The federal judge, who cited Dolly Parton in his ruling, found that the state law violated the First Amendment.
and not the more important things like the 1800 AI datancenters on standby being built.
I’ve come to the conclusion that the people who are pushing for this type of legislation or rules have a deep seated homoerotic side to them.
Ah Texas, the hypocrite state. Uphold the rights of all, until they don’t like something that falls under those rights.
Just don’t go
🤯
I’ve never experienced a drag show against my will.
…I feel like that is a challenge somehow.
Perhaps he wants us to … drag him to one
Can’t wait for this to get appealed to the supreme court for a 5-4 bullshit decision
You mean to tell me all of the republicans don’t have to go to drag shows? They can’t resist.
The “freedom” crowd always seems to be quite upset at other people’s freedoms… 🤦
The fReEdOm crowd sure wants to take away the freedom of a lot of people.
In his ruling, Hittner mentioned Dolly Parton, whose death was announced Tuesday, and criticized the law’s definition of banning performances that “[appeal] to the prurient interest,” citing people who would chastise Parton “as a voluptuous sex symbol because of her big hair, flamboyant clothes and breast exposure.”
“There are ‘erotic’ elements in countless popular performances that could be subject to both civil and criminal penalties under S.B. 12,” he wrote.
One of the plaintiffs in the case, a drag queen who performs under the name Brigitte Bandit, impersonates Parton in her performances. Bandit celebrated the ruling on social media Tuesday, posting a screenshot of the decision and captioning it, “Drag is free speech, bitch.” She announced she would also perform as Parton, who gave her a rhinestone guitar as a gift in 2023, at an Austin bar Saturday in her honor.
Even from the grave, Dolly is making the world a better place.
I don’t think she’s buried yet.
Conservatives want small government when it’s stuff they want to do, and big government when they don’t. In-groups to protect, out-groups to bind. Bad people. Cartoon villains.
Glad this judge seems sensible.
Conservatism consists of one principle, but not that one. It’s literally just about preserving the status quo as they see it, and that includes the invisibility of minorities.
They care about state’s rights to ban what they want banned but federal law when states allow what they want banned.
Bad people.
That’s why they’re all so religious of the Christian persuasion. They forgive themselves, the in group, but not others, the out group, for whom they reserve Old Testament treatment.
If you think abortion is wrong, just don’t have one.
Don’t like drugs? Dont use them.
Dont like guns? Dont own any.
One of those things is not like the other.
Your consistency?
I mean, I agree - but this logic breaks down for those who believe that a fetus is alive.
People who believe that are illogical anyway
Okay, maybe I’ll get hate for this, and to be clear I fully support a woman’s right to abortion, but to the people who truly believe abortion is wrong this is basically saying “if you think murder is wrong, just don’t kill anyone.”
And the reply to every single one of those people is, “If you think abortion is wrong BECAUSE it is murder, then what are your feelings on the death penalty or war?”
It’s not the gotcha you think it is. Murder is defined as the intentional killing of an innocent person, and the death penalty and war don’t don’t intentionally involve innocent people.
It’d be like saying “oh, you oppose murder? What about self defence???”
Because I would like you to be successful in debating this issue, I need to inform you:
That’s not a very good response. It will convince literally no one. It won’t be convincing to the person you’re debating. It won’t be convincing to people who are observing the argument. It changes absolutely nothing.
The only effective replies are the ones that force people to think deeply:
- What makes this wrong, specifically?
and then, ask them to explain even more deeply every time they respond. e.g., “killing an innocent person is wrong.”
- What makes something innocent? What makes something a person?
If you can get them to at least admit that it’s a gray area, you’ve won.
It’s not murder when the men with money do it.
Which is whataboutism - it is a legitimate argument.
Almost every person I know who thinks abortion is morally wrong also supports the death penalty and war for almost any reason and police violence. They only seem to care about unborn fetuses that are not ‘alive’ independently from the body they inhabit. And most think that the mother’s life is fine as a fetus’ collateral damage. Therefore I don’t for a minute believe that many of those who profess to morally care about life/murder, really care about either.
I do know Catholics who are anti-abortion, anti-death penalty and anti-euthanasia; they strongly believe God should decide the beginning and end of anyone’s life.
Not saying they are right but they are consistent.
I’m anti-abortion for myself, never had one never thought it was an ok thing. But I don’t think laws should apply at all - the existing woman always matters more than the as yet unborn and I’ve met exactly one person ever who used abortion freely and as her birth control and she was crazy. It’s such an edge case law is not the right answer.
So in short I agree with if you don’t think it’s right don’t do it. Don’t try to control other people who aren’t harming you. You don’t walk in anyone else’s shoes, you don’t know their pain. If your friend is having an abortion when she wants the baby, but can’t figure out how to manage tell her how you can HELP her, don’t judge her.
But being absolutely against murder doesn’t end up with other people being murdered, so it’s a terrible analogy that they are just allowed to get away with. If you stop doctors from “murdering” babies, then mothers die as a result, full stop. They don’t even argue that point, they just don’t care, so arguably, they’re no better than the murderer in their own stupid analogy.
All of this is a religious refusal to admit that biology is a nasty, difficult and ugly business and not the perfect product of their all-loving God, and it’s just plain stupid.
Murder affects people though.
Gay marriage enters the chat.
But I like being bad, daddy.
As it should be.
It’s unfair. They need to ban those because they want to go but don’t want to be seen there.
Then maybe they should attend in drag.
They have the white dress and hat already.
Maxwell Q. Klinger approves this decision.
Excited for the Supreme Court to decide states have the power to impose dress codes on the entire population.
They want it banned because they fucking love it and they can’t square it with their bigotry so banning it is the only way to make the gay thoughts go away
It’s ok Texans you can reject your upbringing and be yourselves. The thoughts aren’t wrong, Pastor is
Incorrect. They want it banned so that they can arrest trans people under sex offenders laws then use that as an excuse to execute them.
This is correct. While some of them are ashamed of their own feelings/desires and want that banned so it isn’t a temptation, the vast majority are going after this as a way to hurt people they want to hurt. Why they want to hurt them can be stem from many things.
“You going out in that?”
How can you expect these bigots to stay away? What kind of solution is that? Why wont someone think of hate and intolerance for once.
/s
