Murfreesboro, Tennessee, is already beginning to implement the law.
A city in Tennessee is using a recently passed ordinance essentially prohibiting homosexuality in public to try to ban library books that might violate the new rules.
Murfreesboro passed an ordinance in June banning “indecent behavior,” including “indecent exposure, public indecency, lewd behavior, nudity or sexual conduct.” As journalist Erin Reed first reported, this ordinance specifically mentions Section 21-72 of the city code. The city code states that sexual conduct includes homosexuality.
Anyone who violates the new ordinance is barred from hosting public events or selling goods and services at public events for two years. Anyone who violates the ordinance “in the presence of minors” is barred for five years.
An ACLU-backed challenge to the ordinance has already been launched, but that hasn’t stopped city officials from implementing the measure. Last Monday, the Rutherford County steering committee met to discuss removing all books that might potentially violate the ordinance from the public library. The resolution was met with widespread outcry from city residents.
“When have the people who ban books ever been the good guys?” local activist Keri Lambert demanded during the Monday county meeting.
Murfreesboro city officials have already used the ordinance to ban four books that discuss LGBTQ themes. In August, the county library board pulled the books Flamer, Let’s Talk About It, Queerfully and Wonderfully Made, and This Book Is Gay.
The board also implemented a new library card system that categorizes books into certain age groups. When it takes effect next year, children and teenagers will only be able to check out books that correspond to their age group; they will need permission from a parent or guardian to check out “adult” books.
Library director Rita Shacklett worried in August that the new rules would prevent students from accessing books they need for a class. She explained that many classic high school books, such as To Kill a Mockingbird, are now classified as “adult.”
It’s unclear if the county steering committee plans to pull books such as the A Song of Ice and Fire series, which includes multiple depictions of heterosexual sexual conduct.
Murfreesboro’s new ordinance is part of a much larger wave of attacks on LGBTQ rights in Tennessee and the rest of the country. In the past year, the so-called Volunteer State became the first state to try to ban drag performances. That law was overturned in court.
In March, the Tennessee House of Representatives passed a bill that would allow people to refuse to perform a marriage if they disagree with it, essentially gutting marriage equality. The bill was introduced in the Senate but deferred until next year.
link: https://newrepublic.com/post/176915/tennessee-town-ban-public-homosexuality
archive link: https://archive.ph/LFMMK
You realize none of these answers the question I asked, which was about the long mental health outcomes of people in abstinence-only programs vs. sex positive ones which specifically include homosexuality in it as well, right?
You’re making an a priori assumption that teen pregnancies lead to worse long term mental health outcomes than homosexuality does. Also, what does abortion have to do with any of it? Is there any data that shows that women who have abortions are happier in the long run than those who don’t?
The best data that I found from abortion advocates shows that abortion has no impact on mental health, in which case it would be irrelevant to the question we’re trying to answer here.
Meanwhile, there is data that LGBT people have worse mental health and higher rates of substance abuse than straight people. And yes, I am aware you’re just going to say “that’s because they are being discriminated against by society for being who they are” but once again, that is simply an assumption and remains to be proven.
As I have said before, society has made huge steps in the past 20 years towards accepting homosexuality, with gay marriage being legal and many states allowing adoption, yet somehow people still feel persecuted because some states won’t allow them access to other people’s kids in order to teach them about homosexuality.
At some point, you have to ask yourself whether perhaps the Bible is right about homosexuality, and perhaps a permanent feeling of victimhood and oppression is part and parcel of being gay, and a manifestation of God’s punishment for violating the natural law.
deleted by creator
It’s not happening, and it’s good that it is: https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2022/06/03/schools-gender-identity-transgender-lessons/
Stop gaslighting me. You know damn well that public schools in many Democrat run states have already included LGTB and gender identity education into their lesson plans, and that progressive teachers in conservative states are trying to do the same, and vociferously protesting any attempts to pass laws forbidding that. It’s not that long ago that Governor DeSantis raised a big stink when he passed a law to make this illegal in Florida.
This is what I mean by “access to other people’s kids”. People like you are demanding that they be allowed to introduce other people’s children to the concept of same sex relationships. That’s exactly what the law we’re discussing here is forbidding, and that’s the reason you’re so upset, because in your mind, this constitutes fascism for not allowing other to “live their lives as they see fit”.
I’m sorry, but you gotta draw a line somewhere. If you want to have same sex relationships with other consenting adults in the privacy of your own home, be my guest, but you don’t have a right to drag other people’s children into this. Their brains are still developing. Being weak or effeminate as a boy does not mean someone is gay or born in the wrong body and needs to be taught about sucking dick or taking feminizing hormones to reveal their “true self”. They need protection from bullies and demagogues like you who are trying to recruit them into their sadomasochistic world of sexual exploitation.
And I’ll be the first to admit that on the whole, conservatives and Christians aren’t doing a particularly great job at this either, but that doesn’t mean that these kids would be better off sodomizing each other because a teacher in school told them that boys having anal sex with other boys is healthy and natural. It’s not. And your constant murderous, vitriolic anger is a good illustration that being gay, unlike the name implies, is not at all a fun and happy lifestyles, but merely a fake front intended to mask a sheer bottomless pit of rage and contempt for everything that’s pure and natural.
