• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Arkansas GOP targets drag shows

The Dem senator had a good point about Hooters: "there's activity there that is 100% designed to appeal to the prurient interest, and there are kids running around everywhere; but that's not in this bill. " Men don't go to Hooters for the food.




This is just the current manufactured outrage for GOP. They aren't happy unless there's something to be outraged about. So childish.
 
Norman Alexander said:
They are wanting to ban something they haven't properly defined.
Click to expand...

Well, at least they tried to come up with a stipulative definition for the sake of the proposed ban.

Code: 
"Drag performance" means a performance:
2 (A) In which one (1) or more performers:
3 (i) Exhibits a gender identity that is different
4 from the performer's gender assigned at birth using clothing, makeup, or
5 other accessories that are traditionally worn by members of and are meant to
6 exaggerate the gender identity of the performer's opposite sex; and
7 (ii) Sings, lip-synchs, dances, or otherwise
8 performs before an audience of at least two (2) persons for entertainment,
9 whether performed for payment or not; and
10 (B) That is intended to appeal to the prurient interest;

Wait, have I been spelling "lip-sync" wrong this whole time?
 
Last edited:
d4m10n said:
Well, at least they tried to come up with a stipulative definition for the sake of the proposed ban.

Code: 
"Drag performance" means a performance:
2 (A) In which one (1) or more performers:
3 (i) Exhibits a gender identity that is different
4 from the performer's gender assigned at birth using clothing, makeup, or
5 other accessories that are traditionally worn by members of and are meant to
6 exaggerate the gender identity of the performer's opposite sex; and
7 (ii) Sings, lip-synchs, dances, or otherwise
8 performs before an audience of at least two (2) persons for entertainment,
9 whether performed for payment or not; and
10 (B) That is intended to appeal to the prurient interest;

Wait, have I been spelling "lip-sync" wrong this whole time?
Click to expand...

Put on your wife's sunglasses while you're dancing at a party and it's suddenly a drag show.
 
I'm sure this is a huge problem in Arkansas. Why, I bet there are dozens, if not hundreds, of lascivious drag shows going on in Little Rock, spilling over onto the streets for little kiddies to see, sometimes even on Sunday mornings on their way to church!
 
10 (B) That is intended to appeal to the prurient interest;
Click to expand...

Ah, this of course is the classic "I'll know it when I see it" problem. Inevitably, the lowest common denominator of tolerance eventually getting to decide what is "prurient" or "offensive."

Why are so many "small government" conservatives coming up with solutions in need of a problem?
 
TheGoldcountry said:
Ah, this of course is the classic "I'll know it when I see it" problem. Inevitably, the lowest common denominator of tolerance eventually getting to decide what is "prurient" or "offensive."

Why are so many "small government" conservatives coming up with solutions in need of a problem?
Click to expand...

Because they don't have any solutions for real problems.
 
TheGoldcountry said:
Ah, this of course is the classic "I'll know it when I see it" problem. Inevitably, the lowest common denominator of tolerance eventually getting to decide what is "prurient" or "offensive."

Why are so many "small government" conservatives coming up with solutions in need of a problem?
Click to expand...

Stacyhs said:
Because they don't have any solutions for real problems.
Click to expand...

What is the name of the legislative version of a straw man argument?

"It's too hard to pass laws that address real problems, so I'll pass a law for an easier problem that doesn't exist."
 
Stacyhs said:
The Dem senator had a good point about Hooters: "there's activity there that is 100% designed to appeal to the prurient interest, and there are kids running around everywhere; but that's not in this bill. " Men don't go to Hooters for the food.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_7166963d2dcb1ac3f9.jpg[/qimg]


This is just the current manufactured outrage for GOP. They aren't happy unless there's something to be outraged about. So childish.
Click to expand...

d4m10n said:
Well, at least they tried to come up with a stipulative definition for the sake of the proposed ban.

Code: 
"Drag performance" means a performance:
2 (A) In which one (1) or more performers:
3 (i) Exhibits a gender identity that is different
4 from the performer's gender assigned at birth using clothing, makeup, or
5 other accessories that are traditionally worn by members of and are meant to
6 exaggerate the gender identity of the performer's opposite sex; and
7 (ii) Sings, lip-synchs, dances, or otherwise
8 performs before an audience of at least two (2) persons for entertainment,
9 whether performed for payment or not; and
10 (B) That is intended to appeal to the prurient interest;

Wait, have I been spelling "lip-sync" wrong this whole time?
Click to expand...

Those performers at Hooters are wearing short trousers. MENS' CLOTHING! Not a skirt to be seen They are in DRAG!
 
Venom said:
The GOP has become the most ****** up backwards excuse of a political party.

**** the Republican Party.
Click to expand...


x1000. What else need be said? It's like a parody of a caricature of something stupid.

I would be 100% ashamed to be even remotely associated with the GOP these days.

It is so much easier and healthier to live and let live, at least to a much larger degree than this. All that anger and hate is exhausting.

I don't know how to express how silly these people are to me with their faux puritanical bullcrap. I mean just look at yourselves! You are ridiculous, as in deserving all the ridicule you get. And **** you too.
 
Venom said:
The GOP has become the most ****** up backwards excuse of a political party.

**** the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

And yet 40%+ of Americans are happy to vote for them. The modern day GOP is just a symptom of a malaise.

The UK (and England in particular) has nothing to crow about given how popular the Tories are. :mad:
 
"...traditionally worn by member of the opposite sex..."

That will get shot down SO quickly and embarrassingly if it ever comes to a prosecution. Seriously, these goofs have NO idea.
 
Norman Alexander said:
"...traditionally worn by member of the opposite sex..."

That will get shot down SO quickly and embarrassingly if it ever comes to a prosecution. Seriously, these goofs have NO idea.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming it'll get stomped on First Amendment grounds right away anyway. You can't block people from wearing clothes and doing performances on the property that's owned by a business. They just can't, it'll never fly and they know that. The only thing they want is to vote for it so they can virtue signal to their base.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom