What to call this thread?

[sear]

Federal appeals court clears way for DeSantis-backed law restricting children at some drag shows​

11th Circuit rules venue failed to show it would likely succeed in its First Amendment challenge
By Jasmine Baehr Fox News / Published August 4, 2026 9:33pm EDT
Florida AG announces Meta compliance with kids' social media ban

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announces Meta's compliance with Florida's 2024 law banning social media access for kids under 14.
A divided federal appeals court cleared the way for Florida to enforce a Gov. Ron DeSantis-backed law restricting children from certain sexually explicit live performances, including drag performances the state argues are obscene for minors.
The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit ruled Tuesday 8-5 that Orlando restaurant Hamburger Mary’s had not shown it was likely to succeed in its First and Fourteenth Amendment challenge to Florida’s Protection of Children Act.
The court vacated the preliminary injunction in full and sent the case back to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida for further proceedings. The ruling clears the way for enforcement, though Hamburger Mary’s could still seek additional review.

Federal appeals court clears way for DeSantis-backed law restricting children at some drag shows

The 11th Circuit ruled 8-5 that Hamburger Mary's failed to show it would likely succeed in its First Amendment challenge to Florida's drag show law.

www.foxnews.com

This post #1,901 is not an endorsement of government infringement of conduct between consenting adults. BUT !!
Our culture, our society, our nation, our People are obliged to enable children to be children, to enjoy childhood.

The wrinkle here is enforcement. At the rollercoaster the sign tells the story. You have to be "this" tall for this ride. BUT !
The Internet doesn't have a practical way to know if any particular smartphone is the property of a child, -OR-
if a child has temporarily obtained access to an adult's smartphone.

Protecting children is a top priority.
Protecting Constitutional rights isn't?

 

[sear]

"True - gender identity is innate (i.e., they were born that way)." S2 #1,900

Perhaps what constitutes a persuasive argument is somewhat subjective.

We don't need a current example like Ariana Grande or a more terminal example like Karen Carpenter to remind / warn us about the consequences of those that wish to maintain their birth certificate statistics.

If #1,898 will enlighten, change a mind, I'm all in favor.
But even within this forum I've encountered more persuasive arguments.

 

[sear]

"DeSantis-backed law restricting children at some drag shows" #1,901

"We all know that drag shows existed in bars where age restrictions were enforced. And many people ( adults) really enjoyed them..." tired-of-the-lies
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fe...is-backed-law-restricting-children-drag-shows

Thank you totl,
You are correct that when such demonstrations are conducted at a bar, children are excluded,
and that a 3rd millennium change in venue to social media should not accompany a reduction in safeguards for children. Well done t.

 

[Shiftless2]

Rep. Miller Introduces Bill to Protect Children from Sexually Explicit Content in Schools

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Congresswoman Mary Miller (IL-15), Chairwoman of the Congressional Family Caucus, introduced the Stop the Sexualization of Children Act to protect children from being exposed to explicit material in the classroom.

marymiller.house.gov

You might ask why I posted this here - after all, it's not about LGBT people. Or is it?

While the focus is on her statement re strippers the real "meat" of the bill is in the middle.



So just an attempt to codify banning Trans people with no further clarification. You are a Trans student? Gotta go to segregated Trans school. Normal republican evil shit.

 

[Shiftless2]

In the early 1950s, the United States government was hunting homosexuals. Not metaphorically. The "Lavender Scare" ran parallel to McCarthy's Red Scare, and congressional investigators were systematically purging gay and lesbian people from federal employment, revoking security clearances, and destroying careers. Being named was enough. You didn't have to be convicted of anything.

Alfred Kinsey had the names.

By 1953, Kinsey and his team at Indiana University's Institute for Sex Research had conducted in-depth interviews with thousands of Americans about their sex lives. Many of those people had confessed to acts that were still criminal offenses in every state in the country. Kinsey had promised every single one of them complete confidentiality, and he meant it in a way that went far beyond a handshake.

His team developed a custom cryptographic shorthand that only four researchers could read. Interview transcripts were recorded entirely in this code, never in plain language. Subject names were stored separately, locked in a vault, and kept entirely disconnected from the coded transcripts. The system was designed so that even if someone got their hands on the files, they couldn't connect a transcript to a real person without the codebook, and the codebook had exactly four readers.

Then Congress came for him.

The Reece Committee, a House committee ostensibly investigating tax-exempt foundations, targeted the Rockefeller Foundation in 1954 specifically because it had funded Kinsey's research. The implication was that sex research was ....

CONTINUED with comments