Is not American Freedom Great

Mo. Law Banning Lap Dances Unconstitutional

.KANSAS CITY, Mo. - A new state law banning seminude lap dances at Missouri strip clubs was declared unconstitutional by a judge Friday, two days before it was to go into effect.
Cole County Circuit Judge Richard Callahan said provisions of the law violate First Amendment protections and state constitutional limits on amending a bill beyond its original purpose.

“The state may not limit persons of majority age from engaging in lawful expressive conduct protected by the 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution without a substantial and direct connection to adverse secondary effects, a showing that has not been made,” Callahan said in the declaratory judgment.

Under the law, signed in July by Gov. Matt Blunt, seminude lap dances would have been banned and dancers would have had to stay at least 10 feet from each other. Customers would have faced misdemeanor charges for tucking money into a dancers’ G-strings, and the minimum age for dancers and customers would have risen from 19 to 21.

The adult entertainment industry’s attorneys had argued the law violated free-speech and expression rights, and they also said it violated a state constitutional requirement that bills relate to one subject and remain tied to their original purpose.

The bill that included the strip club restrictions initially was labeled as a bill for alcohol-related traffic offenses but was passed under the heading of “crime.”

The attorney general’s office said it was reviewing the judge’s decision and didn’t yet know what actions it might take.

Joe Spinello, general manager of the Shady Lady Lounge in Kansas City, said the restrictions probably would have forced him to cut staff. He said clubs hurt most by law would be ones that rely on customers and employees who are under 21.

news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050827/ap_on_re_us/strip_clubs_restrictions

As we sit and wait for the law to impose morality from above – that is, as we sit and wait for the cat to bark like a dog – perhaps the problem is that we Catholics are not ourselves a holy people, and that we do not, as a consequence, set a good example.

Not when it is defending lap dances. How ridiculous.

Well, yes, American freedom **is **great…
But this is the pits. This is not about freedom; this is about license. When people finally get the difference between these two sorted out, we will be truly free.

Is THIS the freedom we want to bring to the Middle East?

Shouldn’t OUR COUNTRY get a clue about what freedom really is before we try exporting our horribly distorted and juvenile version?

I was being Sarcastic. But this is what the American Freedom amounts to in reality as interpreted by U.S Supreme Court. That Lower Court is just following U.S Supreme Court precedant on this.I read the 1960 or 70s Case in College that ruled that this type of entertainment was “free speech”.

[quote=kelso]Is THIS the freedom we want to bring to the Middle East?

Shouldn’t OUR COUNTRY get a clue about what freedom really is before we try exporting our horribly distorted and juvenile version?
[/quote]

Speaking of horribly distorted and juvenile … :rolleyes:

Someday, God willing, the judges will stop trying to determine policy and let the ELECTED officials determine the laws. I hope Roberts is a step in that direction. As it is, we are ruled by the unelected judiciary.

With free will comes responsibility.

The answer is not Saddam’s Fascism, the answer is the Good News of Jesus Christ.

[quote=gilliam]With free will comes responsibility.
[/quote]

Unfortunately, the mantra of the Moral Relativists is that Free Will is als Freedom from Responsibility and Freedom from Consequences.

PF

[quote=WanderAimlessly]Unfortunately, the mantra of the Moral Relativists is that Free Will is als Freedom from Responsibility and Freedom from Consequences.

PF
[/quote]

I thought it was: with free will comes someone elses responsibility to make me feel good?

[quote=gilliam]I thought it was: with free will comes someone elses responsibility to make me feel good?
[/quote]

Sounds good. http://www.gifs.net/animate/bartskateboard.gif

I’m sorry to say it, but I think the judges were exactly right.

Previous case law has considered “adult” activities protected as free speech. The court was bound to that precedent. They can’t break it just because the activities are immoral.

Furthermore, the American government was not instituted as a theocracy. Its purpose was never to try to keep people from personal sin. That is the church’s job, not our government’s. Our government’s purpose is to protect ALL freedoms, whatever they may be, so long as they do not interfere with the rights of others. Abortion is wrong, because it interferes with a child’s right to life. Same-sex marriage is wrong, among other reasons, because it detracts my own right to have a sacred institution of love. But two people engaging in this activity at a private business… that doesn’t affect anyone in any way other then themselves. As much as I wish that such things COULD be banned, that is not the role of the U.S. government as it was instituted, and as such, the government should be making no rules to limit it, no matter how wrong it is.

Josh

[quote=kelso]Is THIS the freedom we want to bring to the Middle East?

Shouldn’t OUR COUNTRY get a clue about what freedom really is before we try exporting our horribly distorted and juvenile version?
[/quote]

Absolutely. I love the formulation of St Augustine. A man has as many masters as he has vices. A good man, though a slave, is free; a wicked man, though a king, is a slave.

The WASP ruling establishment, the group which still rules this country through such instruments of the US Supreme Court and the federal courts, long ago abandoned Christianity and adopted sexual degeneracy. This is but one manifestation of that. Real freedom is freedom from vice.

As much as I disagree with the activity the judges were ruling on, I have to say I believe they probably ruled correctly. That same free speech law gives me the right to pray the Rosary in front of that strip club in hope that God will convert the hearts of the men and women who have such sad views of their own sexuality.

[quote=threej_lc]I’m sorry to say it, but I think the judges were exactly right.

Previous case law has considered “adult” activities protected as free speech. The court was bound to that precedent. They can’t break it just because the activities are immoral.

Furthermore, the American government was not instituted as a theocracy. Its purpose was never to try to keep people from personal sin. That is the church’s job, not our government’s. Our government’s purpose is to protect ALL freedoms, whatever they may be, so long as they do not interfere with the rights of others. Abortion is wrong, because it interferes with a child’s right to life. Same-sex marriage is wrong, among other reasons, because it detracts my own right to have a sacred institution of love. But two people engaging in this activity at a private business… that doesn’t affect anyone in any way other then themselves. As much as I wish that such things COULD be banned, that is not the role of the U.S. government as it was instituted, and as such, the government should be making no rules to limit it, no matter how wrong it is.

Josh
[/quote]

What about a right of a local community to set rules for it’s moral standards. Children can probably understand whats going on there given a bit of time. I know that’d be crazy for the Supreme Court to believe that’d be a good idea, so I’ll go sit back down.

[quote=threej_lc]. But two people engaging in this activity at a private business… that doesn’t affect anyone in any way other then themselves.
Josh
[/quote]

So whatever is done between two consenting adults in private is Okay then? Seems like I have heard this argument before.

[quote=StCsDavid]As much as I disagree with the activity the judges were ruling on, I have to say I believe they probably ruled correctly. That same free speech law gives me the right to pray the Rosary in front of that strip club in hope that God will convert the hearts of the men and women who have such sad views of their own sexuality.
[/quote]

There is a differance that one would probably be considared political speech, while the other is not. If on the other hand people wanted to protest to have a strip bar, then they can do so. I don’t think the Supreme Court would see it that way though.

[quote=gilliam]With free will comes responsibility.

The answer is not Saddam’s Fascism, the answer is the Good News of Jesus Christ.
[/quote]

So the Iraq War is spreading the Good News of Jesus Christ?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.