Federal judge temporarily halts Tennessee's 'drag ban' law on free speech grounds

essentialsaltes · Apr 1, 2023

Judge Thomas Parker cited constitutional protections of freedom of speech in issuing a temporary restraining order.

“If Tennessee wishes to exercise its police power in restricting speech it considers obscene, it must do so within the constraints and framework of the United States Constitution,” Parker wrote.

rambot · Apr 1, 2023

There's nothing more obsene than a man gender larping and reading about gay penguins.

Maybe you could argue that the lack of meaningful legislative movement to do something/ANYTHING to control America's staggering gun violence is more obsene. But really? Dead children can't hold a candle to "And Tango Makes Three" when it comes to tragedies.

HTacianas · Apr 1, 2023

essentialsaltes said:
Judge Thomas Parker cited constitutional protections of freedom of speech in issuing a temporary restraining order.

“If Tennessee wishes to exercise its police power in restricting speech it considers obscene, it must do so within the constraints and framework of the United States Constitution,” Parker wrote.

Congratulations. The judge just opened strip joints up to minors.

Always in His Presence · Apr 1, 2023

CORRUPTING THE MORALS OF A MINOR Definition & Meaning - Black's Law Dictionary

Find the legal definition of CORRUPTING THE MORALS OF A MINOR from Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition. the term that is given to the actions of an adult that leads a child to partake in an activity that is immoral or to witness an immoral activity....

thelawdictionary.org

How about just enforcing this law.

Exposing a minor to sexually explicit materials or physical shows is illegal whether straight, gay or trans.

rambot · Apr 1, 2023

HTacianas said:
Congratulations. The judge just opened strip joints up to minors.

ROFL!
Reading from a book is EXACTLY the same as going to the peelers?

Personally, I don't expect the mods will have ANYTHING to say about this picture.

rambot · Apr 1, 2023

hislegacy said:
CORRUPTING THE MORALS OF A MINOR Definition & Meaning - Black's Law Dictionary

Find the legal definition of CORRUPTING THE MORALS OF A MINOR from Black's Law Dictionary, 2nd Edition. the term that is given to the actions of an adult that leads a child to partake in an activity that is immoral or to witness an immoral activity....

thelawdictionary.org

How about just enforcing this law.

Exposing a minor to sexually explicit materials or physical shows is illegal whether straight, gay or trans.

Good idea! Good thing they are enforcing the law. The issue is that some folks don't have a functional understanding of what "Sexually explicit material" is and just think that everything they don't "like" is explicit.

RocksInMyHead · Apr 1, 2023

HTacianas said:
Congratulations. The judge just opened strip joints up to minors.

No, he didn't. The contested law banned "adult cabaret performances" from public property and places where they might be viewed by minors. The issue appears to be with the overly-broad definition of "adult cabaret performances" to include "male or female impersonators", a category of performer that is not inherently lewd or obscene.

HTacianas · Apr 1, 2023

rambot said:
ROFL!
Reading from a book is EXACTLY the same as going to the peelers?

View attachment 329685

Personally, I don't expect the mods will have ANYTHING to say about this picture.

According to the law:

"Adult cabaret entertainment":
(A) Means adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors, as
that term is defined in § 39-17-901, and that feature topless dancers, go-go
dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators, or similar
entertainers;

rambot said:
ROFL!
Reading from a book is EXACTLY the same as going to the peelers?

View attachment 329685

Personally, I don't expect the mods will have ANYTHING to say about this picture.

HTacianas · Apr 1, 2023

RocksInMyHead said:
No, he didn't. The contested law banned "adult cabaret performances" from public property and places where they might be viewed by minors. The issue appears to be with the overly-broad definition of "adult cabaret performances" to include "male or female impersonators", a category of performer that is not inherently lewd or obscene.

It says:

"Adult cabaret entertainment":

(A) Means adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors, as
that term is defined in § 39-17-901, and that feature topless dancers, go-go
dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators, or similar
entertainers; and

RocksInMyHead · Apr 1, 2023

HTacianas said:
It says:

"Adult cabaret entertainment":

(A) Means adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors, as
that term is defined in § 39-17-901, and that feature topless dancers, go-go
dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators, or similar
entertainers; and

Fair enough. Based on that, I would actually say that this a relatively reasonable law. The language could maybe be tightened up a bit, but the definition of "harmful to minors" as laid out in § 39-17-901 is pretty clear:

“Harmful to minors” means that quality of any description or representation, in whatever form, of nudity, sexual excitement, sexual conduct, excess violence or sadomasochistic abuse when the matter or performance:

Would be found by the average person applying contemporary community standards to appeal predominantly to the prurient, shameful or morbid interests of minors;

Is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable for minors; and

Taken as whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific values for minors;

It does rely a bit too much on "community standards," which can be highly variable and difficult to define, but the requirement that it also lack literary, artistic, political, or scientific value should help with that.

However, the judge blocking this law still does not open strip joints to minors as you claimed - unless they were open to minors before?

Always in His Presence · Apr 1, 2023

rambot said:
Good idea! Good thing they are enforcing the law. The issue is that some folks don't have a functional understanding of what "Sexually explicit material" is and just think that everything they don't "like" is explicit.

How about renderings of oral sex between a child and adult? Or literal descriptions of sex acts? Is that sexually explicit material?

Your opinion?

Always in His Presence · Apr 1, 2023

rambot said:
ROFL!
Reading from a book is EXACTLY the same as going to the peelers?

View attachment 329685

Personally, I don't expect the mods will have ANYTHING to say about this picture.

While in real life this is what is happening

I don't think the mods will have ANYTHING to say about this picture either.

rambot · Apr 1, 2023

A dude dressed as a lady laughing. Is this what I am supposed to be worried about?

