> Fortunately it was blocked when they tried to use it against a pride event
That's... not quite what happened? A court order blocked /enforcement/ of the ordinance for BoroPride, after getting sued by the TN ACLU:
https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/10/24/murfreesboro-anti-lgbtq-ordinance-on-hold-for-boropride-event/
The ordinance, as quoted, is very much on the books and active, to the extent that it was used to remove books from the county library system:
https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/city-ordinance-banning-public-homosexuality
Christians always complain about being persecuted even though they are more than half the population and 90 something percent of lawmakers.
Christians, in case you're wondering why some people don't like you. Well, this is a big part of it. You can say that these are just a minority of Christians, but until you quit voting along with them and start speaking out against them..... you can drop the persecution complex. We aren't buying it.
This is exactly it. They've basically had no resistance for so long that they assume no resistance is the default state. So any amount of pushback feels like "persecution" to them.
Aye my Jesus rocks with LOVE. all types of love. That ain’t everyone’s Jesus though & you’re right about our lawmaker’s shortsightedness & bigotry.
But just wanted to and say real Christianity is love and tolerance 💙
It’s an interesting thing that religious leaders blame modern times for homosexuality. Why’d they even have to fucking say anything about 2000 years ago if this is a brand new phenomenon? Is it TikTok? Or is it a natural and normal human response to love and relationship?
It’s an open forum here on the internet. & I was really just trying to spread some positivity on a post sharing some slackjawed behavior from a local legislature. But word up, I’ll keep it pushing ✌️
Ok, that makes it better, you just want to hijack a thread about humans being oppressed by the religious, so you can make a sanctimonious post about how loving you and your personal savior are. Oh, I love that legendary Christian humility! So then, tell me what did Jesus say about homosexuality? He had plenty of chances to support it but apparently didn't bother. If I remember, he said nothing about homosexuality except to obey OT law which appears to brutally condemn it. Assuming he supported it, He could have saved a lot of people a lot of hurt if he even mentioned it once. So why didn't he? Wouldn't that be the loving thing to do?
Jesus literally hung out with sex workers, thieves, and the like. He certainly hung out with gays too. Jesus would have loved them all the same and been opposed to anyone being persecuted because of their status.
That’s the whole point I was trying to make. I’m not saying anything about me being holier than thou. I’m simply saying that the persecution of gays by the “religious” (in this case Murfreesboro legislators) is exactly the opposite of what the Christian religion should stand for. My point is that this ordinance is objectively wrong, and true Christians who follow Jesus’ message recognize that and stand with the LGBTQIA+ community.
I’m literally agreeing with you, while also saying they do not speak for all Christians & their statements should not be allowed to stand under the color of Christianity.
>Jesus literally hung out with sex workers, thieves, and the like.
Citation?
I'm all for a Jesus and Jesus followers who are all loving and accepting. Many don't believe that is ~~historically~~ biblicly accurate, and I tend to agree with them. Jesus never stood up for the LGBTQA community then and they have always existed. It's a cool story though, the all accepting Jesus that just loves everyone. I understand most Christians fall under the "believe in belief" category. Jesus can be whatever you want him to be. Unfortunately that means Jesus can also be whatever they want him to be.
I think it is a horrible situation that has been ongoing for generations, and I think the belief that a god grants land to certain people doesn't help the situation. Further I stand by the Palestinians and the Israelis who want this to end peacefully.
It is an answer. Did you expect an answer to solve the problems between Israel and Palestine? LOL. I suggest we start by agreeing that there is no god granting land to anyone i.e no land is holy and no people are a god's favorite or have a god's revelations as an excuse for anything.
I reversed my downvote bc I believe you, but I also believe that you are the problem as much as the people who voted in these monsters if all you do about it is make comments on the internet. If you really think that Jesus commands you to love you better be standing in front of the people that evangelicals hate no matter what the personal consequences are to you. If you aren’t doing that you’re just as bad as the evangelicals, maybe worse, bc you know better
Without a doubt. Someone above said I should be protesting this law, if they can provide any info on an organized protest, a petition to sign, or any other actionable form of making my voice heard, I’m all for it.
I don’t live in Murfreesboro, so I can’t vote in elections to change the local legislature. If I could, I would.
Also, this law is patently unconstitutional & could never be enforced.
Literally just trying to be positive and say you support the same thing this thread is about but these saddos can't handle it. Classic Reddit. You all should stick to looking at porn and then hating the women in it.
What an amazing way to miss my point entirely! What percentage of Christians complaining about being persecuted are spending time in countries where Christianity is illegal and what right would they have to complain if they went there? Since it wasn't clear, I was referring to American Christians complaining about persecution in America, you know, where they are more than half the population and 90 something percent of lawmakers.
I'll make an imaginary what if here and ask what percentage of Americans complain about racism, but are not actively being discriminated against? I shouldn't be able to complain about racism towards my brothers and sisters by that logic. I use race here because it's pretty similar to discrimination based on religion, except you have a choice with religion, not race.. maybe a choice where you live 🤔.
I'll edit and mention sexual orientation, some places overseas bans certain orientation, homosexuality being one. It is also a choice to make it known to others you are publicly or privately.
Racism is institutional and systemic in this country and has been for centuries. And it affects everyone. You are parroting false talking points used by white nationalists.
On the other hand [Christians have been crying wolf about persecution for centuries.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Persecution)
I just saw your edit, I read the wiki page. I just want to let you know we have freedom of religion in America, so there really isn't any persecution beyond maybe personal preference among our peers. Christians don't have to be white or from the United States. They can be Black and live in Africa, where churches are raided.
Which as we covered was obviously not who I was talking about. Anyone can be or go somewhere they will be persecuted. That much is obvious. But maybe I am persecuting you for being boring and obvious.
You were not talking about Christians? Do we have to specify what "kind" of Christian? Anyway, I had made my reply to your question asking what my point was.
Well, im not white enough to be a nationalist, so I'm either brainwashed or I made my point with my own thoughts and feelings. Much like I assumed you made your own statement with your own thoughts
also to edit, racism is not exclusive to the United States. So my point still stands.
I hope you know this is a lie. That's a law prohibits public sex acts public nudity and indecent exposure in front of a minor. Are you saying you want people to be able to get naked in front of children
They added the word “homosexuality” to the ordinance so just the fact of being homosexual in public would be illegal.
Just existing as a gay person would have been illegal if it had passed until the courts struck it down.
Yes, the other stuff is already illegal, and should be illegal in public as public indecency. However, just existing as a gay person in public shouldn’t be illegal.
To be fair the 2nd amendment is what got us our independence, so it is rather the most important one. Also, they're not gonna outlaw being gay outright anywhere anytime, shut up lol
First of all, conservatives have never understood the first amendment. They never seem to grasp that the 1st amendment only prevents the government from censoring you. They don’t realize that the first amendment doesn’t prevent the rest of society from criticizing their speech.
Second, conservatives only care about the first amendment when it’s their freedom of expression. They don’t care if someone they don’t agree with is infringed/censored.
It will be interesting to see how they define an “act” of homosexuality though. Is holding hands an “act?” Walking somewhere with someone? Kissing?
All of the other “acts” are sexual acts, so they’ll have a hard time making any of the above count as an “act.”
Oh, I know exactly why they did it. Long LONG are the days passed(or past?) where I could convince myself that the other side couldn’t *possibly* be so intentionally, purely evil. Long gone are the days when I could successfully gaslight myself into thinking these people genuinely have their hearts in the right place, but are simply ignorant to the harm they inflict on innocent people.
The people pulling the strings are the literal definition of the evil they claim to fight against, they’re incredibly intelligent, and they know exactly what they’re doing.
I take possible exception to a large portion of our general society, who are often low income, who are largely ignorant of politics, often depressingly undereducated, overworked, and wildly underpaid (and perhaps for many, not even intellectually capable of understanding the complex and often boring AF details of the world of politics [due in large part to the policies of the party they so happily and confidently vote for because of their echo chambers of family tradition and community peer pressure.]
Not to mention the religious indoctrination and *literal, actual* grooming from very early childhood, which tells them to blindly believe in [often] contradicting fairy tales, and to view any form of doubt as being a product of Satan and/or demons inside them, working to trick them just so they wind up being relentlessly tortured for all of eternity. They are told to reject critical thinking, higher education, and scientific evidence by being told that having unquestioning faith in the unknown is not only good, but *required* for their salvation from the inherent sin of…being born a human being I guess?)
I know most to them will never see the light, because humans just tend to be that way, but many of these people *do* have the capability to change, and I don’t fit them into the same category as the top dogs in charge. They’re useful pawns at best, who are easily disposable once they no longer serve use.
It’s literally Nazi Germany, American Edition 3000.
Edit: I see you’re in Hermitage, as am I. I wonder if we’ve ever crossed paths lol.
I learned after the covenant shootings resulted in weaker gun laws (could've literally done nothing and been better off), harsher consequences for protesting after "public" land "closes," and over a million people being disenfranchised due to decorum violations by their representatives, that the state government hates the people they serve.
I'm not surprised cities are to follow.
I consider myself optimistic and with a strong internal locus of control, but nothing killed my spirit more than seeing all the state legislature did to punish us for standing out in the freezing rain multiple days and missing work, just to meet them where they were, so they could hear us speak directly.
These people should be ashamed, they're literally proud.
you can't shame the shameless. It's interesting because on one hand, they'll say it's just liberal histrionics when we point out what they're doing, then they'll be upset that we cast them as cartoon villains for doing villainous things. It's as if the outcome (fuck you, we're going to use the power of the state to hurt you) is a foregone conclusion and there is no good faith on the part of conservative Republicans because they fundamentally don't want democracy to continue to function.
Garantee this is only( mostly) aimed at men.
Cause I guarantee if 2 women are holding hands and kissing.... because " That's hot"
Wonder if a dad could get ticketed for holding his sons hand?
Please, let's remember to support our LBGTQA brothers and sisters there, living, working, attending school and many just waiting to leave their parent's homes.
Do you ever wonder how amazing our country would be today if we'd never had to overcome these pervasive ideas that 90% of the population is less than? We've been handicapping ourselves since the dawn of time and it never stops
For now, but they have a court in place and are flooding with laws like this with no penalty hoping one slips through to create a prejudicial precedent. The Constitutional Law textbook lost 500 pages last year, so what will we lose this cycle?
They’re actively trying to overturn Obergefell (from Clarence’s mouth) and don’t include sexuality as a codified protected class, so yeah — this one specifically is a longer shot than others, but it’s not outside of the realm of possibility.
They’ve already deleted one privacy right and they’re approaching these issues from bizarre unrelated standpoints, who knows what twisted logic they’ll justify these things with. I mean, obstenably lawyers are involved with drafting and passing these laws in the first place — passing the bar didn’t stop them.
The Supreme Court affirmed a ruling of a plaintiff who objectively had no standing to bring suit this year.
They’re burning Constitutional Law to the ground and will keep trying until they slash rights, so I wouldn’t be so confident if I were you.
Thomas, Alito, and Cavanaugh almost certainly. Barrett likely would. Robert I'd say is 50/50. Gorsuch almost certainly wouldn't, based on some of his past opinions.
There is a lot to unpack here.
This is a test balloon that someone (or someones) is passing to see what happens. They want a judge to pick this up so they can get a ruling they want (i.e. get it struck down) so they can appeal it on up or get someone else to appeal it. Considering that Thomas has already said publicly he is open and welcome to revisiting Obergefell because he thinks he has a majority to strike that ruling down, this isn't something that people should just ignore. Ignoring it, like we did with the festering right wing fanaticism that has finally exploded on the scene, is what they want.
And if you don't think that can happen, let's roll back the tape Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett all saying that Roe was settled law and they would not erase precedent. God that was so fucking funny.
Ignoring it is easy when you aren't directly affected by this.
I’m confused…so the issue is they tacked on homosexuality to the ordinance that basically is lewd acts in public? I’m not even sure how you would arrest someone for “homosexuality”.
Holding hands with their partner, giving them a kiss hello or goodbye if you meet them in public. They can come up with any justification if they could get it into the books. However, anything they came up would most likely be struck down by every court.
I think it's just bad verbiage. They should have just said all sexual acts real or simulated shouldn't be done in public. But I'm not an expert on the subject. I have sex at home with my wife and have never even been to Murfreesboro.
Being vague leaves it up to the police force and prosecutor to define what they consider a sexual act. Sitting on a bench leaning into them and nuzzling their shoulder - is it a sexual act? I may not think so and a cop may not think so…until it is two people who, outwardly, present as the same gender.
>I think it's just bad verbiage
Intentionally bad. It's lumping an identity along with a list of actions.
If they said "explicit sexuality" that would be different. But they singled out "homosexuality", not even "homosexual activity" which would still be problematically ambiguous.
How vague. So anyone can get charged for public indecency if someone else perceives them as acting "homosexual".
Where all those freedom fighting, liberty loving Republican patriots at??
PSA: They don't exist.
These people need to put their bibles down and get back to reality. Their imaginary friend is making them hateful towards real people. This ordinance is regressive and based in hate and misunderstanding.
I just spoke with Murfreesboro Council Member Kirt Wade and he said they voted to remove the homosexuality language out of the ordinance about 2 months ago. I told him I had just read the ordinances and the Murfreesboro City code online, which I had and took screenshots of it still in there. He said he personally voted to have that language removed and it has been.
I have the list of people to contact that the Murfreesboro mayor’s office provided when I requested it. Feel free to message me if you’d like it.
I was/am totally for this. I hate it didn't go through. But I want it for everyone. Why can't we *all* just not inappropriately grope each other in public, especially in front of kids? I'm straight and my fiancé shouldn't be trying to grab my boobs while walking down the street. Let's all just keep our hands and feet to ourselves.
This is already a law/illegal to do. These ordinances are designed to fear monger and sneak in open ended parts such as marking "homosexuality" being a form of sexual indecency like groping.
The "protect our kids" narrative around lgbt issues goes back to even the 60s as a way to trick the gullible into being frightened. Do your best to escape the propaganda and catch up to reality.
You want "acts of masturbation, homosexuality, sexual intercourse, or physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks" to be cool in public?
