Scott Benson wrote:
> Wow, I never thought that moving seven words
> ("for an illegal, immoral or unlawful purpose")
> from the end of the bathroom ordinance to the
> middle of the ordinance could possibly cause
> such a stir. Interestingly, the solution may
> be to abolish the ordinance putting Minneapolis
> in the same position as (gasp) the rest of the
> State of Minnesota.
Back in the sixties when I was a radical feminist
I thought that the litmus test for sexual
equality would shared unisex restrooms. Just
consider all the sexual power and stereotypes
that go into the need for segregated restrooms
(not to mention the cost). Well, so much for
idealism.
Michael Atherton
Prospect Park
TEMPORARY REMINDER:
1. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
2. If you don't like what's being discussed here, don't complain - change the subject
(Mpls-specific, of course.)
________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
