Starting with first principles and the scientific method
America First Books
Featuring ebooks that find a truer path in uncertain times

Rev Ted Pike Archive


Real Intention

By Rev. Ted Pike
25 May 2010

Perhaps thousands of callers have now urged 13 undecided senators to vote against the Employment Non-Discrimination Act. Our anger is fueled by ENDA's potential to allow transgender male employees not only into women’s restrooms but also showers and dressing rooms in businesses of more than 15 employees. Every public school and college in America has at least that many employees, along with male and female shower facilities used by students and staff.
Yet Peter Sprigg, senior fellow of Family Research Council, says in the Washington Times that under ENDA naked transgenders can’t invade school locker rooms. “ENDA carves out an exception for shared shower and dressing facilities in which being seen unclothed is unavoidable.” As a result, Christian/conservative groups now pull back from claiming ENDA will allow transitioning men into women's showers. What is the truth? Here again is Section 8, paragraph 3 of ENDA.

CERTAIN SHARED FACILITIES—Nothing in this Act shall be construed to establish an unlawful employment practice based on actual or perceived gender identity due to the denial of access to shared shower or dressing facilities in which being seen unclothed is unavoidable, provided that the employer provides reasonable access to adequate facilities that are not inconsistent with the employee’s gender identity as established with the employer at the time of employment or upon notification to the employer that the employee has undergone or is undergoing gender transition, whichever is later.

This intentionally confusing section says the government will not honor any complaint by, for example, transgender males who claim they are being excluded from women's shower facilities—as long as the employer provides such men with "adequate" (non-shower and dressing room) facilities.
But if ENDA is passed, such restriction will infuriate many "transitioning" males. It deprives them of fully enjoying their new-found female privileges. If after working out, a transgender “female” at a college or gym is denied the necessity to shower with members of his new sex, such exclusion will be considered discrimination—an excellent basis for a federal lawsuit. If ENDA is passed in its present form, it will generate a profusion of lawsuits by aggrieved transsexuals.
ENDA itself is in transition. The first stage is passage of unworkable legislation that discriminates against the right of a transitioning male employee to full and adequate use of female shower facilities. For ENDA to guarantee equality, the above section must be rewritten to become an "equal showering" amendment.
Bridgette P. LaVictoire, writing in lesbian website, reflects awareness in the homosexuality community of ENDA's discrimination: “The largest stumbling block has been regarding transgender protections. Unfortunately, in order to get those protections in the bill, they were forced to include a rather discriminatory portion about not allowing a person to use the bathrooms correct to their gender presentation. This opens the door to a great deal of abuses and problems unless there is also a provision that requires businesses to have a unisex bathroom.”
ENDA’s discrimination centers on public showers and dressing rooms, not bathrooms as LaVictoire confusingly asserts. And this discrimination cannot be ended by unisex facilities, as she ambiguously contends—whether a single-occupant, unisex bathroom/shower, or a communal unisex facility for male and female transgenders.
There is only one thing that transgender activists will accept: full rights to enter dressing rooms and showers of their new sex. Only this confirms that they are regarded by society as truly equal and accepted. Anything less says: “You are still not male or female enough to be admitted into the confidence of those you now consider your own. You can’t boldly say, ‘I am a man,’ or ‘I am a woman,’ in all areas of society and receive respect and dignity for who you are. Transsexuals are still 'have nots,' isolated by the sexual apartheid of government, business, and society."
Already, even before ENDA enshrines anti-transgender discrimination into law, transgenders are proving litigious. In Pennsylvania, a transgender "woman" is winning a discrimination lawsuit against her former employer, brought before the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission. She was hired as "James" but was transitioning to "Kate Lynn." Her employer required her to use a unisex single-occupancy bathroom until she could medically document her "anatomically appropriate" gender. This wasn't enough for "Kate Lynn," who complained about having to walk five minutes from her work location to the unisex facility. A preoperative male-to-female transsexual is also currently suing Macy's for being ejected from the women's restroom.

