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.

 

Federal judge temporarily blocks Tennessee's anti-drag law

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Maxmars

Women don't exist anymore ... unless we have a penis. Then we can call ourselves women. If you were born a woman, you've been erased now and have no voice.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 08:44 PM
link   
The bill will pass, no doubt about it, like Max said it needs to be reworded before it can be done, still it also depends on how many parents support the bill.

That is one of the main issues, taxpayer does hold power after all.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

We had drug education and prevention, but they didn't bring in using addicts to teach us all about it was my point. We had one former addict the whole time I was in school. The rest of the time, it was DARE and police officers. I went around the grade schools and was a speaker myself as high school student - an athlete mentor or something, but I was chosen because I hadn't done anything, not because I had.

I was supposed to talk about how I'd avoided it.

Truthfully, it was because I knew that I didn't want to suck anything into my lungs as a runner with asthma, so that ruled out tobacco and weed. I had a good racket going conning the adults into giving me the privileges I wanted, so that ruled out taking stupid risks with alcohol, and with migraines, I already had access to narcotics and knew I loathed being impaired and did not find it enjoyable.

Of course, I couldn't exactly be fully truthful about all that.

edit on 2-4-2023 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 08:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ketsuko




So why are drag queens the special unicorns who suddenly are absolutely necessarily to teach this?


This isn't about drag queens teaching children anything. It's about their ability to freely express themselves in public.

The thing is about our constitutional republic is, even drag queen have constitutional rights.


Yes.. teaching children in schools about the existence of 72 genders and whatever other delusion they have in their minds. Drag queens have no place in schools as they are not teachers and they intentionally engaging in misinformation and disinformation propagating their unsubstantiated views and delusions.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Some of the group had done drugs and alcohol on the regular, though.

Although I can say as an actor that not all dress up is sexual nor deviant. Tootsie, Bosom Buddies, Charlie’s Aunt, Kids in the Hall, Monty Python, etc. Even Romeo and Juliet were originally an all male cast and Peter Pan is traditionally cast to a female.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

No, not all is. But drag is not Mrs. Doubtfire either.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Drag Queen shows are not meant for children.

Normalizing this is asinine.

I’ve seen arguments trying to compare this to clowns.
I’ve seen arguments using over sexualized American TV and music to somehow justify Drag queen performances for children.

Both are bad arguments. You know it. They are not the same no matter how much you want them to be.

The nice thing is that parents have the choice. In their voting and in their ability to remove their child from school.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ketsuko




So why are drag queens the special unicorns who suddenly are absolutely necessarily to teach this?


This isn't about drag queens teaching children anything. It's about their ability to freely express themselves in public.

The thing is about our constitutional republic is, even drag queen have constitutional rights.


Yes.. teaching children in schools about the existence of 72 genders and whatever other delusion they have in their minds. Drag queens have no place in schools as they are not teachers and they intentionally engaging in misinformation and disinformation propagating their unsubstantiated views and delusions.



Then this bill isn't for you, because it does nothing to prevent a school from inviting a guest speaker to teach gender expression in 72 ways. It doesn't even stop a trans teacher from getting hired and teaching 3rd grade.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 09:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ketsuko




So why are drag queens the special unicorns who suddenly are absolutely necessarily to teach this?


This isn't about drag queens teaching children anything. It's about their ability to freely express themselves in public.

The thing is about our constitutional republic is, even drag queen have constitutional rights.


Yes.. teaching children in schools about the existence of 72 genders and whatever other delusion they have in their minds. Drag queens have no place in schools as they are not teachers and they intentionally engaging in misinformation and disinformation propagating their unsubstantiated views and delusions.



Then this bill isn't for you, because it does nothing to prevent a school from inviting a guest speaker to teach gender expression in 72 ways. It doesn't even stop a trans teacher from getting hired and teaching 3rd grade.


Yes there must be an invitation after all. I didn't know anyone can turn up in a school and demand to teach the kids whatever they have in their minds. The school should have never invited a drag queen in the first place and I am sure they have regretted it.

