Florida revokes liquor license of hotel that put on a sexually explicit show with kids present

[HeyNorm]

Hmmm... it seems you think you're being clever.

Not clever at all. I am using existing legal arguments that determine civil rights.

So is a straight man similarly situated to a man that identifies as a woman? If not, what is the remarkable difference?

 

[dblack]

Not clever at all. I am using existing legal arguments that determine civil rights.

So is a straight man similarly situated to a man that identifies as a woman? If not, what is the remarkable difference?

Jesus - you sure get fixated. By repeating this question over and over again, it seems you think I'm opposed to gay marriage or something? Which isn't the case. Is that your issue? What does any of this have to do with the OP?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You're missing the point, or rather steering around it. And I'm growing tired of trying to rub your nose in it. What you all are doing, by trying to fight the culture war with legal mandates, is no different than what the Democrats are doing. You just have a different end goal in mind.

It's fair to say that Democrats started it, depending on how far back in history you want to go. But now Republicans have decided that, rather than fight against the practice of using government for "social-engineering", they'll respond in kind with their own agenda. Which means there's hardly anyone pushing back against overbearing government.

what part of sexually explicit don't you understand?

 

[HeyNorm]

Jesus - you sure get fixated. By repeating this question over and over again, it seems you think I'm opposed to gay marriage or something? Which isn't the case. Is that your issue? What does any of this have to do with the OP?

Not at all. I oppose men, no matter how they identify, sharing womens locker rooms or participating in womens events.

But how do we stop it if we cannot define where this “similarly situated” line exists?

In one case you will defend it so gays can marry, then in the next we should leave trans alone because applying any limitationto them is “government overreach”?

And if trans can share locker facilities with women, why shouldn’t straight men, being similarly situated, enjoy the same freedoms?

Here’s the deal, a trans exercising this “right” can expose his schlong to my wife and daughter and face no legal consequences, but I, doing the same becomes a sex offender if I do the same to your wife or daughter?

 

[dblack]

what part of sexually explicit don't you understand?

I'm mostly ignoring your fixation on sex. It doesn't change the principles involved. You want to force your preferred social norms on others with government. That blows.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I'm mostly ignoring your fixation on sex. It doesn't change the principles involved. You want to force your preferred social norms on others with government. That blows.

wrong sex acts are not appropriate for children that you don't get that is a major problem for you retard. I assume you think it is ok for children to go to live sex shows anywhere anytime or is just crossdressing ones you think are fine?

 

[HeyNorm]

I'm mostly ignoring your fixation on sex. It doesn't change the principles involved. You want to force your preferred social norms on others with government. That blows.

Oh I see, so the argument, as most on your side of the argument begins and ends with………..

Because Gay.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

So lets allow public fornication after all you think it is ok if a show why not anywhere any time?

 

[HeyNorm]

wrong sex acts are not appropriate for children that you don't get that is a major problem for you retard. I assume you think it is ok for children to go to live sex shows anywhere anytime or is just crossdressing ones you think are fine?

Denying children access to explicit sexual acts is now a sexual fixation?

 

[dblack]

Not at all. I oppose men, no matter how they identify, sharing womens locker rooms or participating in womens events.

And others disagree. Why do you get to force your preferences on everyone else? That implicitly gives them the power to force their preferences on you (when they have the votes). Is that what you want? What's wrong with live and let live?

But how do we stop it if we cannot define where this “similarly situated” line exists?

I don't want to stop it, certainly not with government. It's none of my business. So I can't really care what you mean by "similarly situated", though it seems very important to you.

Here’s the deal, a trans exercising this “right” can expose his schlong to my wife and daughter and face no legal consequences, but I, doing the same becomes a sex offender if I do the same to your wife or daughter?

If someone forces themselves on you, whether it's to show you their schlong or whatever, that should be illegal. But if you take your daughter to a schlong show, that's on you.

