Tennessee poised to ban public drag shows, hormone therapy for children

[Foxi4]

So then why not make the law so that sexual drag shows can only happen in strip clubs and the like? Why make them illegal entirely?

I don’t know, I didn’t write the law. I’m actually sort of ambivalent towards it because I wouldn’t bring a child to a drag show in the first place. If you’re asking me why people support such legislation, my best guess is that it stems from the belief that the law should protect minors even if that protection goes against the wishes of the parents. It’s the same reason why you can’t beat a child senseless - they’re people, not property.

Your gun argument is a little bit odd because there absolutely are rules regarding safe firearm storage, and they do involve liability in the event of an accident.

 

[MikaDubbz]

I don’t know, I didn’t write the law. I’m actually sort of ambivalent towards it because I wouldn’t bring a child to a drag show in the first place. If you’re asking me why people support such legislation, my best guess is that it stems from the belief that the law should protect minors even if that protection goes against the wishes of the parents. It’s the same reason why you can’t beat a child senseless - they’re people, not property.

I think it just comes down to parents being lazy and/or wanting to pass off the blame if their child turns into something that they're ashamed of, "My child would have never turned out this way, if the government did a better job of raising them for me!"

 

[Foxi4]

I think it just comes down to parents being lazy and/or wanting to pass off the blame if their child turns into something that they're ashamed of, "My child would have never turned out this way, if the government did a better job of raising them for me!"

This depends on your point of view. It’s questionable whether parents should be allowed to experiment with their children like this. Child Protective Services exist specifically for the state to step in when the parents expose kids to things they’re not meant to be exposed to. If you consider taking a child to a drag show to be child abuse, wanting to ban them is the natural progression of that train of thought. I personally don’t care about other people’s children to have a strong opinion - they’re not my children.

 

[MikaDubbz]

This depends on your point of view. It’s questionable whether parents should be allowed to experiment with their children like this. Child Protective Services exist specifically for the state to step in when the parents expose them to things they’re not meant to be exposed to. If you consider taking a child to a drag show to be child abuse, wanting to ban them is the natural progression of that train of thought. I personally don’t care about other people’s children to have a strong opinion - they’re not my children.

Hence, the 'I think' at the start there.

 

[Foxi4]

Hence, the 'I think' at the start there.

I personally err on the side of the state keeping its nose out of people’s private business because once it asserts authority of that domain of life, there’s a wealth of other things it can decide children should on shouldn’t do, regardless of what the parents think. Sadly that ship has already sailed, so it’s a bit of a moot point.

 

[osaka35]

So all this talk of education is very fascinating and enlightening, but I'm having trouble correlating it to the topic at hand. A law that makes it illegal for children to attend adult shows, which should have already been a thing and it makes it illegal for doctors to amputate healthy tissue from children. It's crazy nobody wants to talk about these two subjects that this thread was originally about in the first place.

the correlation is if we had better education, we wouldn't have to worry about politicians trying to pass laws based on ignorance and misinformation.

 

[Foxi4]

the correlation is if we had better education, we wouldn't have to worry about politicians trying to pass laws based on ignorance and misinformation.

There are cheaper ways to achieve the same result, but they’re all illegal.

 

[MikaDubbz]

I personally err on the side of the state keeping its nose out of people’s private business because once it asserts authority of that domain of life, there’s a wealth of other things it can decide children should on shouldn’t do, regardless of what the parents think. Sadly that ship has already sailed, so it’s a bit of a moot point.

Likewise. I don't want my kids to see sexual shows, but I don't need the government to make them flat-out illegal. It's just sad how we've moved to this point where parents are never to blame for what their children do anymore, it's always someone else, and man oh man is the government the perfect scapegoat in that sense.

 

[Foxi4]

Likewise. I don't want my kids to see sexual shows, but I don't need the government to make them flat-out illegal. It's just sad how we've moved to this point where parents are never to blame for what their children do, it's always someone else, and man oh man is the government the perfect scapegoat in that sense.

In all fairness, everything is usually the government’s fault at some point of the chain of blame.

 

[MikaDubbz]

In all fairness, everything is usually the government’s fault at some point of the chain of blame.

