It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Texas House Committee Approves Ban on Suggestive Cheerleading, Drill Teams and Dance Squads

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 4 2005 @ 04:40 AM
link   
If it sounds more and more like Big Brother runs Texas, that's because a Texas House Committee just approved a bill from the script of the 1984 movie Footloose.


Amen.

KWTX.com reports:


A Texas House Committee approved a bill on Tuesday that would ban “suggestive cheerleading” at high school athletic events.

The bill would ban cheerleaders, drill teams, dance squads and other such groups from performing in a “sexually suggestive manner” at any school-sponsored or sanctioned event.

Rep. Al Edwards, D-Houston, said he filed the measure after seeing teenage cheerleaders gyrating at football games in his district.

"The eyes of the nation are on Texas to see if we're going to take a stand," Edwards said.


Like Edwards rising concern over the gyrating cheerleader spectacle, Texas has taken a stand.


The bill was approved by a 6-0 vote in the committee and Edwards predicted continued support when it gets to the full chamber.


And it's support is as unanimous, as the bill is ambiguous. Apparently there's no definition of "suggestive" except that which causes Texas legislators to rise to attention. One of those "they'll know it when they see it" kind of things and entirely at the discretion of the Commisioner (aka gyrating cheerleading inspector).

But here's what they do know. To not support this ban on the insideous affliction of Elvis Pelvis makes one abnormal and unintelligent.


"There's no normal intelligent legislator who could say that trying to stop exploiting our young girls out there in public like that is wrong ... how could they not be supportive," he said.


And CNN, the past hour reported some legislative supporters are already making public arguments that suggestive dancing leads to AIDS and pregnancy, so banning it is a no brainer.

Lots of things both in and from Texas are no brainers, but this isn't one of them. This also just goes to show that not all the Texas Taliban are Republican. Edwards is a Democrat. That entire water supply is tainted in my opinion.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by RANT]




posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:15 AM
link   
Truely amazing.

Will they ban cheerleaders from wearing skirts next?

I really don't know what else to say, I just find this strange.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:20 AM
link   
A few more stupid laws and american women will be forced to
wear veils..

[edit on 4-5-2005 by C0le]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:26 AM
link   
This law may step over some bounds, but the issue is interesting to discuss.

Why, is it that young girls should be taught to be sexually suggestive in a public high school by a cheerleading coach when they are all under the age of consent?

When a male joins the football team he is not required to forgo any of his morals, why should we force our daughters to forgo theirs?

Of course that doesn't bother me nearly as much as those parents who dress up their young daughters as steet walkers with gaudy makeup and all to win a few ribbons at a beauty contest.

This further leads us to the issue of the rise of child abductions and murders, personally I feel this crime should be a capital offense. Their is nothing more heinous to the social fabric of society that endangering children. If it is in the minds of these texas politicians that they can curtail this current trend with the new cheerleading law at least thier hearts are in the right place.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
This law may step over some bounds, but the issue is interesting to discuss.


I agree on both counts. The law is out of bounds and the "issue" is worthy of discussion as it has been for decades. It's always been resolved at the local level by school administrators, parents and students. Compromises are made and local community standards enforced. This is legislating those "standards" on a statewide level and as we're all too painfully aware Texas and Florida are the trial balloon state's for all ham handed moral legislation lately, so we might should be concerned over larger implications.


Why, is it that young girls should be taught to be sexually suggestive in a public high school by a cheerleading coach when they are all under the age of consent?


Consent? To dance??? :shk: It's an elective activity by the way, where typically the participants are the one's pushing the boundaries and the coaches drawing lines. So it's not like female and male cheerleaders are being forced to sway their hips to Push It.


This further leads us to the issue of the rise of child abductions and murders, personally I feel this crime should be a capital offense. Their is nothing more heinous to the social fabric of society that endangering children. If it is in the minds of these texas politicians that they can curtail this current trend with the new cheerleading law at least thier hearts are in the right place.


Child abductions are horrible as are AIDS and teen pregnancy but I'm not buying the causal argument from "suggestive" dance in the slightest. Nor the idea that the blood pumping rapidly through these legislators ever made it anywhere near their heart.

What should be considered though is the "districting" impact this will have given the arbitrary nature of enforcement. A "Commisioner" can and will play favorites now. Whole teams and school programs can be shut down. School districts denied funding. Oh this is wrought with potential abuse.


(c) If the commissioner determines that a school district or
a campus in a school district knowingly permits a sexually
suggestive performance prohibited by Subsection (a) or knowingly
permits a school performance group to perform in violation of
Subsection (b), the commissioner shall reduce the funding the
district receives under Chapter 42 by an amount the commissioner
determines appropriate.


Keep in mind this is a sport for some students and winning national competitions and scholarships may be the only way they'll ever get to college.

