(03-02-2023 02:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Just responding to the headline....

This is a waste of political capital and time. The government should not be determining how people can dress or what they can choose as entertainment. They can certainly limit content as it pertains to minors, but it would be a HUGE MISTAKE for them to just blanketly decide that a show (or costume party) with a man wearing a dress is illegal.

Well, that is NOT what this is about. If you think it is then you haven't read the text of the bill. You've fallen into the lefts trap of seeing only the headline. That's how they trick their low IQ base. Anyone here who has read anything from you knows you are far from a low IQ voter so what gives?

(03-02-2023 02:45 PM)b2b Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 02:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Just responding to the headline....

This is a waste of political capital and time. The government should not be determining how people can dress or what they can choose as entertainment. They can certainly limit content as it pertains to minors, but it would be a HUGE MISTAKE for them to just blanketly decide that a show (or costume party) with a man wearing a dress is illegal.

Should've read more than the headline. This is about the shows allowing kids to be present.

thanks, you said it with a lot less words than me

(03-02-2023 03:12 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 02:50 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 02:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Just responding to the headline....

This is a waste of political capital and time. The government should not be determining how people can dress or what they can choose as entertainment. They can certainly limit content as it pertains to minors, but it would be a HUGE MISTAKE for them to just blanketly decide that a show (or costume party) with a man wearing a dress is illegal.

The point has been made that the law is directed as kids in the audience.

Some have demonstrated that there is definitely behavior directed towards kids that should rightfully be restricted.

The bold in my statement addresses the bold in your Tanq, which I believe is responsive to 'b2b'

Quote:My point is that I think the law is vague -- it is using a standard that is indeterminable.

My second point is that vague obscenity laws are a minefield of disaster of over-application.

For example -- a danger of restricting a non-sexual reading books by a bearded man dressed fully yet in a dress, to a childs reading group.

Or by restricting a play open to the public with children in the audience, of a Dolly Parton imitator who is a male.

I would prefer a law that is more objective in nature, and tends to be less subjective. One that tends to act to reduce the chance of it being applied to the above.

Others are saying 'great law, stops the guy in a wig from twerking with his junk in the kids' faces, let the innocent people who are affected sue their way out of the issue'.

Which has now progressed to discussion of morality of the guy in a dress reading to children.

I understand this. Morality laws are often difficult if not impossible.

Nobody had a real issue with Mrs Doubtfire though... at least not on a 'he's corrupting our kids' basis.

Bottom line, to the headline... 'banning most drag shows' is a bad idea. Not because drag shows are a good thing in my mind, but because the government shouldn't be regulating adult choices.

Seeing Shakespeare in its original form (with men playing the women) can provide interesting original context to his humor that is often lost when you remove that fact.

There was NO sexual aspect to that movie, none at all.

(03-02-2023 07:55 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 03:12 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Nobody had a real issue with Mrs Doubtfire though... at least not on a 'he's corrupting our kids' basis.

Bottom line, to the headline... 'banning most drag shows' is a bad idea. Not because drag shows are a good thing in my mind, but because the government shouldn't be regulating adult choices.

Seeing Shakespeare in its original form (with men playing the women) can provide interesting original context to his humor that is often lost when you remove that fact.

There was NO sexual aspect to that movie, none at all.

But there IS to Shakespeare... and that is also IMO ok.

Because while it is certainly male actors portraying women... they are not portraying men portraying women, if that makes sense.

As I said, and the above 'you should have read more' admonition doesn't chnge anything that I can see... THEY CAN CERTAINLY LIMIT CONTENT AS IT PERTAINS TO MINORS... but I think anything remotely APPROACHING the banning of 'drag shows' (without a clear definition that there is some sort of sexual component thereof... not gender, but 'preludes or allusions to intercourse') is a bad idea. Again, not because I support drag shows... merely that all sorts of things I DO support become fair game. The government should not be deciding what sort of entertainment ADULTS can view. (with the obvious caveat that the performers are willing)

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

(03-02-2023 08:16 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

Approve or not?

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

(03-02-2023 07:17 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:51 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:45 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 05:57 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  The fact that I think men wearing dresses are freaks does not make me a bigot. It does make you guys idiots though. You like men in dresses have at it. I don't, and you can't make me.

Probably you all wear dresses too. c'est la viec'est

And tanq, you can't insult me. I don't give a flying fk about your opinion. You're just an old rummy who has seen better days.

You can defend someone’s right to do something even if you don’t like or wouldn’t participate in it. The ACLU has gone to bat for a lot of people they probably don’t agree with. A right is a right, even if you don’t agree with them, which you guys don’t seem to get.

People have the right to participate in society even if you don’t think they are wearing the clothing that matches their gender.

Except for the pesky one about guns.... right

And btw, people can do what they want, 100%

But others can also make jokes about them, ridicule their behavior, ignore them in public, shame their behavior, etc etc

It doesn't mean people will just sit back and have it shoved down their throat.