I’m straight, dumbass.
Sure you are.
deleted by creator
If you were straight, there’d be no conceivable reason as upset as you are about a small town in Tennessee which you don’t even live in banning homosexual acts in public in front of minors.
There simply is no good reason children ever need to see this, just like they don’t need to see their parents having sex.
deleted by creator
Again, you’re acting as if not allowing people to be gay in front of kids is equivalent to putting them in extermination camps, or that putting them in camps is the next logical step. It’s not. They’re not prohibiting people from being gay, they’re just limiting where and how it can be expressed when children are involved. And no, it’s not a free speech issue, we have age limits for violent movies being shown in public as well (which can of course freely be skirted at home, just like parents in Murfreesboro can still decide to teach their children about homosexuality at home).
Also, sexual abuse is far more common in public schools than it is at church. Here’s a few links for you:
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5332880 https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/student-student-sexual-assault-common-thought https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/15/sexual-violence-reports-rise-drastically-at-schools-education-department-data-shows-429663
Tell you what, though: I’ll accept ending your fictional “indoctrination” conspiracy if you accept banning any and all religious mentions of any kind in our schools. OUR SCHOOLS. Not your schools.
And using DeSamtis as your metric made you lose yet again. A known fascist who hates freedom and America.
Aren’t public schools in the US already secular? Somehow I don’t think they’re the ones “indoctrinating” people with any religion except statism, which I was under the impression you hated almost as much as Christianity.
If you ask me, we should get rid of government schools entirely and just let the private sector figure out how best to prepare children for life. That would likely be far cheaper and more effective. But of course it will never happen, because it would provoke great anger and pearl clutching among so called “liberals”, who WANT to use the school system to indoctrinate children into their statist child exploitation cult.
Also, you once again have shown a major lack of reading comprehension, because I have by no means used DeSantis as a metric, I just used him as an example to show that what you claim isn’t happening in schools WAS actually happening in schools. Because if it hadn’t been happening, the law would have been a) entirely unnecessary and b) not the least bit controversial. Imagine banning wearing your pants backwards in public, something nobody has done since Kriss Kross went out of style over 20 years ago. Apart from a few fringe lunatics concerned about government overreach, nobody would be protesting something like that, because nobody is actually doing it. Yet the outrage over Florida was nationwide.
deleted by creator
Based on what evidence? I just told you I would get rid of public schools entirely, how does that make me a statist?
Once again, you are simply projecting. In reality, you’re the one who wants to force everyone’s kids in public school so they can be taught about having gay sex and become mindless consumer drones for the rich and powerful. But that always seems to be the case when people get rid of God, they end up worshiping the state instead.
I think we’re done here. At this point, it’s amply clear to me that you have no ability reason, so capacity for introspection, and not a single halfway sensible argument. All you have is bottomless rage and contempt for everyone who doesn’t think like you, and you would like nothing better than to force everyone to bow down and comply to your will. You never answered my question about this but I’m starting to think a gay communist dictatorship is exactly the type of government you would prefer.
I want a government that minds it’s own business. Education and protection if human rights is it’s business. You pretty obviously despise both of those. Privatizing education just means that anti-life antichrists such as yourself are allowed to brainwash children and chuck them into coal mines. We did it your way already and saw the result.
We’re done here because you lose. I have gay friends; gay clients; a gay family member; and a trans son of a client. I defend all of them against the likes of you and your violent death cult religion.
Minding its own business is by definition not what the government does. Yes, there obviously should be limits on what they’re allowed to do (which is why we have the Bill of Rights in the constitution), but regulating public order and trying to prevent or at least curb the worst predations among people is literally what the government was created for. And I’m not a big fan of it either, but until we figure out a way to raise all children peacefully and without abuse, it sadly appears to be the best we can do.
And no, education was never intended to be the government’s business. Public safety, regulation of commerce, and national defense was. The federal government didn’t even get involved in education until the 19th century. Public schools, where they existed, were operated by the cities or counties they were in.
See the thing is, people constantly disagree about what the best way to do anything whatsoever is. But nowadays we have this weird idea that everyone everywhere must have everything the same. A black kid from the swamps in Louisiana should have the same chance at becoming a rocket scientist as a white kid from Massachusetts whose parents work at MIT. Except it simply isn’t possible to guarantee any of that. Nor is it necessary in order for everyone to be happy.
If California wants to become a sanctuary state for transgender people, and the local residents agree with that, why shouldn’t they? Conversely, if a small town in Tennessee doesn’t want homosexuality in public, and the residents agree, why shouldn’t they be allowed to do that, too? You don’t have to live there if you don’t like it, just like I don’t have to live in California.
But no, that doesn’t work for you, does it? If the people in Tennessee want to do something you don’t agree with, you have to get upset and start a whole damn argument on the Internet about it, even though you probably don’t even live anywhere near there. That’s the mark of a petty tyrant, a wannabe authoritarian who can’t be happy unless everyone thinks and acts exactly like he wants them to. You’re not fooling anyone with this nonsense. You’re just a sad, miserable cunt who wants everyone to share in his misery. But you know what, I hope you find happiness anyways. And by God, I hope that it doesn’t involve the sexual abuse of any children.
deleted by creator