Texas just banned all that. There's no way any of their schools can compete with the 49 states currently living in this century, short of the ambiguous relativism and favortism I just described. Will the "state" be stricter on schools in black communities? Easier on programs in affluent communities where the students may be college bound or up for scholarships?

This is hogwash. Cynical, unenforceable, unfair, ambigous, feel good legislation and nothing more.

And we haven't even touched on the free speech issue. What a travesty.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by RANT]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54
This law may step over some bounds, but the issue is interesting to discuss.

Why, is it that young girls should be taught to be sexually suggestive in a public high school by a cheerleading coach when they are all under the age of consent?

When a male joins the football team he is not required to forgo any of his morals, why should we force our daughters to forgo theirs?

Of course that doesn't bother me nearly as much as those parents who dress up their young daughters as steet walkers with gaudy makeup and all to win a few ribbons at a beauty contest.

This further leads us to the issue of the rise of child abductions and murders, personally I feel this crime should be a capital offense. Their is nothing more heinous to the social fabric of society that endangering children. If it is in the minds of these texas politicians that they can curtail this current trend with the new cheerleading law at least thier hearts are in the right place.


Yes, this is an interesting an interesting topic and I can see that perhaps the intent is sound. That said, we walk a fine line between suppression and allowing freedom of expression without fear of children being ‘abused’.

It is a little like the discussion around females wearing ‘suggestive’ clothing deserving to be raped and abused which is the Muslim argument (in some quarters – let me stress not all Muslims’ share that view.

It also begs the question - why do young girls feel they need to be sexually suggestive assuming they don't have an issue with what they are being asked to do. I assume if they did have an issue they wouldn't want to be in a cheersquad to start with? Perhaps they don't see it the same way that adults do..



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by JoshGator54If it is in the minds of these texas politicians that they can curtail this current trend with the new cheerleading law at least thier hearts are in the right place.
Perhaps, but they'd be going about it the wrong way. Dealing with the issue vicariously like this will only lead to problems. The state should be dealing more directly with the problem of abuse of minors (sexual or non-sexual), and let the parents of the school take issue with the school or coach promoting parents. Let's stop letting the state be the parent of children, and start making parents be responsible parents. It's one thing to give parents tools to help them in their parental responsibilities, but it's another thing to be imposing laws like this that shift the responsibility to the government and everyone else, as well as limiting the freedom of adults.

This bill is so vague that if the state could stop almost any behavior by cheerleaders, no matter how innocent, on the grounds of "suggestive" behavior, without fear of repercussions.

I can say this much: should I ever become a parent, then I want to be parenting my children, not the state, and I think it would be unethical to be needlessly imposing upon the freedom of others just to make my life as a parent easier. It's fine that the state is willing to give me tools like public education to assist me, but give me the freedom of choice to use or not use those tools. If I have a problem with a school my child is attending, then I will take it up with that school, or send my child to a different school.


Originally posted by Lady of the Lake

Originally posted by JoshGator54
This law may step over some bounds, but the issue is interesting to discuss.

Why, is it that young girls should be taught to be sexually suggestive in a public high school by a cheerleading coach when they are all under the age of consent?

When a male joins the football team he is not required to forgo any of his morals, why should we force our daughters to forgo theirs?

Of course that doesn't bother me nearly as much as those parents who dress up their young daughters as steet walkers with gaudy makeup and all to win a few ribbons at a beauty contest.

This further leads us to the issue of the rise of child abductions and murders, personally I feel this crime should be a capital offense. Their is nothing more heinous to the social fabric of society that endangering children. If it is in the minds of these texas politicians that they can curtail this current trend with the new cheerleading law at least thier hearts are in the right place.


Yes, this is an interesting an interesting topic and I can see that perhaps the intent is sound. That said, we walk a fine line between suppression and allowing freedom of expression without fear of children being ‘abused’.

It is a little like the discussion around females wearing ‘suggestive’ clothing deserving to be raped and abused which is the Muslim argument (in some quarters – let me stress not all Muslims’ share that view.

It also begs the question - why do young girls feel they need to be sexually suggestive assuming they don't have an issue with what they are being asked to do. I assume if they did have an issue they wouldn't want to be in a cheersquad to start with? Perhaps they don't see it the same way that adults do..
Actually, no, that isn't the question that's been begged (that's the incorrect usage of the phrase, but you're not the only one to do this, so don't feel bad). If anything, it begs the question of whether or not suggestiveness in girls leads to their kidnapping or murder. The way I see it is that logic like that is the same logic that says that rape victims are responsible for what happened to them, and so therefore the laws should be imposing upon potential rape victims.

