politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Cross dressing is now illegal in Ohio. In a bill that is vaguely worded and will be enforced very subjectively because nature didn't clarify what clothes are masculine and feminine
Things are bad; I'm not going to argue that things aren't bad. I'm not a lawyer, I eat crayons.
That Ohio bill hasn't been passed yet. I don't know how likely it is to pass. Too likely, I guess.
It also doesn't dictate a blanket ban on cross-dressing. What it does do is put "performers or entertainers who exhibit a gender identity that is different from the performer's or entertainer's biological sex" into the category of adult entertainments like stripping, meaning it's restricted in the same ways. No kids allowed. That's lines 153 to 165 here.
That's very big, it's very bad, it's very stupid, it's mean, it's anti-freedom. Un-American, I'd say. It would seem to create problems with Bugs Bunny, Harpo Marx, Monty Python, etc. But the most obvious thing it's targeting is "Drag Queen Story Hour."
But it isn't a ban on cross-dressing in general. Yet.
Edit: If you live in Ohio, you can find and contact your state Senator regarding House Bill 249, the "Indecent Exposure Modernization Act," through this page.
What color crayon is your favorite?
The red ones taste like my favorite glue.
the green ones slide further up my nose.
How are they defining performer or entertainer?
I don't see a definition in the bill. I don't know if there's a standard legal definition for that or not.
Even a good-faith interpretation of "performer" could leave some gray areas, I'd think. A song-and-dance number for an audience gathered for the purpose is a performance with a performer, sure. What about an appearance on a talk show, an interview, a forum discussion, a podcast?
Unfortunately, "performance" is a bit of jargon for a specific, unrelated concept in contract law.
The reservations your question suggests are very reasonable. I don't intend to dampen anyone's alarm at this absurd effort to implement legal, systemic bullying over nothing. I just so happened to be reading about the Ohio bill shortly before I came across FreshParsnip's comment.
Walking in public
I'd be fine with it as long as they include the church.
A small sacrifice for the greater good.
Unconstitutional in truth. Freedom of speech and expression.
so....who can wear socks?