of behavior is encouraged by the word of law. After all, if Christians (aka, narrow-minded shitbags) can discriminate based on their religion, and America is all about equality and freedom, why can't other religions discriminate?

    Wonder how quick it'll take to repeal that retarded law written and endorsed by dim-witted, paste-eating, feeble-minded, brainwashed, mouth-breathing, sister-humping, self-important, brain-damaged, inbred, self-righteous, narrow-minded, egotistical, slack-jawed, cross-eyed fucktards.

    Especially since most corporations that could actually bring money into their backwater states have either put their plans on hold, or outright *cancelled* them due to the dumbfuckery that signed the bills into law. (Except Chic-Fil-A. They hate those that bat for the pink or sausage teams)

    All because some bloke wants to wear a skirt, or some dame wants to wear trousers and be called 'Sir' or 'Miss', or use the restroom of their choice?

    I'm sorry, I can't understand your bigoted and discriminatory reasoning. Could you go kill yourself so you don't pollute the gene pool? Thanks, mate.

    And for those that worry about 'perverts' coveting their children -

    Your "precious" children are far more at risk on the internet than in a public restroom. If you are that concerned about it, pop that tit (aka, smartphone or tablet) out of their mouth and *EDUCATE* them. Raising a child that possesses common sense is *YOUR* responsibility. For them to be treated equally and fairly is the responsibility of *SOCIETY*. If you don't like it, change it. If you're too lazy (aka, "busy") or stupid or passive-aggressive to change it, STFU and move your ignorant asses somewhere else. Like North Carolina. They'll tell you what to think, and about who.

    Just my drunk-on-my-day-off-at-11AM opinion. Like it? Yay. Don't like it? Don't give a shit. Or even a fart, for that matter. Those 'laws' are outright retarded, and those that wrote and endorsed them need to be stuffed into brightly colored sacks, hung from trees, and all the illegal immigrants from south 'o the border told they're pinatas. Should make for an interesting evening.

    *Get one free Amazed of equal or lesser value with the belief of this Amazed!

    1. gazthejourno (Written by Reg staff)

      Re: Can't we all just get along?

      Ordinary I'd zap this, but for pure comedy value I've let it through.

      Keep the replies vaguely civil or expect to have your comments zapped and end up on the pre-moderation naughty step.

    2. Fatman
      Joke

      Re: Can't we all just get along?

      <snip>

      I honestly can't *WAIT* for some middle eastern push-or-pull-start indian to deny one of those christ-spouting-holier-than-thou imbeciles the 'privilege' of purchasing a tank of gas because they're hardcore old-school Muslim, and the preacher's wife had the *audacity* to not only be in public without being wrapped in an area rug that has only eye holes cut in it, but *SPOKE ALOUD* in the presence of the all-controlling-I-know-better-than-you-ever-will Menfolk. That offended their 'religious sensibilities' (insane as they can be), and now that sort of behavior is encouraged by the word of law. After all, if Christians (aka, narrow-minded shitbags) can discriminate based on their religion, and America is all about equality and freedom, why can't other religions discriminate?

      </snip>

      Man, do I like your way of thinking.

      </snark>

      I am trying to wrap my head around the idea of the local Muslim community demonstrating outside the (heathen) Christian houses of worship demanding that Christian females start dressing modestly. Get out your burka ladies!

      I have lived in the South since the early 1970's, after leaving the Midwest. While in the more urban locations, the 'temperament' of society has slowly become better, all one has to do it to travel to its """backwoods""" to experience time travel. In some of these places far off the beaten path, you may get to experience what life was like nearly 100 years ago.

      Simply put, if you ain't a white middle class Anglo-Saxon male you ain't shit.

      Females need not apply.

      Blacks and browns need not apply.

      Jews and any other non Christians need not apply.

      If you don't have any money, you need not apply.

      IOW - if you are NOT Donald Trump, the rich local banker or businessman you need not apply.

      BUT, if you worship Jesus Christ, and spread HIS Holy Word, then The Kingdom, The Power and The GloryTM are all yours.

  7. Old Handle
    Unhappy

    On the one hand, this law sucks, on the other hand I have problems with big corporations trying to push democratically elected governments around. Just recently Georgia's governor vetoed a religious-freedom bill* under similar pressure. But goodness knows this kind of corporate bullying it goes on all the time, although much less publicly, and that sucks too.

    *This one would have protected people's right not to make cakes they don't agree with. While many might put the two laws in the category, from my libertarian perspective they aren't the same at all.