Masters of Deception

Confused? That's exactly what homosexual activists Barney Frank and Chai Feldblum, writers of ENDA, intend. Both are highly articulate communicators. Yet in crafting the transgender provision of ENDA, they purposely made it so nearly incomprehensible that members of Congress and the public will give up trying to decipher it. Instead, we accept the simplistic summary of the bill provided by the very deceivers who confused us in the first place! Their streamlined explanations to Congress and the media, of course, do not mention the possibility of men in women's showers or even restrooms. Congress votes not for the actual bill but a misrepresentation.
In all this, ENDA ignores the possibility that the civil rights of children, teens and college students might be violated by intrusion of lechers into their showers. As Attorney General Eric Holder revealed in his Senate Judiciary hate bill hearing, the Anti-Defamation League’s "anti-hate" laws are not about protecting the white, Christian, heterosexual majority - only small minorities whom liberals consider historic "victims" of Christian civilization. (Watch the NPN video "Holder Admits: No Equality Under Hate Bill.")
Of course, ADL, the mainspring of the bill, doesn't truly care about the civil rights of transgenders. ENDA is a means to an incredibly evil end. ADL wants ENDA to force showering between all students and sexual deviants because only then can this legislation reach its fullest potential to destroy sexual/gender clarity and morality in the next generation. Jewish ADL and its religiously Orthodox leader, Abe Foxman, have one goal: tearing down the structure and values of Christian civilization so that on its ruins a Judaic one-world order may be established by Israel’s false messiah, Anti-Christ. Foxman says he keenly anticipates appearance of this messiah. Orthodox Jews believe their messiah will rule the world from Jerusalem. (See, "ADL's Foxman: Man of Faith?") Few things are more corrosive to nations than homosexuality, destroying basic definitions and protections for “male” and “female.” That’s why ADL pushes sodomy so hard in every level of society.
Don't think that under ENDA your children will have any protection from sexual predators in the public school system. Under ADL's hate laws, devotees of 547 sexual deviancies, or paraphilias, have all the special rights. Under ENDA, they are the state-supported predators. Your children are their prey. (Watch the NPN video "Stop the Pedophile Protecting Hate Bill!")
TAKE ACTION! It is vital that we continue to boldly describe ENDA as leading to allowance of "transitioning" male employees into women's restrooms and showers. Call the 13 undecided U.S. Senators listed at's Action Page. Did you call last week? Call again toll free at 877-851-6437.





TALK SHOW HOSTS: Interview Rev. Ted Pike on this topic. Call (503) 631-3808.
The freedom-saving outreach of Rev. Ted Pike and the National Prayer Network is solely supported by the sale of books, videos, and your financial. All gifts are tax-deductable.

P.O. Box 828, Clackamas, OR 97015


America First Books Editor's Note

For those new to the hate bill controversy that is the topic of most of Rev. Pike's work, please link to the following articles:
Alert to Congress Regarding Hate Bills and the False Flag Attack Threat by America First Books publisher William B. Fox. Two-thirds down the web page please find the essay "The Hate Crime Law Concept: It is all very sinister for at least nine major reasons."
Also, earlier on this same page I comment:

Although Rev Ted Pike is completely independent from Captain May and myself in terms of his political and religious views, the threats we address all stem from the same corrupt power elite. I mention in my concluding remarks below that this elite “would mobilize us into domestic tyranny and foreign wars, while distracting us from economic depression and the groups that brought it about.”
This is the real problem, not the lack of more “hate crime” laws. If anything, we need even more freedom of speech to speak truth to power, sort out our problems, and develop peaceful strategies to handle high level malefactors. This is why we urgently need for members of Congress to not only take a principled stand and stop all hate crime legislative initiatives, but to also roll back all the existing hate crime laws currently on the books.

Hate crime laws actually pose a major national security threat. They condition Americans to feel that certain types of thought are inherently immoral or illegal, even if they do not result in any form of violence or infringement on the rights of others.
In our articles related to false flag attacks, Capt. Eric H. May and I have discussed strong evidence that Mossad-CIA was behind 9-11, the mere "thought" of which would some day be outlawed once hate crime oversight bureaucracies become firmly implanted in America. We can expect government hate crime overwatch entities to experience the usual cancerous growth and abuse of power that libertarian writer and Presidential candidate Harry Browne described in his classic book Why Government Doesn't Work.
Please find out more about the hate crime issue in the Rev Ted Pike archive.

Please discover important alternative religious and secular viewpoints on freedom of speech issues at America First Books:

a) The Rev Ted Pike archive
b) The Religious Crisis page

These web pages address not only conservative Christian and Christian Zionist viewpoints, but also secular, anarcho-libertarian, atheist, pagan/natural religion (particularly Asatru/Odinist), racial nationalist, and "miscellaneous other" perspectives.

Flag carried by the 3rd Maryland Regiment at the Battle of Cowpens, S. Carolina, 1781

© America First Books
America First Books offers many viewpoints that are not necessarily its own in order to provide additional perspectives.