[edit on 5/4/2005 by supercheetah]

[edit on 5/4/2005 by supercheetah]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I have to ask this.....
Has the cheerleading changed that much since the 80"s? Because well, when I was in college in TX one of the college cheerleading squads won the national championship and well, it seem, at least to me, that they were the pride and joy of texas!!
I really haven't been keeping up with the times, and well, maybe it has changed that much, who knows.

But, well, someone else pointed out just how badly this law could be abused, and remember we are talking about a state who's elected representative is well known for his abuse of the patriot act just to track down members of the other party and get them back to texas to draw those redistricting lines so they could have a few more republicans in the federal house and senate. There not much that would surprise me at this point.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Truely amazing.

Will they ban cheerleaders from wearing skirts next?

I really don't know what else to say, I just find this strange.



AH! AH! HE CAUGHT ON!

...


Are people finally starting to see the erosion of personal freedom? It's not like Cheerleading is compulsory....And many squads write their own routines...Let them do what they want...they're kids. High School Kids. Dancing. Shouldn't the Texas legislature be more worried about oh....I don't know.....this whole homeland security schtick that they've been waving at us? I'm just...........tired. I'm going to break out a word that doesn't get used often enough on this board. Repugnant. Those damn crazy Repugnants.......*sigh* I just can't understand sometimes.


.:Edit:.

Seems I was a bit quick to judge. Even the blue in Texas is turning red. My apologies to any repugnats I've offended. You may now return to your regularly scheduled......lunacy.....or whatever.

[edit on 5-4-2005 by Loki]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Jack Cafferty just read my e-mail on CNN.


Even better than O'Reilly and I don't feel nearly as violated.

I hope Al Edwards reads my e-mail too!

[edit on 4-5-2005 by RANT]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:28 AM
link   
So who runs Texas now? the fundamentalist? yes..............they are taking the country for the Christ, and they need to control sexual behavior, after all they need to eradicate aids.

They are [no brainers alright]


Texas has been run over by ignorance and occurs the lord.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by supercheetah
Actually, no, that isn't the question that's been begged (that's the incorrect usage of the phrase, but you're not the only one to do this, so don't feel bad). If anything, it begs the question of whether or not suggestiveness in girls leads to their kidnapping or murder. The way I see it is that logic like that is the same logic that says that rape victims are responsible for what happened to them, and so therefore the laws should be imposing upon potential rape victims.

Well actually, there are a number of questions that surface. For the record I don't feel bad.

First question - should the legislators take over the role of parent? My view is no, they shouldn’t. If the bill is so vague that it is open to misuse, that is scary. That said, many parents today appear to have absolved themselves of their parental responsibilities. So if the legislators feel they have to assume the parental role we need to questions ourselves first.

Second question – why do young girls feel they need to act in a suggestive manner? The certainly appear to feel that they need to do this. Yes you are right, the question rightly is does this lead to their kidnapping or murder and if yes why.

In reply to your response supercheetah - the way I see it is that logic like that is the same logic that says that rape victims are responsible for what happened to them, and so therefore the laws should be imposing upon potential rape victims. This is just the inconsistency that we see daily now where the victim becomes the cause and the perpetrator is starting to be supported by the courts when they use the victim is the cause defence. We should all be worried about that potential shift.

I feel we are saying the same thing just expressing it differently.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Isn't that how they used to burn women they used the "suggestive behavior" to call them witches and burn them in Salem.

Yes...............any pretty girl that causes a "men of the lord" have his groin stir should be rape, after all the are an evil temptation.

What a mentality, I hope this stays in "Holy Texas" and not beyond the borders.

Next will be the clothing the makeup and perfume.

We can not have girls tempting "men of the lord" with their "embellishment to their bodies"



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   
When I first heard the proposal that was submitted for this law, I thought, Great! Especially when you see video of a cheerleader routine that supposedly prompted the legislation. Then, as I read on and learned more about how the law was written, they left out how they were going to define "sexually suggestive manner". That is a very big problem.
Without a concise definition of this term with the way the law is written, if someone one (example) a Muslim is watching a routine, the girls would have to be wearing clothing that covered their whole bodies. This would be because under their belief system, a woman should not show anything (even their hands).
Unfortunately, Texas has a history of enacting ambiguous laws. There is one in place today called the Public Intoxication law (PI for short). A police officer can and will arrest anyone that they believe is under the influence even if the detainee has no alcohol or drugs in their system. The person can not even submit blood, hair or any evidence to refute the police officers (objective) determination. By this law, an offender is guilty and cannot be proven innocent.
I see this cheerleader law going down this same road.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:54 AM
link   

Al Edwards, Democrat, wrote this bill "after seeing teenage cheerleaders gyrating at football games in his district."

He's gone on to claim "booty shaking" as he calls it, promotes AIDs, pregnancy, violence and gangs.

