Tennessee's Anti-LGBTQ LT. Governor, Randy McNally, Loves Naked Pics of Gay Man

[Thunder Good-Oil]

It's written too broadly ... and will be shot down in court.

... and cabaret does not typically feature nudity. A show of that type which does feature nudity, would be described as "burlesque."

If we are talking about a performance on public property, the onus is on parents/guardians to keep children away from where these shows are taking place. Those performers have as much right to be there as you do. As long as they are fully clothed, it should not matter to the government if they are cross-dressing or not. The government has no business regulating how people dress.

You missed the word “adult” in front of cabaret.

Some of the shows at issue are are taking place IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. How are parents supposed to keep their children away from those “performances”?

There is nothing in the bill citing “cross-dressing”. You are either not understanding or are lying about this part:

“male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest”

I provided the definition of prurient for you in the earlier post.

Again, a drag queen that manages to get into a school to read to an elementary school class is going to have 1st Amendment protection. But parents have a right to object and push back on their school board officials and school administrators. When the drag queen wears sexually suggestive attire and is twerking for the children, they risk being locked up.

This legislation wouldn’t be necessary if the “performers” weren’t using children to see how far they can push their agenda.

 

[BowlBrother85]

You missed the word “adult” in front of cabaret.

Some of the shows at issue are are taking place IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS. How are parents supposed to keep their children away from those “performances”?

There is nothing in the bill citing “cross-dressing”. You are either not understanding or are lying about this part:

“male or female impersonators who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest”

I provided the definition of prurient for you in the earlier post.

Again, a drag queen that manages to get into a school to read to an elementary school class is going to have 1st Amendment protection. But parents have a right to object and push back on their school board officials and school administrators. When the drag queen wears sexually suggestive attire and is twerking for the children, they risk being locked up.

This legislation wouldn’t be necessary if the “performers” weren’t using children to see how far they can push their agenda.

Adult cabaret and cabaret are the same thing. There is no such thing as "children's cabaret." You can ban cabaret from public schools. The law is written too broadly, however.

It can't simply be "the public", "public spaces" or "public property." Those performers have as much right to be in a town square as a child does. Those performers do not have the right to be in a public school, however, unless they work there, or have a child who attends the school. Once again, the onus is on parents and guardians to keep children away from where these performances are taking place. It's a big world out there. You don't have to take your kid to a location which is hosting a cabaret show. Go to the zoo or something.

The point is, the government should not be regulating how people dress, while on public property. Transvestite entertainers have the right to freedom of expression under the 1st Amendment, just as you do. The government can only legislate that they be fully clothed. The manner in which they are fully clothed, should be left up to each individual's freedom of expression - which is protected by the 1st Amendment.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Adult cabaret and cabaret are the same thing. There is no such thing as "children's cabaret." You can ban cabaret from public schools. The law is written too broadly, however.

It can't simply be "the public", "public spaces" or "public property." Those performers have as much right to be in a town square as a child does. Those performers do not have the right to be in a public school, however, unless they work there, or have a child who attends the school. Once again, the onus is on parents and guardians to keep children away from where these performances are taking place. It's a big world out there. You don't have to take your kid to a location which is hosting a cabaret show. Go to the zoo or something.

The point is, the government should not be regulating how people dress, while on public property. Transvestite entertainers have the right to freedom of expression under the 1st Amendment, just as you do.

You keep ignoring important components. Adult cabaret and cabaret don’t share a definition.

Cabaret: a form of theatrical entertainment, consisting mainly of political satire in the form of skits, songs, and improvisations

Hence the bill includes the language “adult” cabaret.

Also, it isn’t simply "the public", "public spaces" or "public property."

The legislation is very specific about the non permitted performances are “adult” and sexually oriented. Transvestite “entertainers” are limited in what they can hide behind their freedom of expression. You can’t sit on a park bench without your pants on and claim that you are exercising “your freedom of expression under the 1st amendment”.

Stop trying to characterize the bill as simply targeting performing in drag. That is a lie. It is what the leftists do to stir up their base.

 

[BowlBrother85]

You keep ignoring important components. Adult cabaret and cabaret don’t share a definition.

Cabaret: a form of theatrical entertainment, consisting mainly of political satire in the form of skits, songs, and improvisations

Hence the bill includes the language “adult” cabaret.

Also, it isn’t simply "the public", "public spaces" or "public property."

The legislation is very specific about the non permitted performances are “adult” and sexually oriented. Transvestite “entertainers” are limited in what they can hide behind their freedom of expression. You can’t sit on a park bench without your pants on and claim that you are exercising “your freedom of expression under the 1st amendment”.

Stop trying to characterize the bill as simply targeting performing in drag. That is a lie. It is what the leftists do to stir up their base.

Adult cabaret and cabaret are the same thing.