Gender is binary. Only in the minds of trans activists and of the woke crowd there are multiple genders.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 09:39 PM
link   
What about the old Contributing to Delinquency of a Minor?

In some cases actions against community standards are a misdemeanors. But in any case, things that encourage sexuality with or between minors goes to felony levels quickly even if the minors refuse to participate.



posted on Apr, 2 2023 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Sookiechacha


No. You are.

So you admit you are arguing for something that is not even pertinent to the thread?

Sounds about right.


I'm talking about the law that the judge put a TRO on and why. It has nothing to do with groomers influencing children in a captive environment.

Yes, it certainly does. That's why the law is there in the first place. It does not criminalize all cross-dressers; it makes it illegal to perform a cross-dressing routine in public in a sexually suggestive manner where children are able to access it.

Here is the bill, which you apparently did not read.

SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 7-51-1401,is amended by adding the following language as a new subdivision:
    "Adult cabaret performance" means a performance in a location other than an adult cabaret that features topless dancers, go-go dancers, exotic dancers, strippers, male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest, or similar entertainers, regardless of whether or not performed for consideration;

Did you perhaps catch the requirement that such activity must be "prurient"? Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the term... no matter, as usual I am happy to educate you:


prurient - adjective
    having or encouraging an excessive interest in sexual matters.

This law only applies to sexually-charged exhibitions.

Pro tip: look up the words before you assume.


What one is wearing doesn't define obscene.

No, but clothing may be used to create a prurient atmosphere. Are you claiming that sheer lingerie is not sexual in nature now?


live and let live and get over the fact that drag queens have constitutional rights too.

Exactly where in the Constitution is there a right to encourage deviant sexual behavior in children? Is that right next to the right to kill unborn children? How'd that one work out for you?

There is no Constitutional right to harm children. Not gonna be. Get over it.

TheRedneck



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 12:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Ahabstar

No, not all is. But drag is not Mrs. Doubtfire either.



Just like usual on ATS, i feel like i'm being lectured about the evils of life at the bottom of the sea by a bunch of horses. It's wild, you're all SO confident about the details of something you have so drastically wrong that it's immediately clear that none of you have any personal life experience of anything remotely relevant to the conversation. Like woah, slow your roll Phar Lap! Maybe rein in the assertions about the evil octopus agenda until you've been snorkelling! you're making yourself look like a very, very silly horse right now!

Just to address one of the many, many, many, many, MANY, many, many, many many, many statements in this thread intended to make the poster seem knowledgeable but just betray their arrogant, horsey ignorance;

yes, Mrs Doubtfire is drag.
of course it is.
what else would you call it?
"oOhH iTs DiFfErEnT bEcAuSe ItS nOt SeXy"
drag isn't always sexy! you've got a very specific image in your mind because that's what you're having pushed on you right now, but that is only one little part of a larger thing! you're an ignorant horse who thinks you know oh so much and as usual, bless your lil hooves, you're being manipulated by very unscrupulous people who profit off of your outrage!
edit on 3-4-2023 by continuousThunder because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 02:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: malte85

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: vNex92

Nice try, he was a Trump appointee.


Interesting to see you support drag shows for children.


oh come on, you don't give a damn about kids. what about these baby and children's beauty contests where little girls pose on stage in bikinis or sexy outfits in front of some jury and lots of other adults. they exist for decades and still happening nowadays, mainly in america. where is the outrage?

freddy mercury would laugh his head off at you holy patriots. anyway, real child abuse still takes place within the family and in every second somewhere in the world. but that doesn't interest you either, right?
oh right. Redirect this smut to the family. You know that the ruling Marxist party vows to abolish the “bourgeois family!” It’s always good when people out themselves.



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 02:44 AM
link   
a reply to: continuousThunder

Actually, Hollywood is known to bring hidden stuff out into the open but not always too blatant, they use stuff like humor to present things. Doubtfire probably was one of those things, and the plot did strangely involve kids …
Sure as heck doesn’t make weekly drag shows for children and family night appropriate, any more than that stupid book in school libraries about teens running away from school and doing drugs. And the cartoonish books where the boy head is on the girl body and girl head on the boys body just to confuse children and you don’t think it’s a concerted effort to destroy the sanity of our children ?



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 05:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: sarahvital
how do you know
it's really a guy under those black robes?


Why do you not trust that Trump didn't completely and thoroughly personally verify this judge prior to appointment?



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 05:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Sookiechacha

IMO, anyone who opposes this law is supporting the sexualization of children. That is simply sick ad twisted.

While I agree, it does appear that this law needs some more work to make it crystal clear - meaning, specifically exempt the cases and situations where it wouldn't apply, as well as be more precise in where and when it does.

ETA: sorry, I didn't see your prior post where you excerpted the pertinent parts of the law where it specifically defined everything, so I take it back, the law is fine as is, and I agree with you that anyone who opposes the law is supporting the sexualization of children.

I am surprised however that it was a Trump appointed judge who did this
edit on 3-4-2023 by tanstaafl because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 06:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Asmodeus3
Then this bill isn't for you, because it does nothing to prevent a school from inviting a guest speaker to teach gender expression in 72 ways. It doesn't even stop a trans teacher from getting hired and teaching 3rd grade.

Looks like you're right, so obviously there is more work to be done. Happy to see you agree...



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: vNex92

I am sure 7,11 year old boys would love to dress up as drags right?
Because that is what normal boys do right?



The techer gets the kid who are easy to dupe to Bully them in to it.

Shools are Maid to teach kids to Bully!
and to Follow a leader, a bully.
it makes them sheep! peer pressure use'd
as a wepon to brains wash the kids.

This gets them ready for The Real World!
Now you see why the world is crazy!

Perants NEED to have the childrens phone
recording EVER thing at school.
Sound to make it easy on the phone.

Do this now in Secret.
and get a good Lawer!



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 09:47 AM
link   
so, what you are saying, is since child abuse already happens every day, we should be more relaxed about another from of it becoming exceptable? Pass.

Stopping child abuse interests plenty of people, the outrage is easy too find. One may have to come to terms that a good chunk of the world is pretty weirded out by drag queens trying to teach little kids about how cool they are.


a reply to: malte85



posted on Apr, 3 2023 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck



So you admit you are arguing for something that is not even pertinent to the thread?


No. I'm saying that you are.



This law only applies to sexually-charged exhibitions.


No. It says cross dressers, a male or female "impersonator" performing in public is all that's needed to be defined as "cabaret" and sexually charged. Simply being a cross dressed performer in public is enough to break this law, even if they're singing in a church choir, if someone, anyone thinks they're "sexy".

You don't care about children being exposed to sexual content. Perhaps you missed the Carls Jr TV ad or the clip I posted from a bit from America's Got Talent, that are prurient as hell. Cheerleaders, beauty contests, dance concerts, where kids are present, even competing, that are prurient as hell are not targeted, unless of course someone is cross dressed.
That's why the law, as written, is unconstitutional.



This law only applies to sexually-charged exhibitions.


Sexually-charged according to who? The person turned on?
Oh no! Call a cop! Uncle Ted is turned on!
Would the law prevent these performances?




Are these "Drag Queen" too sexy for you? You don't want them to able to be near children at all, right?



No, but clothing may be used to create a prurient atmosphere. Are you claiming that sheer lingerie is not sexual in nature now?


Are you suggesting that it's legal for women to prance around in public dressed in sheer lingerie?
Like I said, Tennessee has clear cut obscenity laws, already on the books. What this law does is suggest that simply impersonating a man or a woman is prurient, in and of itself, if someone says so.



There is no Constitutional right to harm children.


Again, there are already laws on the books. Cross dressing, impersonating a female, harms no children. Appearing sexy while cross dressed is the crime here, nothing more, nothing less.


edit on 3-4-2023 by Sookiechacha because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join