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

I carry and owned NFA items before the recent “forced” NFA registration of pistol braces. I probably go through more ammo in a year than 98% of the people on here (5k to 6k shotshells a year).

I believe in all the amendments unlike some people here.

For some reason an odd version of Elmer Fudd comes to mind

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

(03-02-2023 08:22 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 08:16 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

Approve or not?

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

Jesus fuckin christ dude. What prize do you think you'll win by spamming this board with moments of inappropriate behavior of drag artists with kids? It's unhinged. No, I do not approve of that. AND I ALREADY STATED THAT. Yes, those moments unfortunately exist (and likely in gross minority to otherwise very tame drag queen events like storytime/theater). Yes, parents who take their kids to these are boneheads. But, AGAIN, I still think over reaching laws like this proposal do more harm than good and create a nanny state.

Are you just sitting at home masturbating with eric to all these videos? Are you just lonely and retired and constantly googling drag acts to find this ****?

(03-02-2023 08:22 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 08:16 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

Approve or not?

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

You really like watching drag queen videos.

(03-02-2023 08:16 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

I'm self aware and you're a freak *shrug*

(03-02-2023 08:31 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 08:22 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 08:16 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

Approve or not?

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

Jesus fuckin christ dude. What prize do you think you'll win by spamming this board with moments of inappropriate behavior of drag artists with kids? It's unhinged. No, I do not approve of that. AND I ALREADY STATED THAT. Yes, those moments unfortunately exist (and likely in gross minority to otherwise very tame drag queen events like storytime/theater). Yes, parents who take their kids to these are boneheads. But, AGAIN, I still think over reaching laws like this proposal do more harm than good and create a nanny state.

Are you just sitting at home masturbating with eric to all these videos? Are you just lonely and retired and constantly googling drag acts to find this ****?

I'll keep posting them in this thread until it ends

Thanks for finally being so forceful in your objection

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

(03-02-2023 08:33 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 08:22 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 08:16 PM)JDTulane Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:16 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Ok then, I'm a bigot.

FINALLY! A BREAKTHROUGH!!!!

BTF is finally becoming self aware!


Now we just need Eric to come out and Max to stop shouting to the clouds and this thread can die.

Approve or not?

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

You really like watching drag queen videos.

Well?

Sent from my SM-F721U using Tapatalk

(03-02-2023 09:03 PM)maximus Wrote:  Thanks for finally being so forceful in your objection

Truth be told your videos are probably turning him on.

(03-02-2023 09:06 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 09:03 PM)maximus Wrote:  Thanks for finally being so forceful in your objection

Truth be told your videos are probably turning him on.

First you admit you are a bigot THEN you admit eric is probably jerkin' it to this thread?


Wow. You really are a changed man! Congrats. Welcome to the light. I might formally unignore you along with Maximus if this keeps up!

(03-02-2023 06:45 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 05:57 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  The fact that I think men wearing dresses are freaks does not make me a bigot. It does make you guys idiots though. You like men in dresses have at it. I don't, and you can't make me.

Probably you all wear dresses too. c'est la viec'est

And tanq, you can't insult me. I don't give a flying fk about your opinion. You're just an old rummy who has seen better days.

You can defend someone’s right to do something even if you don’t like or wouldn’t participate in it. The ACLU has gone to bat for a lot of people they probably don’t agree with. A right is a right, even if you don’t agree with them, which you guys don’t seem to get.

People have the right to participate in society even if you don’t think they are wearing the clothing that matches their gender.

No I won't defend someone's right to do something I don't like. Wtf is wrong with you? And please don't talk to me about the ACLU. The only civil rights those leftist POSs care about are the right to kill babies.

(03-02-2023 10:04 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:45 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 05:57 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  The fact that I think men wearing dresses are freaks does not make me a bigot. It does make you guys idiots though. You like men in dresses have at it. I don't, and you can't make me.

Probably you all wear dresses too. c'est la viec'est

And tanq, you can't insult me. I don't give a flying fk about your opinion. You're just an old rummy who has seen better days.

You can defend someone’s right to do something even if you don’t like or wouldn’t participate in it. The ACLU has gone to bat for a lot of people they probably don’t agree with. A right is a right, even if you don’t agree with them, which you guys don’t seem to get.

People have the right to participate in society even if you don’t think they are wearing the clothing that matches their gender.

No I won't defend someone's right to do something I don't like. Wtf is wrong with you? And please don't talk to me about the ACLU. The only civil rights those leftist POSs care about are the right to kill babies.

Well, that’s the difference between you an real Americans. We recognize that rights extend to everyone even if we don’t agree with them. “I wholly disapprove of what you say—and will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Since 2017 the ACLU has supported the constitutional rights of the NRA, the Koch-funded Americans for Prosperity Foundation, anti-Semitic protesters, Trump supporters, Trump himself, Republican challengers to a Democratic gerrymander, right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos, and conservative and anti-gay student groups. They don’t agree with those groups, but they defended their civil liberties.

You have the kind of attitude that paved the way for the holocaust.