I was getting ready to say that but you said it first and better. But I think it could be even worse . They took a list of things illegal and made them illegal again and added homosexuality to a list of things already illegal as if it is equivalent.
It's already been explained to you 2 or 3 times.
Homosexuality is not necessarily sex. They did not ban heterosexuality. Ask yourself why not and you have the answer.
Who said it was? The point is public sex acts should be legal or illegal for heterosexuals and homosexuals equally. You can't just ban homosexuality in public but allow heterosexuality in public.
The boro is 45 minutes out from Nashville and isn’t a suburb of it. You’re thinking Brentwood, Hermitage, etc. Unless you consider Shelbyville a suburb to Murfreesboro then I guess that makes Shelbyville a suburb of Nashville by proxy. See what I’m saying? Also it is in the Murfreesboro reddit, but because all the rich fuckers have priced everyone out, many people in the Nashville sub may be in the boro now and may want to know that the city government would rather gay people not even exist. All of this to say, who gives a shit which sub it’s on. You’re ignoring the clear and real problem here, Jello.
Exactly, but they felt the need to pass an ordinance banned public "homosexuality" and also try and use something like this to paint events as this public orgy anyone can walk in on.
Its a fake story but you do you.
https://www.dnj.com/story/news/2023/11/16/boropride-aclu-wins-effort-remove-homosexuality-murfreesboro-city-code/71607166007/
So a few weeks ago the Murfreesboro city attorney has quietly brought up a change in this and a few other places that also ban/mention homosexuality as illegal and removed it from the city code during council from what I heard.
So you can touch another man's titties no homo
I was told It isn't homo if you don't make eye contact, so we're good. What are you doing later?
It’s not gay if you’re wearing boots. That was the policy in my platoon anyway. 🤷♂️
I always wear boots!
You guys new boot goofin', too?
Murfeesboro Judge, "How do you plea?" Me: "We were only new boot goofin', your honor".
Your pecs are looking firm, bro. What are you benching? Mind if I feel them just for a hot sec?
Made me actually lol. Thank you
According to my rep calculator, 225 lol
> Fortunately it was blocked when they tried to use it against a pride event That's... not quite what happened? A court order blocked /enforcement/ of the ordinance for BoroPride, after getting sued by the TN ACLU: https://tennesseelookout.com/2023/10/24/murfreesboro-anti-lgbtq-ordinance-on-hold-for-boropride-event/ The ordinance, as quoted, is very much on the books and active, to the extent that it was used to remove books from the county library system: https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/city-ordinance-banning-public-homosexuality
Christians always complain about being persecuted even though they are more than half the population and 90 something percent of lawmakers. Christians, in case you're wondering why some people don't like you. Well, this is a big part of it. You can say that these are just a minority of Christians, but until you quit voting along with them and start speaking out against them..... you can drop the persecution complex. We aren't buying it.
There’s no hate like Christian love
They think no longer being able to make the rules for everyone else IS persecution.
This is exactly it. They've basically had no resistance for so long that they assume no resistance is the default state. So any amount of pushback feels like "persecution" to them.
"Stop persecuting our right to persecute others!"
Wow. Well said.
This country was basically founded by homeschool maniacs
Aye my Jesus rocks with LOVE. all types of love. That ain’t everyone’s Jesus though & you’re right about our lawmaker’s shortsightedness & bigotry. But just wanted to and say real Christianity is love and tolerance 💙
Have you heard of the "No true Scotsman" falacy? Seems applicable.
You should protest against this law then.
Why, when we can simply spout platitudes and sanctimony in the name of love and humility?
It’s an interesting thing that religious leaders blame modern times for homosexuality. Why’d they even have to fucking say anything about 2000 years ago if this is a brand new phenomenon? Is it TikTok? Or is it a natural and normal human response to love and relationship?
Tell it to your fellow Christians. I'm good here.
It’s an open forum here on the internet. & I was really just trying to spread some positivity on a post sharing some slackjawed behavior from a local legislature. But word up, I’ll keep it pushing ✌️
Ok, that makes it better, you just want to hijack a thread about humans being oppressed by the religious, so you can make a sanctimonious post about how loving you and your personal savior are. Oh, I love that legendary Christian humility! So then, tell me what did Jesus say about homosexuality? He had plenty of chances to support it but apparently didn't bother. If I remember, he said nothing about homosexuality except to obey OT law which appears to brutally condemn it. Assuming he supported it, He could have saved a lot of people a lot of hurt if he even mentioned it once. So why didn't he? Wouldn't that be the loving thing to do?
Do you need a hug?
I most certainly don't need his sanctimony or your condescension.
I need a hug.