But you're not really looking to protect you or your family, are you? You want to control what other people do. Classic statist social meddling. MYOB.

 

[HeyNorm]

So lets allow public fornication after all you think it is ok if a show why not anywhere any time?

Unless it’s heterosexual, of course.

 

[marvin martian]

And if I offered up the same excuse for banning Trump bigots from social events? Here: "I don't care what you guys do, but it better not involve children and keep it out of my face." Does that work for you?

You people have been doing that already for 5+ years. Both online and in person.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You people have been doing that already for 5+ years. Both online and in person.

Anyone thinking children should be exposed to this garbage shouldn't be allowed around children

 

[marvin martian]

And others disagree. Why do you get to force your preferences on everyone else? That implicitly gives them the power to force their preferences on you (when they have the votes). Is that what you want? What's wrong with live and let live?

I don't want to stop it, certainly not with government. It's none of my business. So I can't really care what you mean by "similarly situated", though it seems very important to you.

If someone forces themselves on you, whether it's to show you their schlong or whatever, that should be illegal. But if you take your daughter to a schlong show, that's on you.

But you're not really looking to protect you or your family, are you? You want to control what other people do. Classic statist social meddling. MYOB.

Why would a performer in that type of show want to perform in front of children?

 

[HeyNorm]

And others disagree. Why do you get to force your preferences on everyone else? That implicitly gives them the power to force their preferences on you (when they have the votes). Is that what you want? What's wrong with live and let live?

I don't want to stop it, certainly not with government. It's none of my business. So I can't really care what you mean by "similarly situated", though it seems very important to you.

If someone forces themselves on you, whether it's to show you their schlong or whatever, that should be illegal. But if you take your daughter to a schlong show, that's on you.

But you're not really looking to protect you or your family, are you? You want to control what other people do. Classic statist social meddling. MYOB.

Wrong, many of our wife’s and daughters are being forced to share locker rooms with trans.

While I am similarly situated to a tranny male who identifies as a woman, I get arrested.

You guys started this , and now you run from it? Why?

Here’s why, because gay

 

[dblack]

wrong sex acts are not appropriate for children that you don't get that is a major problem for you retard. I assume you think it is ok for children to go to live sex shows anywhere anytime or is just crossdressing ones you think are fine?

I don't presume to decide, for other people, which sex acts are "wrong". No one is forcing us to take our kids to sex shows. Why isn't that enough? Why do you want to force your sexual mores on others?

 

[dblack]

Wrong, many of our wife’s and daughters are being forced to share locker rooms with trans.

Really? If that's happening I definitely oppose it. Can you give me an example of someone being force to share a locker room? I've never heard of such a thing. All I've read about is that some places are allowing it. If they're forcing people to go in, that's dead wrong.

You guys started this , and now you run from it? Why?

You guys? What is it you're imagining I started?

Here’s why, because gay

???

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Really? If that's happening I definitely oppose it. Can you give me an example of someone being force to share a locker room? I've never heard of such a thing. All I've read about is that some places are allowing it. If they're forcing people to go in, that's dead wrong.

You guys? What is it you're imagining I started?

???

good god schools in some states are forcing it and especially with sports. Do you live under a rock?

 

[dblack]

good god schools in some states are forcing it and especially with sports. Do you live under a rock?

No, but I don't really follow all the propaganda sites. If see that happening anywhere, I'll definitely speak out against it. But that doesn't really have anything to do with the OP, does it?

 

[HeyNorm]

Really? If that's happening I definitely oppose it. Can you give me an example of someone being force to share a locker room? I've never heard of such a thing. All I've read about is that some places are allowing it. If they're forcing people to go in, that's dead wrong.

You guys? What is it you're imagining I started?

???

To participate in the sport the woman has trained her entire life many women must either share the locker room with a male that identifies as a female (even though the male still desires females sexually).

Your argument will be that the female should just quit her lifelong ambition and not go in the locker room. Right?

After all, the biological females have no right to privacy.