When does he perpetrate the sexual violence against them exactly?

rambot · Apr 1, 2023

hislegacy said:
How about renderings of oral sex between a child and adult? Or literal descriptions of sex acts? Is that sexually explicit material?

Your opinion?

Any SINGLE instance of that happenning, I would have no problem enforcing local standards with those acts.

What I have a problem with is the juvenile mischaracterization that because, MAYBE it happenned on, like 3 occasions, they ALL MUST BE BANNED.

That's where my problem lies.

Two short questions for you:

Do you think a drag queen reading a simple book like "Little Blue Truck" is problematic?
What if that same drag queen read "And Tango Makes Three"? The book about the gay penguin couple who were given an orphan penquin baby.
Would that be problematic?

essentialsaltes · Apr 1, 2023

HTacianas said:
Congratulations. The judge just opened strip joints up to minors.

The [pre-]existing law handles that just fine.

Always in His Presence · Apr 1, 2023

rambot said:
Any SINGLE instance of that happenning, I would have no problem enforcing local standards with those acts.

??? What is the difference between a SINGLE instance and multiple? They are the same action. if the act is a crime one time, it is a crime 100 times. if you are asking has it happened - one title Gender Queer depicts the act with children.

rambot said:
What I have a problem with is the juvenile mischaracterization that because, MAYBE it happenned on, like 3 occasions, they ALL MUST BE BANNED.

That's where my problem lies.

If the action is a crime once, it is a crime no matter how many times it happens. If a piece of literature is sexual explicit - it is sexually explicit no matter if shown once, three times or 30,000 times. The content doesn't change.

rambot said:
Two short questions for you:

Do you think a drag queen reading a simple book like "Little Blue Truck" is problematic?

For me personally - yes. I find men dressing like woman abhorrent and I do not want my children exposed to them. (as does 65% of the American public)

rambot said:
What if that same drag queen read "And Tango Makes Three"? The book about the gay penguin couple who were given an orphan penquin baby.
Would that be problematic?

I don't care if the man dressing as woman was reading Bible stories. He would still be someone I would not want my child exposed to.

What these men do in adult company is perfectly fine in my book. You would never hear a word from me. When it comes to children - that is a totally different thing.

Let me ask a question to you please.

If a straight white Christian man is showing children depictions of child sex is considered a sexual predator and pedophile.

What is an adult teacher showing children depictions of child sex?

durangodawood · Apr 1, 2023

HTacianas said:
Congratulations. The judge just opened strip joints up to minors.

Really? Prior to this to 2023 law minors in TN could just sit down in strip clubs?

You know this...how exactly?

Hans Blaster · Apr 1, 2023

HTacianas said:
It says:

"Adult cabaret entertainment":

(A) Means adult-oriented performances that are harmful to minors, as
that term is defined in § 39-17-901, and that feature topless dancers, go-go
dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators, or similar
entertainers; and

Having male or female impersonators does not make a performance inherently adult-oriented or harmful to minor.

Since I was a minor in the 80s here are a few major media featuring fe/male impersonators in the 70s/80s:

Network TV sitcoms:

MASH, Cpl. Klinger: wears dresses all the time to try and convince superiors he is nuts.

Bosom Buddies: Two young men impersonate women to live an an affordable, women-only apartment building (starring Tom Hanks)

plus dozens of one-off uses of gender impersonation and cross-dressing for comedic or dramatic effect.

Then there are mainstream movies that have all been on network TV:

Tootsie: Dustin Hoffman plays a struggling actor who impersonates a woman to get an acting gig playing a middle-aged woman
Mrs. Doubtfire: Robin Williams plays a divorced dad who impersonates an older English woman to get hired as his kids' nanny
Victor/Victoria: Julie Andrews plays a singer who pretends to be a man to get a job as a female impersonator

There are just a lot material involving drag or cross-dressing in ordinary, general audience entertainment. Including such does not make something "adult-oriented".

HTacianas · Apr 1, 2023

Hans Blaster said:
Having male or female impersonators does not make a performance inherently adult-oriented or harmful to minor.

Since I was a minor in the 80s here are a few major media featuring fe/male impersonators in the 70s/80s:

Network TV sitcoms:

MASH, Cpl. Klinger: wears dresses all the time to try and convince superiors he is nuts.

Bosom Buddies: Two young men impersonate women to live an an affordable, women-only apartment building (starring Tom Hanks)

plus dozens of one-off uses of gender impersonation and cross-dressing for comedic or dramatic effect.

Then there are mainstream movies that have all been on network TV:

Tootsie: Dustin Hoffman plays a struggling actor who impersonates a woman to get an acting gig playing a middle-aged woman
Mrs. Doubtfire: Robin Williams plays a divorced dad who impersonates an older English woman to get hired as his kids' nanny
Victor/Victoria: Julie Andrews plays a singer who pretends to be a man to get a job as a female impersonator

There are just a lot material involving drag or cross-dressing in ordinary, general audience entertainment. Including such does not make something "adult-oriented".

Having male or female impersonators does not make a performance inherently adult-oriented or harmful to minor.

Nothing says it does.

ozso · Apr 1, 2023

rambot said:
A dude dressed as a lady laughing. Is this what I am supposed to be worried about?

When does he perpetrate the sexual violence against them exactly?

So the bar of what's acceptable around children is to be set at anything less than perpetrating sexual violence?

What's to be concerned about is an obvious agenda to completely reshape society to fit their standards.

Federal judge temporarily halts Tennessee's 'drag ban' law on free speech grounds

Fact-Based Lifeform

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus is the only Way

Senior Member

Senior Member

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Jesus is the only Way

Jesus is the only Way

Senior Member

Senior Member

Fact-Based Lifeform

Jesus is the only Way

re Member

Raised by bees

Well-Known Member

✦

Similar threads