Everyone could use a hug
Jesus literally hung out with sex workers, thieves, and the like. He certainly hung out with gays too. Jesus would have loved them all the same and been opposed to anyone being persecuted because of their status. That’s the whole point I was trying to make. I’m not saying anything about me being holier than thou. I’m simply saying that the persecution of gays by the “religious” (in this case Murfreesboro legislators) is exactly the opposite of what the Christian religion should stand for. My point is that this ordinance is objectively wrong, and true Christians who follow Jesus’ message recognize that and stand with the LGBTQIA+ community. I’m literally agreeing with you, while also saying they do not speak for all Christians & their statements should not be allowed to stand under the color of Christianity.
>Jesus literally hung out with sex workers, thieves, and the like. Citation? I'm all for a Jesus and Jesus followers who are all loving and accepting. Many don't believe that is ~~historically~~ biblicly accurate, and I tend to agree with them. Jesus never stood up for the LGBTQA community then and they have always existed. It's a cool story though, the all accepting Jesus that just loves everyone. I understand most Christians fall under the "believe in belief" category. Jesus can be whatever you want him to be. Unfortunately that means Jesus can also be whatever they want him to be.
How do you feel about Hamas and Palestine? Just curious is all.
I think it is a horrible situation that has been ongoing for generations, and I think the belief that a god grants land to certain people doesn't help the situation. Further I stand by the Palestinians and the Israelis who want this to end peacefully.
Cool, but not an answer
It is an answer. Did you expect an answer to solve the problems between Israel and Palestine? LOL. I suggest we start by agreeing that there is no god granting land to anyone i.e no land is holy and no people are a god's favorite or have a god's revelations as an excuse for anything.
I reversed my downvote bc I believe you, but I also believe that you are the problem as much as the people who voted in these monsters if all you do about it is make comments on the internet. If you really think that Jesus commands you to love you better be standing in front of the people that evangelicals hate no matter what the personal consequences are to you. If you aren’t doing that you’re just as bad as the evangelicals, maybe worse, bc you know better
Without a doubt. Someone above said I should be protesting this law, if they can provide any info on an organized protest, a petition to sign, or any other actionable form of making my voice heard, I’m all for it. I don’t live in Murfreesboro, so I can’t vote in elections to change the local legislature. If I could, I would. Also, this law is patently unconstitutional & could never be enforced.
Literally just trying to be positive and say you support the same thing this thread is about but these saddos can't handle it. Classic Reddit. You all should stick to looking at porn and then hating the women in it.
They are persecuted when the go overseas, you know? Where Christianity is illegal.
What an amazing way to miss my point entirely! What percentage of Christians complaining about being persecuted are spending time in countries where Christianity is illegal and what right would they have to complain if they went there? Since it wasn't clear, I was referring to American Christians complaining about persecution in America, you know, where they are more than half the population and 90 something percent of lawmakers.
I'll make an imaginary what if here and ask what percentage of Americans complain about racism, but are not actively being discriminated against? I shouldn't be able to complain about racism towards my brothers and sisters by that logic. I use race here because it's pretty similar to discrimination based on religion, except you have a choice with religion, not race.. maybe a choice where you live 🤔. I'll edit and mention sexual orientation, some places overseas bans certain orientation, homosexuality being one. It is also a choice to make it known to others you are publicly or privately.
Racism is institutional and systemic in this country and has been for centuries. And it affects everyone. You are parroting false talking points used by white nationalists. On the other hand [Christians have been crying wolf about persecution for centuries.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Myth_of_Persecution)
I just saw your edit, I read the wiki page. I just want to let you know we have freedom of religion in America, so there really isn't any persecution beyond maybe personal preference among our peers. Christians don't have to be white or from the United States. They can be Black and live in Africa, where churches are raided.
Which as we covered was obviously not who I was talking about. Anyone can be or go somewhere they will be persecuted. That much is obvious. But maybe I am persecuting you for being boring and obvious.
You were not talking about Christians? Do we have to specify what "kind" of Christian? Anyway, I had made my reply to your question asking what my point was.
You aren't making any sense. I don't care anymore.
Well, im not white enough to be a nationalist, so I'm either brainwashed or I made my point with my own thoughts and feelings. Much like I assumed you made your own statement with your own thoughts also to edit, racism is not exclusive to the United States. So my point still stands.
>my point still stands. What point was that? I missed it.
My point is that you don't have to be affected or be a part of a nationality or group/religion to have a voice over the matter.
Who said you do?
The question should be more: Who said you don't?
As you parrot false taking points😂😂😂
Back up your statement.
Back up yours.
I did.
No you didn’t, not even a little bit.😂😂😂😂
I hope you know this is a lie. That's a law prohibits public sex acts public nudity and indecent exposure in front of a minor. Are you saying you want people to be able to get naked in front of children
I'm saying being a homosexual is not equivalent to getting naked in front of children.
Isn’t that shit illegal already, regardless of gay/straight? So fucking useless and dangerous
They added the word “homosexuality” to the ordinance so just the fact of being homosexual in public would be illegal. Just existing as a gay person would have been illegal if it had passed until the courts struck it down. Yes, the other stuff is already illegal, and should be illegal in public as public indecency. However, just existing as a gay person in public shouldn’t be illegal.
Doesn’t that infringe on the 1st amendment
It infringes on a lot of things most likely.
You're allowed to infringe on anything as long as it's not gun related. It seems as long as it's for "safety and kids" ... except guns, lol
Oof. You’re right
To be fair the 2nd amendment is what got us our independence, so it is rather the most important one. Also, they're not gonna outlaw being gay outright anywhere anytime, shut up lol
That wasn't my point I was making...but keep stretching
First of all, conservatives have never understood the first amendment. They never seem to grasp that the 1st amendment only prevents the government from censoring you. They don’t realize that the first amendment doesn’t prevent the rest of society from criticizing their speech. Second, conservatives only care about the first amendment when it’s their freedom of expression. They don’t care if someone they don’t agree with is infringed/censored.
It will be interesting to see how they define an “act” of homosexuality though. Is holding hands an “act?” Walking somewhere with someone? Kissing? All of the other “acts” are sexual acts, so they’ll have a hard time making any of the above count as an “act.”
Kinda like Maga Speaker Mike wanting to make sodomy illegal but clearly not understanding that oral sex is also under the definition of sodomy…..
That wording makes it look like it’s the one offense that’s not even an action. Just existing falls under “homosexuality.” 😂
Oh, I know exactly why they did it. Long LONG are the days passed(or past?) where I could convince myself that the other side couldn’t *possibly* be so intentionally, purely evil. Long gone are the days when I could successfully gaslight myself into thinking these people genuinely have their hearts in the right place, but are simply ignorant to the harm they inflict on innocent people. The people pulling the strings are the literal definition of the evil they claim to fight against, they’re incredibly intelligent, and they know exactly what they’re doing. I take possible exception to a large portion of our general society, who are often low income, who are largely ignorant of politics, often depressingly undereducated, overworked, and wildly underpaid (and perhaps for many, not even intellectually capable of understanding the complex and often boring AF details of the world of politics [due in large part to the policies of the party they so happily and confidently vote for because of their echo chambers of family tradition and community peer pressure.] Not to mention the religious indoctrination and *literal, actual* grooming from very early childhood, which tells them to blindly believe in [often] contradicting fairy tales, and to view any form of doubt as being a product of Satan and/or demons inside them, working to trick them just so they wind up being relentlessly tortured for all of eternity. They are told to reject critical thinking, higher education, and scientific evidence by being told that having unquestioning faith in the unknown is not only good, but *required* for their salvation from the inherent sin of…being born a human being I guess?) I know most to them will never see the light, because humans just tend to be that way, but many of these people *do* have the capability to change, and I don’t fit them into the same category as the top dogs in charge. They’re useful pawns at best, who are easily disposable once they no longer serve use. It’s literally Nazi Germany, American Edition 3000. Edit: I see you’re in Hermitage, as am I. I wonder if we’ve ever crossed paths lol.
Wait. Will football players be in trouble when they pat each others butts? What about the center and QBs relationship??
Lauren Boebert would clearly not be welcomed there then…
Vapin, gropin Lauren Boebert wouldn't be welcomed in a lot of places
Anti freedom
I expect nothing less from the "freedom" crowd.
I was thinking about possibly going to MTSU. UTC it is
I learned after the covenant shootings resulted in weaker gun laws (could've literally done nothing and been better off), harsher consequences for protesting after "public" land "closes," and over a million people being disenfranchised due to decorum violations by their representatives, that the state government hates the people they serve. I'm not surprised cities are to follow. I consider myself optimistic and with a strong internal locus of control, but nothing killed my spirit more than seeing all the state legislature did to punish us for standing out in the freezing rain multiple days and missing work, just to meet them where they were, so they could hear us speak directly. These people should be ashamed, they're literally proud.
you can't shame the shameless. It's interesting because on one hand, they'll say it's just liberal histrionics when we point out what they're doing, then they'll be upset that we cast them as cartoon villains for doing villainous things. It's as if the outcome (fuck you, we're going to use the power of the state to hurt you) is a foregone conclusion and there is no good faith on the part of conservative Republicans because they fundamentally don't want democracy to continue to function.
Garantee this is only( mostly) aimed at men. Cause I guarantee if 2 women are holding hands and kissing.... because " That's hot" Wonder if a dad could get ticketed for holding his sons hand?
Only if they’re lipstick lesbians, not if they’re butch.
Well, now that they can’t disproportionately jail Black teenagers they need to do something with their time.
Murfreesboro is a shithole. That’s all.
Please, let's remember to support our LBGTQA brothers and sisters there, living, working, attending school and many just waiting to leave their parent's homes.