Normal people don’t care about your social justice bullsh!t

(03-02-2023 10:49 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Normal people don’t care about your social justice bullsh!t

This^^^

Most of us are just sick of it.

(03-02-2023 07:37 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 06:02 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 04:25 PM)maximus Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 04:12 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(03-02-2023 04:00 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  Keep in mind these are the same people who think mentioning Marxism and social rot in the same sentence is conflating two separate issues.

Keep in mind this dude doesnt seem to realize that that age old issue that he keeps repeating as a mantra didnt quite hold up so well in the light of history.

Damn commies/ hippies/ dope smokers/ faggots/ MLK supporters/ Jewboy race workers/ Lefty screen writers.

That same argument that you cling to was used to describe the activities of every single group listed above. Didnt work out the way ol' Marx said, did it? I guess it sounds cool when you intentionally ignore its application through the US history.

Applying it to guys wearing dresses reading to kids is really funny in that context. But please keep beating that drum.

Yep, guys in dresses reading to kids is the APOCALYPSE for our society. THE APOCALYPSE!!!!

Man if I wasnt actually in this channel, I'd think you all were creations in South Park.

Oh, there's another one to add to the list of Damn commies/ hippies/ dope smokers/ faggots/ MLK supporters/ Jewboy race workers/ Lefty screen writers --

It *should* be Damn commies/ hippies/ dope smokers/ faggots/ MLK supporters/ Jewboy race workers/ Lefty screen writer/ South Park/ guys in gingham dresses reading to kids --- all the downfall of everything we know.

This **** is CLASSIC!!!

If you dont think or believe there has been slow rot, that started decades ago, and slow infiltration of leftist / socialist / communist ideals into every aspect of American life then there is no hope for you.

Hambone mentioned you are a "conservative"

Your subsequent response to this post will prove that... or not.

Max, my comment is specifically to the continued use of Marx's comment about destroying a system by introducing moral rot at the core.

Since he made that quote, that quote has been used as a rationale to discredit screenwriters in Hollywood, hippies in the 60s and 70s, dope smokers, gays, MKL was accused of being Marxist in his quest for civil rights, the 'Jewboy' civil rights workers who went to the South in the bloody decade of the 60s....

None of these instances of 'moral rot' led to the disintegration of the United States. Given that, I dont see a bunch of guys in dresses doing to the United States what all of the above combined never did.

My political stance is more libertarian, if truth be told.

Do I think that mores and social constructs are changing in the United States? Yes. Do I blame Marxism for that change? No. Do I support those changes? Many no, some yes.

I cannot stand collectivism -- to me that is the big force in Marxism. I am *strongly* in favor of individualism and individual rights.

Huge 1st Amendment supporter, huge 2nd amendment. Im also big on pretty much the entire set of the Bill of Rights.

The 1st Amendment allows a huge amount of stuff -- including a lot of messages I do not like or subscribe to. But that is the power of the 1st -- individual expression at its finest, including the right to hold some pretty twisted thought, and the right to do a number of offensive things.

There is very little in progressivism that I support. But, I am very much a liberal in the very classic sense of the term liberal.

I think the moral stance of this country *is* declining -- no doubt. I dont blame Marxism for it. I am not a fan of progressivism, and think the closemindedness of the left has gone peak stupid (shutting down speech they dont like and the related).

But, to be honest, I see many on the Christian right as similarly 'shut down' albeit not as deep and fierce as from the progressive arena, and in different areas.

But as to the original question -- I think the prediction by Marx and social rot has been somewhat discounted by the historical record. I think that comment is a pat cliche to rally the troops to what the religious right in particular has identified as their now new social battleground.

And in this thread, to reiterate, my sole concern is lbertarian in nature. Part of the Tenn statute is borked to hell and gone. I dont have an issue about regulating the highly sexualized action of drag shows with respect to minors. I do have a big problem with a potential outcome of placing 'innocent' persons in harms way of the law.

This one kind of holds a special place for me. In my first year as an attorney, I represented a rap performer who had been targeted by Texas state officials for obscenity issues based on the lyrics.

The lyrics were absolutely crude, repulsive, and offensive -- but repulsive and offensive does not equal obscenity. Overall, not my cup of tea, not by a long shot. But he was one of those example 'innocents' I have been talking about.

I hope that answers your somewhat 'take it or leave it' question.

I dont think I am true 'conservative' -- I tend to vote that way. Most libertarian types choose that vote since there really are very few libertarian type candidates or politicians. That may make it enough to be on your 'savable' list, or I might be sent to the 'damn him' list.

If that's true then what is it that HAS led to the moral disintegration of the United States, genius? We started seeing the decline of morality in the 50's and 60's and it has continued apace since.

As to the 2nd bolded statement, what is that you DO think has caused the decline that you yourself admit is ongoing? Can you respond to this without writing a freaking book btw? Wordiness does not equal quality.

Sorry that something more than a paragraph is a problem for you.

So stuff it Mr Post Length Police.

Narcissist