Few things are more private than going to the bathroom. For transgender individuals, this simple act can be excruciating, risking humiliation, embarrassment and even outright physical aggression. Those who outwardly look like one gender but are biologically defined as the opposite gender face a level of fear and uncertainty most people cannot imagine.

Now a small group of Minnesota legislators is tromping into this delicate area with a heavy-handed government solution that dumps the onus on the state's employers and schools, turning them into a kind of potty police. Minnesotans should reject this proposal and make known their refusal to be drawn into another divisive debate over social issues that could bring harm to individuals who already struggle for acceptance.

For economic reasons alone, the bill's wording should put a chill down the spines of every business owner in this state: No employer shall permit access to restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms, and other similar places on any basis other than biological sex. That is a high standard, thrusting responsibility for enforcement squarely on employers. Meanwhile, Target Corp. on Tuesday announced that its transgender customers are welcome to use the restroom that aligns with their identity, saying: "We stand for equality and equity, and strive to make our guests and team members feel accepted, respected and welcomed in our stores and workplaces every day." If one of the state's largest and most-respected corporations can set such a standard, should the state aim for anything less?

Oddly, the bill proposed by Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen, R-Glencoe, could create awkward situations where none now exist. Picture someone who appears to be a woman, but who is compelled by law to use the men's room. Or someone who looks like a man, but must use the women's room. Schools and universities, too, would be forced to prohibit "access to restrooms, locker rooms, dressing rooms and other similar places used by minor students on any basis other than biological sex." The federal government has made clear that it considers such restrictions a violation of transgender students' civil rights. On Tuesday, an appeals court upheld the right of a Virginia student to sue his school district based on such restrictions.

Minnesota's bathroom bill appears stalled out, having missed crucial deadlines, but it remains alive. And to emphasize their intentions, 35 Republican state legislators last week sent a letter of support to North Carolina, the only state to have enacted such a law, saying, "We wholeheartedly agree with you."

Last week, the Tennessee attorney general warned lawmakers that their bathroom bill could result in a crippling $1.2 billion loss of federal funding from kindergarten through college. More than 60 corporations in Tennessee banded together to voice their opposition to the bill. On Tuesday, the sponsor pulled it, saying, "We know as soon as this bill passes, we're going to be sued."

North Carolina has lost hundreds of jobs after PayPal canceled a planned expansion. The state has lost tourism and events in a backlash that continues to grow. Twenty days after he signed the bill into law, Gov. Pat McCrory was forced to amend it with an executive order allowing private employers to set their own bathroom and nondiscrimination policies.

Wiser heads prevailed in South Dakota, where Republican Gov. Dennis Daugaard courageously vetoed a similar bill, saying it would have replaced local flexibility with a state mandate. He acknowledged that meeting with transgender students had "put a human face" on the possible consequences and had "helped me see things through their eyes a little better." That kind of mature, inclusive political leadership is to be applauded.

Republicans say they want less government and a friendlier climate for business. This bill fulfills neither objective.

Minnesota already has laws to deal with whatever transgressions might occur in a public restroom setting. Instead of government intrusion, let's apply some common sense and compassion.