Republican AGs Declare LGBTQ+ Merchandise May Be Obscene

[Ivy]

https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/republican-ags-declare-lgbtq-merchandise?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

 

Apparently these people are not going to let up.  Looks like it's mostly threats at this point but…

 

" Inspired by those threats, these Republican attorneys general now have issued stern warnings of potential legal repercussions to the store."

 

"Earlier this year, several states either proposed or enacted legislation classifying LGBTQ+ content as obscene…  Moreover, a number of states approved laws categorizing drag — defined by these laws as dressing and performing in a gender different from one’s assigned birth gender — as obscene."

 

It's not the content, it's the entire subject.  

To paraphrase…  They keep using that word, I don't think they know what it. means.

[VickySGV]

It is a formula and conjuring word of magik to them for political traction.  Now if they would have the same gut reaction to actual child abuse situations life would be better.  -- I am specifically referring to some adults screaming some terrible insults at their children over performance during a Little League Baseball Game which took place at the field at the end of my block the many times, and where I have taken car license plate numbers and made child welfare calls to my police department since I feared for the child's safety. 

[Davie]

What these Republican attorneys general say is a form of Hate Speech—and THAT is obscene.

[awkward-yet-sweet]

People can say what they like, but obscenity is a pretty narrow category in the law.  Given that "harmful to minors" is described beforehand by the term "prurient interest," they will have to twist the law like a pretzel to classify the entire LGBTQ+ subject as obscenity.  A certain amount of obscenity/vulgarity is considered Constitutionally protected free speech.   For example, the Supreme Court has upheld people's right to flip the bird at one another, and even to make the gesture at police. 

 

Eventually this will have to go to the Supreme Court....and that court is going to be VERY busy in the next couple of years with all of this going on.  I hope that in the end we can re-affirm free speech.  Let everybody say and show whatever they want, wherever they want, to whomever they want, at any time.  100% free.  Having any censorship at all ends up with debates and attempts at qualitative judgements of content that are inherently biased and inaccurate.  To me, the worst hate speech in the world is to tell somebody, "You can't say that." 

 

[Sally Stone]

10 minutes ago, awkward-yet-sweet said:

To me, the worst hate speech in the world is to tell somebody, "You can't say that."

I'm so glad you made this comment.  My biggest fear is the erosion of free speech rights.  And as much as it can hurt, I support anyone's right to say what they want, even when it comes from fear or ignorance.  I may not to like or agree with what someone says, but they are entitled to say what they will.  Of course, that doesn't mean I won't argue their alleged point, that is my own right to free speech, but to censor anyone is a dangerous course.

[Carolyn Marie]

The actual merchandise that was aimed at children and youth, the little there was, consisted of clothing & other items with rainbows or TG pride colors.  There is NO WAY any court is going to consider that "obscene."  What they are trying to do is intimidate Target and other retailers from ever having another pride day or recognizing LGBT or Trans Pride in any way.  It might work for some retailers, but not for most, IMO. 

 

De-legitimatizing the LGBT Community isn't going to work outside of the R base, which gets its rocks off by "owning the libs."  Some polls recently have shown support for the LGBT community and our rights to be declining some, but for Americans in general it is still above 50 percent.  I won't deny that the right's pounding of us has had some effect, but it won't last. 

 

Stay strong, my friends.  We aren't going anywhere, least of all back in the closet.

 

Carolyn Marie

[VickySGV]

Back 53 years ago in my days as a Court Clerk, Obscenity cases were rough as a dry corncob on the arresting officers and complaining witnesses. They did not prove a case just by saying they were offended, even if the law seemed to convey that notion.  Defense lawyers were quick to ask personal details of how the person actually had been affected  in detail by about what they saw or heard and quickly put their individual sex lives onto big screen in ways that truly would have been obscene if seen in any other public venue.   Asking a person if they sexually climaxed and did they show proof to an investigating police officer was fair game in those trials.  I wonder how that will pan out in this round.  The trials always took days and were costly for the prosecuting agency, especially when a not-guilty verdict came down.   Many complaining witnesses (victims???) chickened out when they found out what they were going to experience. 

[Ivy]

3 hours ago, Carolyn Marie said:

I won't deny that the right's pounding of us has had some effect, but it won't last. 

I hope this is true.

 

I'm for free speech myself.  I do have problems with threats though.  Isn't threatening someone a crime -- or am I just being a "snowflake?"  Is it free speech to dox someone?  I mean I suppose so.  How about "swatting?"   Disrupting a school board meeting?

The other thing is when discrimination is considered "free speech" -- I mean, yeah… kinda.

 

Is "free speech anything goes?