    1. Charlie Clark Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      No doubt, after sufficient time has passed and some tax incentives or more "right to work" (ie. no unions here) legislation is passed they'll come back having "reevaluated" the situation.

  8. smartypants

    Pervert.

    Where I grew up, the phrase was "not normal", and if you were one of those, well it was open season. In my life I've seen my society grow up, and though not perfect, the screams of the Big Johns (here at least) are seen for what they are now. Sad.

    Big John has done us all a service. There's a simple question we all need to answer.

    Do we want to live in a society where people like him get to decide who is allowed to be a human and who has such labels applied to them, rendering them subhuman and stripping them of rights? Do we want to return to a state where the loudest alpha male (and it's always a male) defines who should hide and cower in fear of their lives for being what they are, and just as bad, the rest of us quietly pretending to agree for fear of being labelled too?

    Or do we rise above merely being tribal, pig-ignorant animals and try to work at building a civilisation where we all have the chance of getting on? A world where the state and the powerful don't see it as their job to run around making other people's lives a misery. What a fucking waste of our time on this good planet I say.

    Well it's a question for every one of us. Civilisation has to be worked at. Each and every day.

    I feel sorry for Americans. America is held back by its Big Johns. And to think that the occupants of the Mayflower set out on a quest to escape from bigotry... I wish I could find something funny in the irony.

    So, if it helps, I'm a pervert too. I have no idea in which way I am perverted, but I'm sure Big John will find a way, so I'll save him the bother and just label myself.

    1. Ken Hagan Gold badge

      Re: Pervert.

      "I feel sorry for Americans."

      Objectively, then, you are in a minority because most of the world's population would be happy to have been born there. (The same goes for most of Europe, as is now painfully obvious.) Nowhere is perfect, but the USA is one of humanity's better efforts and we should recognise that even as we lay into its more imbecilic aspects and reactionary tendencies.

      "America is held back by its Big Johns."

      Not really. The Big Johns are making a lot of noise because the writing is on the wall and they've lost. Fifty years ago you would have found similar attitudes almost everywhere. Now they are confined to just a few places. In the USA, it is possible for the rest of the population to turn round and say "You're a reactionary imbecile." and then campaign against you and turf you out. In most part of the USA, this has already happened. The system works, eventually. (Obligatory, but affectionate, dig: “You can always count on Americans to do the right thing — after they’ve tried everything else,”)

      1. Someone_Somewhere

        Re: the USA is one of humanity's better efforts

        which is really quite depressing when you think about it.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Pervert.

      "And to think that the occupants of the Mayflower set out on a quest to escape from bigotry...[...]"

      My understanding is that they were equally bigots too. That is a strain of Puritan intolerance still detectable in the USA today.

  9. Cynic_999

    The problem is in fact the opposite

    ISTM that the probability of someone getting molested is far, far higher if a man who is dressed as a woman uses a man's toilet than if he uses a woman's toilet.

    1. RonWheeler

      Re: The problem is in fact the opposite

      Thanks. One sane logical comment in the storm of mass PC stupidity.

  10. rhfish

    Paypal does not give a whit one way or the other about this or any other political issue.

    However America's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been taken over by radical lesbians that believe American industry must push their agenda or die. http://www.washingtonblade.com/2013/05/24/lesbian-eeoc-commissioner-chai-feldblum-re-nominated-for-second-term/

    They threatened to bring corporate Boy Scout sponsors to their knees if they did not fall in line on homosexuals. http://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/wysk/enforcement_protections_lgbt_workers.cfm

    The current administration has weaponized our bureacracies including NASA, FCC, National Park Service, and the IRS for use against political opponents. Sets a very very bad precedent.

  11. Someone_Somewhere

    Re: America's Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has been taken over by radical lesbians

    Either your medication needs upping or I need to take brain-blitzing drugs until that sounds sane.*

    NURSE!

    * You do know they're really lizards, right?*

  12. YARR
    Flame

    religious freedom act is not bonkers - it's common sense

    Discrimination exists everywhere, when it's necesary and justified by reason it should be permitted. Arbitrary / unreasonable discrimination should be avoided.

    It's common sense that paedophiles should not be allowed to work with children. Arguing for their equal right to such employment is putting children at risk.

    Male gym teachers should not be permitted in female student's communal changing rooms and showers. Vice-versa.

    Gay and lesbian gym techers should not be permitted in student's communal changing rooms or showers for the same reason.