The law can only state that those performers be fully clothed, while on public property. The manner in which they are fully clothed, should be left up to the freedom of expression of each individual, as protected by the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution.

You are wrong. The law does specifically ban cabaret from being conducted "on public property." Hence, it is written too broadly.

I'm not going round and round with this anymore. It's become a circular conversation.

 

[joevol33]

I'm triggered for telling you that debating this with you is impossible because you can't distinguish between trans and drag? It's pretty simple.

And yeah, this issue pings my radar because I'm involved in the community. I have friends who are directly affected by this because people like you had mothers who smoked while you were in utero.

Fortunately, stumpy morons like you are the ever shrinking minority. There's a reason these bills are only happening in ass backwards states littered with cousin kissers.

Look at you all tough, you mighty keyboard warrior . You're triggered because I won't play pretend. A guy pretending to be a woman, and demanding I play make believe with them is absolutely a mental disorder, and they don't need around kids. Debate it, show me the science, or go sit down with your toddler tantrums because I don't play make believe. You gonna fight for people when they start pretending to be a banana? I hope so, or you're a hypocrite, because it's no different than a man pretending to be a woman. It'd be different if you could carry a conversation without acting like a little kid, but you can't stand a different opinion. I think yours is just as stupid as you view mine, but I'm not a spoiled little toddler crying in front of everyone because you don't agree with me. You're bunch can't handle a different opinion, and it's both sad, and hilarious at the meltdown you guys have, instead of being able to debate anything. I'd bet you anything you're the type to hide your face in protests, and hit women and sucker punch what man you'd dare to hit. Pathetic, I've seen children take a different opinion better than a few of you.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Adult cabaret and cabaret are the same thing.

The law can only state that those performers be fully clothed, while on public property. The manner in which they are fully clothed, should be left up to the freedom of expression of each individual, as protected by the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution.

You are wrong. The law does specifically ban cabaret from being conducted "on public property." Hence, it is written too broadly.

I'm not going round and round with this anymore. It's become a circular conversation.

It’s circular because you refuse to acknowledge that the word adult isn’t relevant and the performances being banned are sexual.

The law DOES NOT BAN CABARET on public property. The word “adult” was added specifically to avoid confusion.

This is the kind of lie that the Dems use all the time to distort facts. “Adult”. It’s an important word to prevent rights from being violated.

 

[BowlBrother85]

The law DOES NOT BAN CABARET on public property.

Yes, it does.

 

[Zues1]

No matter which party/ person gets " outted" from the closet trying to rationale a man dressing up like a burlesque queen is just weird as hell.

 

[BowlBrother85]

No matter which party/ person gets " outted" from the closet trying to rationale a man dressing up like a burlesque queen is just weird as hell.

Freedom of expression should only apply to people who conform to societal norms? Who gets to define what is normal vs what is weird? State and local governments? Do you really want to open up that can of worms?

There was a time when conservatives were opposed to censorship and to adding governmental regulation that intrudes into the daily lives of it's citizens. That has recently taken a hard turn in the other direction. Republicans are trying to tell people how to live now ... which is what Democrats have been historically guilty of.

 

[Zues1]

Freedom of expression should only apply to people who conform to societal norms? Who gets to define what is normal vs what is weird? State and local governments? Do you really want to open up that can of worms?

There was a time when conservatives were opposed to censorship and to adding governmental regulation that intrudes into the daily lives of it's citizens. That has recently taken a hard turn in the other direction. Republicans are trying to tell people how to live now ... which is what Democrats have been historically guilty of.

It's weird man, if you like it that's on you.
While it looks like The Lt Governor is a hypocrite this doesn't mean it's a normal thing to dress up like Bette Midler.
To lump all conservatives or any group into this because of one pervs action is a dumb take.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Yes, it does.

You are lying.

Adult Cabaret is the language in the bill. It isn’t just “cabaret”. “Nightclub” is a synonym. And the bill ONLY applies to public venues, not private venues as long as children are excluded when the performances are sexualized.

======================================
Here it is again. Stop lying about what is included in the bill.

======================================
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 7, Chapter 51, Part 14, relative to adult-oriented performances.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: 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; SECTION 2. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 7-51-1407, is amended by adding
the following language as a new subsection: (c)
(1) It is an offense for a person to engage in an adult cabaret performance:
(A) On public property; or
(B) In a location where the adult cabaret performance could be viewed by a person who is not an adult.
(2) Notwithstanding § 7-51-1406, this subsection (c) expressly:
(A) Preempts an ordinance, regulation, restriction, or license that was lawfully adopted or issued by a political subdivision prior to the effective date of this act that is in conflict with this subsection (c); and
SB0003 000187 -1-

HOUSE BILL 9 By Todd

(B) Prevents or preempts a political subdivision from enacting and enforcing in the future other ordinances, regulations, restrictions, or licenses that are in conflict with this subsection (c).
(3) A first offense for a violation of subdivision (c)(1) is a Class A
misdemeanor, and a second or subsequent such offense is a Class E felony. SECTION 3. This act takes effect July 1, 2023, the public welfare requiring it, and
applies to prohibited conduct occurring on or after that date.

