I talked to my aging dad the other day and he surprised me with the drag queen issue. “You want this in your grandkids schools?!” he says. I said “hold on, do you actually think someone is being hurt here or are you being stoked up by tv you sit around and watch all winter?” Needless to say, a little reason goes a long way and it’s shocking how quickly people lost sight of that.
They absolutely knew it was an unconstitutional law. They want it in front of a friendly SCOTUS. Legislating from the bench, just like they have always accused democrats of doing.
To directly quote the second and third paragraphs of the article:
The judge, Gregory Presnell, was acting on a request by the restaurant chain Hamburger Mary’s, which sued Florida last month claiming that the law was overly broad and put a chilling effect on the right to free speech under the First Amendment.
Presnell, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, determined that while some people may find a drag performer reading a children’s book to a minor during a performance to be inappropriate, it doesn’t necessarily constitute an obscene performance. He also stated that current obscenity laws already “provide Defendant with the necessary authority to protect children from any constitutionally unprotected obscene exhibitions or shows.”
what you did just now is called whataboutism. there is no number of child rapes by catholic priests that would influence the acceptability for a child to be admitted to an upside down leopard thong show. we cannot just claim that someone else did something worse than what we did, and that it somehow makes what we did okay. it’s also problematic because it presents a false choice. we do not have to be both against children being admitted to see men dry humping each other dressed as santa’s reindeer and in favor of children being raped by catholic priests.
@goatmeal Hamburger Mary’s is a drag/hamburger joint with a family day on Sundays. Drag queens dressed up like Lucy, etc. serve hamburgers and do family-friendly comedy. Is this for all families? Probably not. But politicians should NOT be able to tell me I can’t take MY kid there. Especially when I can give consent for my child to see a rated-R movie with obscene amounts of gun violence and death. People having their heads blown off is seriously BETTER for a child to see than a man telling jokes in a dress?
It’s not whataboutism; it’s asking why we are allowing children around known, proven predators with a track record (priests) but preventing them from seeing those who have zero record of any inappropriate activity with children (drag queens). Do we care about children’s safety or not?
I get what you‘re trying to say and I‘m not a fan of churches either, but this just legitimises this idea that we need states and governments to ban attending an activity entirely based on negative actions of a some of that group. By that logic there is a whole lot of shit we need to ban including schools, kindergardens and daycares.
The logical outcome then to “protect the children” is to ban any contact to any adult whatsoever, including the own family members since those are most likely to abuse the children.
If you can provide me the same level and amount of proof that children are raped by teachers and daycare providers that I can provide you that they are by religious leaders, then I’ll concede.
But you and I both know that proof doesn’t exist.
That first sentence was a mouthful god damn. But I hope my point came across.
4.5 million students currently in grades K-12 have suffered some form of sexual abuse by an educator, and more than 3 million have experienced sexual touching or assault.”
I also edited in an argument about most abuse being committed by family members after you replied, so just in case you see that let me add this:
90% of child sexual abuse victims know the perpetrator in some way. 68% are abused by a family member.
Now before you think my goal here is to defend priests or downplay their abuse, NO, I am strongly anti-religion for myself. I just don‘t think we should use government to ban it entirely, or any activities based on the actions of individuals.
How about instead make people aware of these dangers and how to stop it, how to spot kids who are abused, how to get them to talk about it and let people make informed decisions on who they expose their own kids to. If you are scared for your kids, don‘t go to a church or drag show! Good! Your right after all.
Why do people need the state to ban it for everyone? Not like bans even work well! Drugs are banned and look at the absolute state of that. Alcohol was banned and people still did it.
If you ban churches, you‘ll have underground churches hellbent on taking control of the state to reverse that and abuse still happens anyway too. Except maybe worse cause the victims might feel afraid to come forward because of the activity being illegal.
"4.5 million students currently in grades K-12 have suffered some form of sexual abuse by an educator, and more than 3 million have experienced sexual touching or assault.”
And of those, which of them take place in religious boarding schools, essentially a church environment?
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !news@beehaw.org
Breaking news from around the world.
News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.
Guidelines for submissions:
Where possible, post the original source of information.
If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.
These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.
I talked to my aging dad the other day and he surprised me with the drag queen issue. “You want this in your grandkids schools?!” he says. I said “hold on, do you actually think someone is being hurt here or are you being stoked up by tv you sit around and watch all winter?” Needless to say, a little reason goes a long way and it’s shocking how quickly people lost sight of that.
They absolutely knew it was an unconstitutional law. They want it in front of a friendly SCOTUS. Legislating from the bench, just like they have always accused democrats of doing.
Can strip clubs just rebrand as drag clubs and have all ages access?
To directly quote the second and third paragraphs of the article:
The judge, Gregory Presnell, was acting on a request by the restaurant chain Hamburger Mary’s, which sued Florida last month claiming that the law was overly broad and put a chilling effect on the right to free speech under the First Amendment.
Presnell, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, determined that while some people may find a drag performer reading a children’s book to a minor during a performance to be inappropriate, it doesn’t necessarily constitute an obscene performance. He also stated that current obscenity laws already “provide Defendant with the necessary authority to protect children from any constitutionally unprotected obscene exhibitions or shows.”
So… No.
There should be a ban on minors attending church.
And not just because of the dangerous religious indoctrination, but also the documented-a-thousand-times-over child rape.
what you did just now is called whataboutism. there is no number of child rapes by catholic priests that would influence the acceptability for a child to be admitted to an upside down leopard thong show. we cannot just claim that someone else did something worse than what we did, and that it somehow makes what we did okay. it’s also problematic because it presents a false choice. we do not have to be both against children being admitted to see men dry humping each other dressed as santa’s reindeer and in favor of children being raped by catholic priests.
deleted by creator
@goatmeal Hamburger Mary’s is a drag/hamburger joint with a family day on Sundays. Drag queens dressed up like Lucy, etc. serve hamburgers and do family-friendly comedy. Is this for all families? Probably not. But politicians should NOT be able to tell me I can’t take MY kid there. Especially when I can give consent for my child to see a rated-R movie with obscene amounts of gun violence and death. People having their heads blown off is seriously BETTER for a child to see than a man telling jokes in a dress?
@dirtmayor @Antik
It’s not whataboutism; it’s asking why we are allowing children around known, proven predators with a track record (priests) but preventing them from seeing those who have zero record of any inappropriate activity with children (drag queens). Do we care about children’s safety or not?
I get what you‘re trying to say and I‘m not a fan of churches either, but this just legitimises this idea that we need states and governments to ban attending an activity entirely based on negative actions of a some of that group. By that logic there is a whole lot of shit we need to ban including schools, kindergardens and daycares.
The logical outcome then to “protect the children” is to ban any contact to any adult whatsoever, including the own family members since those are most likely to abuse the children.
If you can provide me the same level and amount of proof that children are raped by teachers and daycare providers that I can provide you that they are by religious leaders, then I’ll concede.
But you and I both know that proof doesn’t exist.
That first sentence was a mouthful god damn. But I hope my point came across.
Oh man, ok let me provide what I can.
Famous study, but quite old:
https://www.academia.edu/21997616/A_Forgotten_Study_Abuse_in_School_100_Times_Worse_than_by_Priests
Another stat from an odd site, but the link it provides seems legit:
https://floridaactioncommittee.org/likely-sexually-abuse-child-sex-offender-teacher/
I also edited in an argument about most abuse being committed by family members after you replied, so just in case you see that let me add this:
https://www.childprotect.org/facts-about-child-abuse.html#:~:text=%EF%BB%BFFacts%20about%20Child%20Abuse%3A%EF%BB%BF&text=90%25%20of%20child%20sexual%20abuse,at%2018%20months%20or%20younger.
Now before you think my goal here is to defend priests or downplay their abuse, NO, I am strongly anti-religion for myself. I just don‘t think we should use government to ban it entirely, or any activities based on the actions of individuals.
How about instead make people aware of these dangers and how to stop it, how to spot kids who are abused, how to get them to talk about it and let people make informed decisions on who they expose their own kids to. If you are scared for your kids, don‘t go to a church or drag show! Good! Your right after all.
Why do people need the state to ban it for everyone? Not like bans even work well! Drugs are banned and look at the absolute state of that. Alcohol was banned and people still did it.
If you ban churches, you‘ll have underground churches hellbent on taking control of the state to reverse that and abuse still happens anyway too. Except maybe worse cause the victims might feel afraid to come forward because of the activity being illegal.
"4.5 million students currently in grades K-12 have suffered some form of sexual abuse by an educator, and more than 3 million have experienced sexual touching or assault.”
And of those, which of them take place in religious boarding schools, essentially a church environment?
They also give alcoholic wine to children, like wtf
Parents are the best arbiter of children, except drag shows. Those the Government is best entity to dictate that, apparently.
I just can’t the double speak this group keeps defending.