    All students should not be permitted in communal changing rooms for their opposite physical gender. Otherwise anyone could claim to have an opposite gender identity and abuse the privilege for their personal gratification.

    The needs of minorities should be considered and accommodated, but their rights should not come before the majority. In the case of transsexuals / opposing gender identity etc. they would ideally have separate facilities, or use them at a different time. But it's not right that the majority should suffer for the minority's benefit.

    re. "When even PayPal thinks you're bad, you know you've really jumped the tracks" - rubbish! What qualifies PayPal or any other corporation as having any moral or democratic authority? In corrupt societies money rules over moral principle - wealth buys you greater political influence than your vote would allow. Since PayPal has no vote, in a democratic society it has zero influence.

    It's high time we returned to the democratic principle of representing the will of the people, and formally separate corporations from state. Corporations should not be permitted to lobby politicians and interfere with state legislature.

    Did these CEO's consult their shareholders or their workforce for their opinions first? I doubt it - corporations are fascistic entities and CEOs are their dictators. It's time the ordinary people fought back - at the next shareholder meetings all these CEOs should be voted out and replaced with principled leaders who wont abuse their power by interfering in the political process. Why should the investors tolerate investment decisions based on the CEO's personal misguided prejudices over sound financial investment?

    1. Someone_Somewhere

      Re: religious freedom act is not bonkers - it's common sense

      I don't think it's the underlying principles of the RFA that is the problem so much as the way people twist its intent to suit their own fundamentalist (i.e. bigoted) agenda by (deliberately) misinterpreting the letter of the law.

      I instinctively want to disagree in principle but, so far at least, what you say /is/ just common sense.

      I'm conflicted - If only I didn't find myself agreeing with a lot of what you said /sigh/.

      I know: I won't upvote you* - that will allow me to continue feeling antipathetic towards you for no justifiable reason (so far) whilst still admitting that there may be some merit to your argument.

      --------

      EDIT

      Changed "there is some merit to your argument" to "there may be some merit to your argument".

      HA! I'm off the hook. ;)

      --------

      * no beer icon either - yah, boo, sucks to be you ;)

  13. MJI Silver badge

    Toilets

    I still remember at primary school, the boys was closed, so I used the girls, and got told off.

    I needed a pee.

    So I used a toilet.

    1. Someone_Somewhere

      Re: Toilets

      > So I used a toilet.

      Tut, tut.

      You're a boy; the whole /world/ is your toilet.

      Except the girls' toilets.

      Go in the playground!

      Front of the class with you.*

      * where we can keep an eye on you, you wreteched child!

  14. Old Englishman

    Leaving aside the sheer lying by the brownshirts ... the fact is that these same brownshirts have been making an utter nuisance of themselves. The state has moved to prevent them harassing others with lawsuits designed solely to force those they hate into endorsing their views, allowing weird men to force their way into girls' toilets, etc - surely common sense. In response the brownshirts shriek abuse.

    If the brownshirts win, you, my friends, will be next. The thing about this sort of thing is that no concession is ever enough.

    1. Someone_Somewhere

      Brownshirts?

      Is that a Nazi reference?

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    “Real_ Doctors and scientists have yet to determine exactly what it is that 'makes someone gay“

    That's easy, all you need is a pervert to teach you :D

  16. oldpaul100
    Alert

    oldpaul100

    Just quickly read the offending document, full of legal doubletalk but seems clear about 'bathrooms' and changing rooms, single or multiple.

    In UK it's considered normal for Multiple Use facilies to be Single Sex only. Single use can be either sex with common wash facilities or having individual facilities.

    It seems the argument is over the definition of Sexuality. For L&G there is not much point it arguing about which 'classification' they come under. It's for B&T that where the problem arises. For B it would seem that the registered sex would be the obvious. For T it's obviously much more tricky.

    Here in the UK we have sort of got round this problem by having 'Disabled' Toilets which are indiscriminate in sexuality!

    The effect of adding the word 'biological' in front of sex in the Employment rights is not immediately obvious to me, perhaps I'm missing some background! Similarly making it a Statewide responsibilty would seems normal from here. What effect this and the contract terms would seem on the face of it quite neutral to LGTB arguments.

  17. gozzy71

    They were due to expand their before the law was even changed or thought of so obviosuly wasn't a problem for tehm a year ago :-) But of course expanding into Cuba is no problem at all - that morally updatnding nation with no civil rights violations ever !

  18. Brian Allan 1

    I'm an old fart and my logic is quite simple. You have a penis, you use the Men's room. You don't, you use the Ladies room. End of story!

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon