The federal judge, who cited Dolly Parton in his ruling, found that the state law violated the First Amendment.
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.
There are ‘erotic’ elements in countless popular performances
Both the US and UK armies set up drag shows with their soldiers during WW2.
If you think abortion is wrong, just don’t have one.
Gay marriage enters the chat.
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.”
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.
As an ex catholic, those ones are few and far between, and not in the better way. Opposition to capital punishment is something a lot of American Catholics hold as a “yeah the church says we’re supposed to believe it” much like opposition to premarital sex
deleted by creator
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???”
Death penalty is usually opposed because the person might be innocent. Just the ‘Don’t Talk to the Police’ clip cites two different cases where policemen talked mentally ill people into incriminating themselves, which people were later exonerated by DNA evidence.
Yeah, but it’s not the reason Catholics and other Christians are supposed to oppose it. It’s unnecessary killing, regardless of guilt. In defensive war it’s one thing to kill, but a person you can stop from killing anyone? You’re supposed to keep them in prison and try to help them change
It’s a good reason to oppose the death penalty, but I don’t think it makes it murder at all.
Murder is defined as the intentional killing of an innocent person
You just said above that it is murder.
But the person has been found guilty so even if they aren’t, it’s not the intentional killing of an innocent person.
Murder is not defined as the intentional killing of an innocent person, by either Merriam Webster, Wikipedia, American Heritage Dictionary, or Dictionary.com
Not one definition anywhere has the word “innocent” in it.
It is defined in one place as “The killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.” How we define “justification” is important. I would call most war, “recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.”
Other places has it as “unlawful or unjustified killing of a person.”
Is it really “most war,” or is it one half of most wars?
But sure, that’s a fine definition. I think if you don’t include “justified” the definition is clearly incomplete - and I don’t think anyone who thinks about it would disagree, because it would contradict common usage so thoroughly.
So now you get to argue that killing foetuses is justified. Good luck with that, I’m sure the definitional exercise will have convinced whomever you were talking to :/
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.
Good luck convincing such people of anything.
You won’t succeed in one go, the goal is to leave them asking questions later and not aggressively rejecting your position
Most people can be convinced of something. I have a lot of debates, both in person and online, and I’ve gotten somewhat decent at it. I think the most important thing is setting a realistic goal.
Did I convince a group of young earth creationists that the theory of evolution by natural selection is the best explanation for the diversity of life? No I did not. Did I convince some of them that biologists aren’t a part of a satanic conspiracy, and that they’re just trying to come up with good explanations for the stuff they see? Yes, I think so.
Did I convince a “pro-life” friend that abortion should be exclusively the host’s decision? No I did not. Did I make them recognize that drawing the line on when abortion should or should not be allowed is harder than they had assumed, and that IF the government is going to draw that line, they should at least consult some medical experts? Yes, I think so.
On some level it might feel like it’s not enough… But there isn’t anything better, so I’ll take what I can get. Good luck out there.
Which is whataboutism - it is a legitimate argument.
It’s not murder when the men with money do it.
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.
Don’t like drugs? Dont use them.
Dont like guns? Dont own any.
One of those things is not like the other.
Your consistency?
Guns are dangerous for other people in a way drugs aren’t.
But I like being bad, daddy.
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
I mean - that’s fine - but it is what a decent number of people beleive.
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.
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.
“Free speech” for me of course, your “art” is disgusting and needs to be banned because my interpretation of my religion says so
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.
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.
They care about state’s rights to ban what they want banned but federal law when states allow what they want banned.
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.
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
I have, but so what. I may not have always liked it, but it’s really no different from sitting down at a bar and about an hour in a band comes in to do live music that you aren’t there for and it’s ruining your ability to have a conversation (also has happened to me). You just decide to roll with it or go somewhere else. It’s some real whiny loser shit to try to ban people from engaging in art just because you dislike it.
And yeah, drag shows starting at bars I’m already at is not uncommon because I typically stick to gay bars
Fun story. My first wife wanted to dress me in drag, as at the time I was an absolute twink and she thought I would look amazing. So we did that. And I did look good. Although I’m already tall (194 cm) and was wearing 4 inch heels so I then became very tall. Anyway we went to a drag show and the performers dragged me up on stage and tried to get me to sing we are family with them. I did, although I can’t hold a tune for shit. It was a ton of fun, but I’ve never done it again.
Republicans scream “freedom” louder than anyone, but they prove consistently that it’s just a slogan to them. Texas has outlawed gambling, marijuana, reproductive healthcare, gay marriage, and effectively outlawed porn. And they’re all up in the business of trans and gay folks. And they shove their religion down your throat every chance they get. I don’t think they understand the meaning of freedom.
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.
I’m sure it’s a little of column A, a little of column B. Humanity is wildly diverse; if it wasn’t these fuckers would have nothing to screech about
“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
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.
Just don’t go
🤯
Having been to a drag show, it’s really no different than a fashion show. More clothing, actually.
Having been to a drag show, it was a piece of musical theatre, not a fashion show…
Also worth noting: when was the last time they complained about a burlesque show?
I assume those are 18 and up already, right?
Just like drag, burlesque often contains no nudity, if it had to be 18+, the beach is more revealing. Also keep in mind the anti-trans “protect the children” community are the same demographic that supports child pageants.
The good ones have more jokes and more singing
Personally I’m a fan of the horror themed ones, like Dragula.
I always found drag to be weird and “not my bag, baby!”. But what’s even weirder is a corrupt politician thinking he can tell citizens what they can wear, how much (or if any) makeup they can use, or who they can sleep with.
But hey, you can shoot people through closed doors in other states and use Texas as your escape route to Mexico as a fugitive – Abbott won’t extradite criminals so long as your heinous crime was committed in a blue state. Extraditions only happen for members of certain political parties…
You mean to tell me all of the republicans don’t have to go to drag shows? They can’t resist.
It really is that fucking simple