 

[BowlBrother85]

It's weird man, if you like it that's on you.
While it looks like The Lt Governor is a hypocrite this doesn't mean it's a normal thing to dress up like Bette Midler.
To lump all conservatives or any group into this because of one pervs action is a dumb take.

I'm not asking what is normal or what is weird. I'm asking if you think freedom of expression should only apply to people who conform to societal norms? .... and who gets to decide what is normal? Is it the government?

 

[BowlBrother85]

(A) On public property; or

It specifically bans cabaret on public property .... adult cabaret is cabaret. They are the same.

I believe that this law will be shot down in our court system ... but we will just have to wait and see, Like I said, this has become a circular conversation and I'm done with it.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I'm not asking what is normal or what is weird. I'm asking if you think freedom of expression should only apply to people who conform to societal norms? .... and who gets to decide what is normal? Is it the government?

It would be weird if you sit on a park bench without your pants on. “Freedom of expression” comes with limitations.

 

[BowlBrother85]

It would be weird if you sit on a park bench without your pants on. “Freedom of expression” comes with limitations.

As I have said before ... the government can tell you to be fully clothed, while in public, but they can not tell you the manner in which you should be fully clothed, while in public. That should be left up to the freedom of expression of each individual, as protected by the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

It specifically bans cabaret on public property .... adult cabaret is cabaret. They are the same.

I believe that this law will be shot down in our court system ... but we will just have to wait and see, Like I said, this has become a circular conversation and I'm done with it.

And you exclude the key language. STOP LYING!!!

“who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest”

Cabaret: Definition of CABARET

Synonym of cabaret: nightclub

 

[BowlBrother85]

And you exclude the key language. STOP LYING!!!

“who provide entertainment that appeals to a prurient interest”

Cabaret: Definition of CABARET

Synonym of cabaret: nightclub

Adult cabaret = cabaret

Once again ... this is circular as hell. I'm done.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

As I have said before ... the government can tell you to be fully clothed, while in public, but they can not tell you the manner in which you should be fully clothed, while in public. That should be left up to the freedom of expression of each individual, as protected by the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution.

So you’re fine with Uncle Pervus taking off his pants or taking it out at a public playground in front of children as long he he claims he’s exercising his freedom of expression. That is sick.

 

[Zues1]

I'm not asking what is normal or what is weird. I'm asking if you think freedom of expression should only apply to people who conform to societal norms? .... and who gets to decide what is normal? Is it the government?

Can of worms as you mentioned.
However I know and I hope you do as well it's not okay to just " do anything you like" in public.
Anyone who doesn't understand things that are being pushed by a few groups as normal is detrimental to the long term sustainability of our nation have blinders on.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

Adult cabaret = cabaret

Once again ... this is circular as hell. I'm done.

You keep saying that you are done but keep coming back and lying about the word “adult” not being relevant.

 

[BowlBrother85]

So you’re fine with Uncle Pervus taking off his pants or taking it out at a public playground in front of children as long he he claims he’s exercising his freedom of expression. That is sick.

Didn't I just say that the government can tell you to be fully clothed? They just can't tell you the manner in which you can be fully clothed? Yes, that is exactly what I said.

Now, if that is how you want to behave? Talk to someone else.

 

[BowlBrother85]

You keep saying that you are done but keep coming back and lying about the word “adult” not being relevant.

I'm not going in circles with that again. Reply to someone else. You are thick as a 2x4.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

You're an idiot. LOL.

Didn't I just say that the government can tell you to be fully clothed? They just can't tell you the manner in which you can be fully clothed? Yes, that is exactly what I said.

Now, if that is how you want to behave? Talk to someone else.

So Uncle Perv decides as long as he has on a hat he’s fully clothed.

So ironic that you are calling me an idiot.

 

[BowlBrother85]

So Uncle Perv decides as long as he has on a hat he’s fully clothed.

So ironic that you are calling me an idiot.

For the 3rd time ... The government can define what it means to be fully clothed (what body parts must be covered), and they can tell you to remain fully clothed, while in public. They just can't tell you the manner in which you should be fully clothed, while in public. I feel like I've said this before.

 

[Thunder Good-Oil]

I'm not going in circles with that again. Reply to someone else. You are thick as a 2x4.

You can’t understand that “adult cabaret” and “cabaret” are not the same thing. All you have to do is to click on the link that I gave you for the definition of CABARET.

Your insults are all you’ve got.