Nah, if you are a good parent (perhaps overbearing), you can control what your kid is exposed to until they're 18. They'll probably hate you for it, but if you want to ensure they don't see certain things, you are capable of so without any third party whatsoever having a say. I had a friend who never once saw an R rated movie til the day he was 17. It's totally possible for this stuff to happen without the government interjecting.

 

[Foxi4]

Nah, if you are a good parent (perhaps overbearing), you can control what your kid is exposed to until they're 18. They'll probably hate you for it, but if you want to ensure they don't see certain things, you are capable of so without any third party whatsoever.

You don’t control the curriculum, for starters, but that’s besides the point. If you were to fully control what your child is exposed to, you’d necessarily have to be a helicopter parent. A big portion of being a good parent is knowing that children will be exposed to things you don’t want them exposed to and being able to counteract that by imparting your values effectively. This awareness of reality is important - it’s going to happen, no matter what you do. Let’s be real here, everyone in this thread has seen pornography before they were 18, be it accidentally or intentionally - we’re on the Internet. It’s just a fact of life at this stage and no law is going to change that. With that being said, exposing children to bizarre content of sexual nature intentionally should probably be frowned upon on a societal level. Shame is a powerful (de)motivator that’s fallen out of style in recent years when it is in fact very valuable. Sometimes people should be ashamed of themselves, there’s nothing wrong with that.

 

[MikaDubbz]

You don’t control the curriculum, for starters, but that’s besides the point. If you were to fully control what your child is exposed to, you’d necessarily have to be a helicopter parent. A big portion of being a good parent is knowing that children will be exposed to things you don’t want them exposed to and counter that by imparting your values effectively. Let’s be real here, everyone in this thread has seen pornography before they were 18, be it accidentally or intentionally - we’re on the Internet. It’s just a fact of life at this stage and no law is going to change that. With that being said, exposing children to bizarre content of sexual nature intentionally should probably be frowned upon on a societal level. Shame is a powerful (de)motivator that’s fallen out of style in recent years when it is in fact very valuable. Sometimes people should be ashamed of themselves, there’s nothing wrong with that.

Exactly, raise your kids well, to the point where you trust them, and you wont even have to worry about them going to sexual shows, because you raised a good kid that wont do so until an appropriate age. Or be an overbearing helicopter parent. Either way, this shouldn't be the government's problem, it should be a you (parent) problem. Again, look at guns. They're so dangerous, yet it's not inherently illegal for a parent to a own a gun, you just have to take responsibility and be a good gun owner, and your child will be fine. Be a shitty parent and they'll kill themselves or someone else and you'll end up in prison. But that will (and should) be entirely on you, not the government.

 

[Foxi4]

Exactly, raise your kids well, to the point where you trust them, and you wont even have to worry about them going to sexual shows, because you raised a good kid that wont do so until an appropriate age. Or be an overbearing helicopter parent. Either way, this shouldn't be the government's problem, it should be a you (parent) problem. Again, look at guns. They're so dangerous, yet it's not inherently illegal for a parent to a own a gun, you just have to take responsibility and be a good gun owner, and your child will be fine. Be a shitty parent and they'll kill themselves or someone else and you'll end up in prison. But that will (and should) be entirely on you, not the government.

I don’t think that’s the crux of the issue - the crux of the issue is liability. Laws exist to designate culprits, not just (dis)incentivise behaviours). If you’ve stored your weapon improperly and your child Kurt Cobains itself, I have bad news - you’re not just a bad parent, or a bad gun owner, you’re liable.

 

[MikaDubbz]

I don’t think that’s the crux of the issue - the crux of the issue is liability. If you’ve stored your weapon improperly and your child Kurt Cobains itself, I have bad news - you’re not just a bad parent, you’re liable.

Exactly, and if you raise a shitty kid, they'll break curfew, do drugs too early, see sexual shows you would prefer that they didn't. And bad news for that parent, it's not the government's fault that their kid was a giant piece of shit. Liability is it exactly, which is just another word for one I've been using repeatedly here: responsibility.

 

[Foxi4]

Exactly, and if you raise a shitty kid, they'll break curfew, do drugs too early, see sexual shows you would prefer that they didn't. And bad news for that parent, it's not the government's fault that their kid was a giant piece of shit. Liability is it exactly, which is just another word for one I've been using repeatedly here: responsibility.