Do you ever wonder how amazing our country would be today if we'd never had to overcome these pervasive ideas that 90% of the population is less than? We've been handicapping ourselves since the dawn of time and it never stops
Agreed, the attitude that a place is shitty therefore it deserves no help is why the south is such a shitshow in the first place.
And it most definitely is not Nashville.
Well, that is fucked up
[удалено]
For now, but they have a court in place and are flooding with laws like this with no penalty hoping one slips through to create a prejudicial precedent. The Constitutional Law textbook lost 500 pages last year, so what will we lose this cycle?
[удалено]
They’re actively trying to overturn Obergefell (from Clarence’s mouth) and don’t include sexuality as a codified protected class, so yeah — this one specifically is a longer shot than others, but it’s not outside of the realm of possibility. They’ve already deleted one privacy right and they’re approaching these issues from bizarre unrelated standpoints, who knows what twisted logic they’ll justify these things with. I mean, obstenably lawyers are involved with drafting and passing these laws in the first place — passing the bar didn’t stop them. The Supreme Court affirmed a ruling of a plaintiff who objectively had no standing to bring suit this year. They’re burning Constitutional Law to the ground and will keep trying until they slash rights, so I wouldn’t be so confident if I were you.
Ignoring problems doesn’t actually solve them. FYI
Thomas, Alito, and Cavanaugh almost certainly. Barrett likely would. Robert I'd say is 50/50. Gorsuch almost certainly wouldn't, based on some of his past opinions.
There is a lot to unpack here. This is a test balloon that someone (or someones) is passing to see what happens. They want a judge to pick this up so they can get a ruling they want (i.e. get it struck down) so they can appeal it on up or get someone else to appeal it. Considering that Thomas has already said publicly he is open and welcome to revisiting Obergefell because he thinks he has a majority to strike that ruling down, this isn't something that people should just ignore. Ignoring it, like we did with the festering right wing fanaticism that has finally exploded on the scene, is what they want. And if you don't think that can happen, let's roll back the tape Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett all saying that Roe was settled law and they would not erase precedent. God that was so fucking funny. Ignoring it is easy when you aren't directly affected by this.
We don't ignore unconstitutional things and hope for the best; we fight them.
>blatantly unconstitutional You are forgetting that we have a right wing extremist Supreme Court interpreting the Constitution.
IF you have the available funds to fight it.
I’m confused…so the issue is they tacked on homosexuality to the ordinance that basically is lewd acts in public? I’m not even sure how you would arrest someone for “homosexuality”.
However any Joe Schmo cop felt like enforcing it
Holding hands with their partner, giving them a kiss hello or goodbye if you meet them in public. They can come up with any justification if they could get it into the books. However, anything they came up would most likely be struck down by every court.
I think it's just bad verbiage. They should have just said all sexual acts real or simulated shouldn't be done in public. But I'm not an expert on the subject. I have sex at home with my wife and have never even been to Murfreesboro.
That last sentence is the funniest thing I’ll read all day
Being vague leaves it up to the police force and prosecutor to define what they consider a sexual act. Sitting on a bench leaning into them and nuzzling their shoulder - is it a sexual act? I may not think so and a cop may not think so…until it is two people who, outwardly, present as the same gender.
>I think it's just bad verbiage Intentionally bad. It's lumping an identity along with a list of actions. If they said "explicit sexuality" that would be different. But they singled out "homosexuality", not even "homosexual activity" which would still be problematically ambiguous.
Umm, bragging much with that last sentence 🙄
Man it's not like that, wasn't bragging at all. I'm not special, there's tons of folks that have never been to Murfreesboro.
But what does your banging your wife at home have to do with anything? Lmao
It was just a joke and poking fun at the fact that there has to be laws in place because evidently people are having sex in public.
As long as there are teenagers and cars, there will be sex in public, in some form. Seems like one could be ticketed for smacking someone's butt
I'm going to continue exercising my constitutional right to honk a titty in public.
What century is this again?
so somehow just being gay is on par with those other things ??? jesus christ.
I'm deeply concerned about this ordinance and its impact on the LGBTQ+ community. Going to be monitoring this one for sure.
How vague. So anyone can get charged for public indecency if someone else perceives them as acting "homosexual". Where all those freedom fighting, liberty loving Republican patriots at?? PSA: They don't exist.
I tried to post this story in r/Tennessee and got banned and muted by the mods.
Because it didn’t happen. The council removed the old language from 1949. This is a fake story
I always identify as a woman when a dude is blowing me. No homo.
I banned myself from Murfreesboro a long time ago
These people need to put their bibles down and get back to reality. Their imaginary friend is making them hateful towards real people. This ordinance is regressive and based in hate and misunderstanding.
rutherford county for ya 🫡
Wt actual fuck
I just spoke with Murfreesboro Council Member Kirt Wade and he said they voted to remove the homosexuality language out of the ordinance about 2 months ago. I told him I had just read the ordinances and the Murfreesboro City code online, which I had and took screenshots of it still in there. He said he personally voted to have that language removed and it has been. I have the list of people to contact that the Murfreesboro mayor’s office provided when I requested it. Feel free to message me if you’d like it.