Though it's not in question (with me) this man is an idiot (and probably just cynically looking for crossover conservative votes), his bill was unanimously supported on both sides in the House Committe and is expected to pass the Texas Senate.

As he says (again):


"There's no normal intelligent legislator who could say that trying to stop exploiting our young girls out there in public like that is wrong ... how could they not be supportive," he said.


And I say (again) Al Edwards and the State of Texas knows as much about defining "normal" and "intelligent" as they do "suggestive" booty shaking.

I'm so mad at this fool for validating the Texas Taliban authoriatarian war on freedom I could spit fire.

[edit on 4-5-2005 by RANT]



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:54 AM
link   
once again it is the govt getting involved where the govt doesn't belong. the tend of the current interpretation of govt seems to be 'we the politicians know what's best for you, it's for your own good you know.' and as sheople sit back and say..'oh, this is a good thing. i don't want my kid dancing 'suggestively'..wait my kid isn't in a dance squad. well, i don't want my kid watching that anyway..wait, my kid doesn't go to games..well, i just think it is a good thing to ban, 'cause it my cause my head to explode if i watched it....agian'

the point is not wheather there may or may not be a 'suggestive' move performed by a high school dance line, the point is that a govt entity is making or trying to make laws that are outside of the scope of govt. if the TX legislature follows the same thinking, why should they not begin to bann shorts in high school, or girls wareing those skimmpy tanktops or spagetii strap tops or tight jeans or push up bras, or 2 peice bathing suites or low cut tops......they're children for gods sake!!!! save the children!!! it always seems to be about the women...i geuss men are not able to control themselves or more likely it is the legislators who can't control themselves


if something is or has become a problem, our govt does not trust the population to make a choice of any type...they will do it for you. ( i would asumme that 'suggestive' high school dance teams and cheerleaders must be a huge problem ..you know, since the STATE GOVT got invovled. i wonder what they had to put on the back burnner while they debated how they wanted to save the sinning children and those that watch them.)
AMERIKA is becoming a country where the govt controls all aspects of life, both personal and business. that is half the definition of 'totalitarian'....

but, what can be done. the sheople don't care and the people are too few.....



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:55 AM
link   
Rant, we are on the same page here on this one. If I could, I would give you a WATS.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I've cooled down a bit, I'm going to try to keep it logical.


Let's take a look at it in a few different ways.

Cause: Man sees his daughter dancing this way, gets offended, pushes for legislation, drafts a bill.

Effect 1: IF this is the scenario that played out Which I'm pretty sure it close to the truth, if not the exact truth, then we are looking at the following problem: Man making decisions for EVERYONE'S daughter, as well as his. AKA Using his privileged position of power to push his morals and beliefs on other families. Agreed? Good.

Effect 2: This bill violates, in my humble opinion, a Citizen's right to free speech. Now one could argue, because many cheerleaders are not 18, but they're still PEOPLE, and they still have this right. Many cheer squads write their own material. This is an EXTREMELY flimsy case to make from the stance of the Texas Legislature.

Effect 3: A unilateral decision? In our system of government? knock knock, checks and balances? What happens when this man's district needs a bit more cash for new uniforms? Oops, sorry guys one district over. Your colorguard was a bit suggestive this year. So that extra funding will go to my school now. No, I don't like the sounds of that. I don't like it one bit. There's just too much room for corruption here. AKA Repugnant wiggle room. (YES I realize he is a Democrat, but I see now he is a Repugnant at heart.)

Effect 4: Reduced competitiveness in Texas Schools on the national level. This is pretty much a no-brainer. When cheer season comes around, Texas is going to get WHOMPED in every national comp. I doubt that matters to legislators, but it matters to young girls trying to get to college on cheerleading scholarships, also schools keeping up morale with trophies/etc. I know it sounds frivolous, but bear with me. I know that it matters to the schools. That's simple fact.


I think I'm going to sit back for a minute. Sometimes, things just have to be said, and this time, I guess I did the saying.





posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by RANT
He's gone on to claim "booty shaking" as he calls it, promotes AIDs, pregnancy, violence and gangs.



I think that all this borders in how much of the suggestive dancing got him to get his mister happy, happier, I think that is the whole thing here.

He got "unholy thought" about the girls while they were dancing so they should be punished for his problems.

Also this is a parent school business if the parents don't want their daughters dancing in suggestive manner they should take it with the school system not the legislation.

Plain and simple this is another way for some to push their agendas of control over the rest of the population.

Plain and simple.



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 08:09 AM
link   
Okay, how about we draw the line at publicly displaying gentalia and or any sexually explicit penetrations? Would you all go for that? I know it seems ignorant now but wait 10 years. We'll be arguing over cheerleaders intercourse routines.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join