I suppose that’s one way to look at it. It’s a matter of whether you’d consider exposure to this kind of material damaging to the child or not. We know for a fact that exposure to a speeding bullet is very damaging to a child, but the child is not liable for the damage - the parent is, as they are the ones guilty of improperly securing their weapon. You say that the parents are responsible for how their poorly-raised child behaves, which is fair, but do you also think they’re liable for what that child does or what happens to said child as a result of being raised poorly? This is where we touch upon CPS again. I think you’re expecting emotional maturity from children and that’s just not how it works.

 

[MikaDubbz]

I suppose that’s one way to look at it. It’s a matter of whether you’d consider exposure to this kind of material damaging to the child or not. We know for a fact that exposure to a speeding bullet is very damaging to a child, but the child is not liable for the damage - the parent is, as they are the ones guilty of improperly securing it. You say that the parents are responsible for how their poorly-raised child behaves, which is fair, but do you also think they’re liable for what that child does or what happens to said child as a result of being raised poorly? This is where we touch upon CPS again. I think you’re expecting emotional maturity from children and that’s just not how it works.

Exactly, and just as a parent is liable if their child is exposed to a gun, a parent should be liable if their child is somewhere that is inappropriate for them, like a sexual show. We don't need the government to do our parenting for us.

 

[Foxi4]

Exactly, and just as a parent is liable if their child is exposed to a gun, a parent should be liable if their child is somewhere that is inappropriate for them, like a sexual show. We don't need the government to do our parenting for us.

You seem to misunderstand the distinction - responsibility and liability are not one and the same. Let me give you an example - let’s say that you’re in a self-defense situation. Someone attacks you and, in order to protect your own life, you kill the attacker. To make it simpler, let’s say that you do so intentionally - you didn’t push them back, they fell over and hit their head, you straight up killed them. You are responsible for their death - your deliberate action led to their untimely demise. You are, however, not liable for it as the circumstances of the altercation alleviate your legal culpability - you were defending yourself, and had they not attacked you in the first place, your hand wouldn’t be forced. You’re not a murderer, and you get to walk free. Now, you might think this is an outlandish example in context, but “troubled childhood” is in more court documents than there are days in the year to discuss them. Do you understand this distinction now?

 

[MikaDubbz]

You seem to misunderstand the distinction - responsibility and liability are not one and the same. Let me give you an example - let’s say that you’re in a self-defense situation. Someone attacks you and, in order to protect your own life, you kill the attacker. To make it simpler, let’s say that you do so intentionally - you didn’t push them back, they fell over and hit their head, you straight up killed them. You are responsible for their death - your deliberate action led to their untimely demise. You are, however, not liable for it as the circumstances of the altercation alleviate your legal culpability - you were defending yourself, and had they not attacked you in the first place, your hand wouldn’t be forced. You’re not a murderer, and you get to walk free. Now, you might think this is an outlandish example in context, but “troubled childhood” is in more court documents than there are days in the year to discuss them. Do you understand this distinction now?

Look man, I'm just never going to be on the side of, 'let the government parent for me, and my kid will turn out fine.' Fuck the government when it comes to how your kid turns out. Be a great parent, and you shouldn't have to worry about what your child becomes. It truly is that simple.

 

[TraderPatTX]

Depending on your personal values and what you want to shield your kids from in life, yeah if you want to be a good parent, you probably shouldn't let them go see sexual shows of any sort. Again though, this really shouldn't be something we need the law to do in order to parent for us, we should take some responsibility ourselves, take a part in our kids lives, and make sure they are bearing witness to things in life that we think is appropriate for them or not.

Well, apparently we do need a law for it just like we need laws against murder and rape.

Here's another way to look at it, I don't think a child should ever have to bear witness to someone being attacked or killed, but I don't think we need additional laws to say it's illegal for a child to be in a dangerous neighborhood lol. Just be a good parent and make sure your kid never gets to that dangerous neighborhood to begin with.

Laws are not written to prevent crimes, they are written to hold people accountable for crimes. This is not hard to understand for normal people.

 

[Cylent1]

GOOD!
Children should not given any kind of hormonal treatmant and should NOT be witnessing any Drag shows BECAUSE THEY ARE CHILDREN YOU SICK FUCKS!!!!

If you wanna be gay, then great. But do not push this illness on helpless children. And I did say Illness because thats what it is. No Sugarcoating it!!!