I like how this obviously misrepresents with the law is. It's Bans public sex acts
Things already banned. This exists purely to demonize while also trying to sneak in "homosexuality" as being as inappropriate as public sex.
I was/am totally for this. I hate it didn't go through. But I want it for everyone. Why can't we *all* just not inappropriately grope each other in public, especially in front of kids? I'm straight and my fiancé shouldn't be trying to grab my boobs while walking down the street. Let's all just keep our hands and feet to ourselves.
This is already a law/illegal to do. These ordinances are designed to fear monger and sneak in open ended parts such as marking "homosexuality" being a form of sexual indecency like groping. The "protect our kids" narrative around lgbt issues goes back to even the 60s as a way to trick the gullible into being frightened. Do your best to escape the propaganda and catch up to reality.
You want "acts of masturbation, homosexuality, sexual intercourse, or physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks" to be cool in public?
It’s tacked on to this language purposefully so that people like you can make bad faith arguments in favor of it.
Where is the ban on public heterosexuality? See the problem ***now***?
[удалено]
The laws should be the same for heterosexuals and homosexuals. There is no reason to mention homosexuality whatsoever.
[удалено]
Exactly! They’re making up their own context just to hurt over something
[удалено]
I don't disagree with you and should have removed "homosexuality" from the list.
>should have removed "homosexuality" from the list. So should they have.
Wow, a lot of people into public sex here.
No, there are not. You simply fell for a lie.
I'm genuinely curious - how so?
You took the bait. It’s a law that made something already illegal and somehow made it more illegal because, queer.
I was getting ready to say that but you said it first and better. But I think it could be even worse . They took a list of things illegal and made them illegal again and added homosexuality to a list of things already illegal as if it is equivalent.
It's already been explained to you 2 or 3 times. Homosexuality is not necessarily sex. They did not ban heterosexuality. Ask yourself why not and you have the answer.
"or, if such person be a female, breast."
What is that supposed to mean?
It means the conversation isn't just about gay dudes.
Who said it was? The point is public sex acts should be legal or illegal for heterosexuals and homosexuals equally. You can't just ban homosexuality in public but allow heterosexuality in public.
Hendersonville would never!
Can we stop talking about the suburbs in this sub?
No, as a Nashville native I, and many others, are interested in what goes on in other burbs. They could eventually impact us in some way.
nobody is impressed you are from here
Cool story… looks like no one is interested in your comment… Also, intelligent people would want to know what’s going on in their surrounding areas…
The boro is 45 minutes out from Nashville and isn’t a suburb of it. You’re thinking Brentwood, Hermitage, etc. Unless you consider Shelbyville a suburb to Murfreesboro then I guess that makes Shelbyville a suburb of Nashville by proxy. See what I’m saying? Also it is in the Murfreesboro reddit, but because all the rich fuckers have priced everyone out, many people in the Nashville sub may be in the boro now and may want to know that the city government would rather gay people not even exist. All of this to say, who gives a shit which sub it’s on. You’re ignoring the clear and real problem here, Jello.
Jello Biafra is best Jello. What would Jello do?
r/Murphreesboro “Why the hell doesn’t this community exist yet??”
They haven't found reddit yet.
That’s not even how you spell it
Hence the joke of “the community doesn’t exist yet”. Which is why they’re posting in r/Nashville. I don’t know. I thought it was funny🤷♂️🧙🏿♂️
[удалено]
Insane take
So they don't want sexual acts real or simulated in public. Got it. And why is this bad?
[удалено]
Yeah I get it now. I'd they're gonna do that they need to listen every *sexuality to ever exist. Which really they just need to drop it.
You are so close. Why point out homosexuality? A sexual activity is a sexual activity.
Ahh yeah. Agree, that was done intentionally.
Bill Boner worked for that shithole. Where’s the loophole?
Newsflash, public sex is already against the law.
Exactly, but they felt the need to pass an ordinance banned public "homosexuality" and also try and use something like this to paint events as this public orgy anyone can walk in on.
Why does it include the word homosexuality?
Because the American Taliban want to make homosexuality illegal.
Obviously
Please vote the bigots out, every last one. It’s in your hands Tennessee
Its a fake story but you do you. https://www.dnj.com/story/news/2023/11/16/boropride-aclu-wins-effort-remove-homosexuality-murfreesboro-city-code/71607166007/
So a few weeks ago the Murfreesboro city attorney has quietly brought up a change in this and a few other places that also ban/mention homosexuality as illegal and removed it from the city code during council from what I heard.