City legislating bedroom antics

[flores_in_texas]

Duncanville (in Dallas county) just passed an ordnance banning adults from having orgies:
City Passes Ordinance To Shut Down Swingers Club
The Duncanville City Council unanimously passed an ordinance that will put an end to the private swingers parties held in a residential area.

The ordinance calls for the Cherry Pit Club to shut down and makes it illegal for any private sex club to promote or advertise themselves.

The Cherry Pit promotes the club on its website. "I was appalled, when I visited the Web site, that this kind of thing has been allowed to fester in our community," said resident Linda Libby, a supporter of the ordinance.
---
The other part of the ordinance addresses the large crowds that the sex club attracts. The club is located on Cedar Ridge Drive in the Hills of Duncanville neighborhood.

"There's a lot of traffic, there's noise, there's lights. This is what we are trying to address here," said Councilwoman Johnette Jameson during Tuesday night's city council meeting. "We have to be good neighbors to each other." Councilwoman Jameson proposed the ordinance.LINK (http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_311003532.html)

Several years ago in Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme struck down the sodomy law that had criminalized homosexual sex in Texas.
The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to choose to enter upon relationships in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons. Pp. 3—6.
LINK (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html)

I'm not sure if that can be compared to this story, but the adults in Duncanville are engaging in consensual sex in a private residence. Many people wouldn't have know what was going on in the house if they didn't go to the website and check it out. They are not charging people to have sex with others, so prostitution is not involved. Not all of those who go to these parties are wife-swappers, many who are there are husbands and wives who are into voyeurism and liked to be watched.

Would you have voted to ban this behavior?

[NascarGirl2448]

Talk about the government sticking its big nose where it does NOT belong!! The government has no business legislating sex between CONSENTING ADULTS in a private residence, especially when they are not charging anyone anything to participate, or even "advertising" for that matter.

[Conservative Okie]

Talk about the government sticking its big nose where it does NOT belong!! The government has no business legislating sex between CONSENTING ADULTS in a private residence, especially when they are not charging anyone anything to participate, or even "advertising" for that matter.

agreed!

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

I can see both sides here. However...this is a business....and the 'owners' are not licensed to run a business...nor are they licensed to run a business out of the residential home. I don't know why the city council chose to put the words 'sex' in any of the ordinances they sited....as it doesn't have to do with what is being sold or the business is operating under...it has to do with traffic...with safety issues of the main public...like how would a emergency services get in there if there was an emergency or fire?

Not to mention that these people are advertising a business....yet are not in a business zoned neighborhood. They are in a private residential neighborhood. These people are not paying any taxes on their proceeds of the business...which is a biggie....and they have no insurance based on their business. (That is assuming they are receiving some type of at door fee....some type of proceeds in order to even call The Cherry Pit a business.)

I say these people should buy a large 20 acre parcel...run their 'business' there...with two acres of parking...and the rest of it for their freak show. Playboy mansion doesn't get complaints....but it has been done properly and out of respect for the surrounding residents.

I don't care what people do in their homes....but running any business out of a home should be a no no....even for this type of private club....to many hazards and to many ways to ruin the tranquility of a neighborhood when that many people are visiting on a weekly or nightly bases.

~Mysty

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

Talk about the government sticking its big nose where it does NOT belong!! The government has no business legislating sex between CONSENTING ADULTS in a private residence, especially when they are not charging anyone anything to participate, or even "advertising" for that matter.

But they ....these people...are advertising on their web page honey. In essence..that is advertising their 'wares' if you will for services. I don't know if they are charging a door fee...and would imagine that is the case...but I don't know that to be a fact.

I know I'd be fed up if 200 or more cars showed up even once a week at my next door neighbors....and I wouldn't care what they were doing...I would care about the noise, the traffic...and the possible emergency issues that arise from that many people in a residential neighborhood.

~Mysty

[Vaard]

this has nothing to do with Lawrence v. Texas........nothing in the ordinance makes it illegal for these people to have sex........


i have no issue at all with not allowing a business that attracts high volume of people to be run out of a home or residential community........


i DO have a problem with them saying they cant advertise........ i bet that would be struck down on appeal if challenged.........

[chip]

Talk about the government sticking its big nose where it does NOT belong!! The government has no business legislating sex between CONSENTING ADULTS in a private residence, especially when they are not charging anyone anything to participate, or even "advertising" for that matter.

They are advertising and they are charging people.

This is a zoning issue and cities have every right to protect residents of their cities against having to live next to an adult sex business.

[Vaard]

I don't care what people do in their homes....but running any business out of a home should be a no no....even for this type of private club....to many hazards and to many ways to ruin the tranquility of a neighborhood when that many people are visiting on a weekly or nightly bases.

~Mysty

i see no problem running a mail order business or a business where you go to other peolpes houses (cleaning service, consulting, pet sitting)........


but i do see a p[roblem with a business that attracts high volumne of people to a residential house or area..........

[doghouse]

I can't disagree with the poster about this being a business and inappropriate for that zoned neighborhood. Not because of the nature, but because of the traffic etc.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

i see no problem running a mail order business or a business where you go to other peolpes houses (cleaning service, consulting, pet sitting)........


but i do see a p[roblem with a business that attracts high volumne of people to a residential house or area..........

Right...exactly right...and I should have been more clear. Business that require high volume customer based service out of the residential home is what I'm against. Having an Ebay or cleaning business..or other home based business that requires the service be preformed out of the home...should be perfectly legal.

If I were a neighbor to this type of advertised business...had small kids or was just old and wanted my peace and quite in my own home...then yeah...I'd be spitting mad too! I can't believe that these people didn't think about the complaints that would naturally come from having two hundred or more cars on a private street...much less the noise aspect. One would think that they would have thought of this and done something about it. Poor planning in my opinion.

~Mysty

[chip]

i see no problem running a mail order business or a business where you go to other peolpes houses (cleaning service, consulting, pet sitting)........


but i do see a p[roblem with a business that attracts high volumne of people to a residential house or area..........

Cmon Vaard. Everyone wants 200 carloads of strangers in their neighborhood on a Fri or Sat nite.

This house also happens to sit right across the street from the Boyscouts Camp Wisdom.

[Apatriot]

Duncanville (in Dallas county) just passed an ordnance banning adults from having orgies:
LINK (http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_311003532.html)

Several years ago in Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme struck down the sodomy law that had criminalized homosexual sex in Texas.

LINK (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html)

I'm not sure if that can be compared to this story, but the adults in Duncanville are engaging in consensual sex in a private residence. Many people wouldn't have know what was going on in the house if they didn't go to the website and check it out. They are not charging people to have sex with others, so prostitution is not involved. Not all of those who go to these parties are wife-swappers, many who are there are husbands and wives who are into voyeurism and liked to be watched.

Would you have voted to ban this behavior?

Yep, money is involved, making it a commercial enterprise, and hence the government's business. If no money was involved (and since the club advertises, money is involved), I would say the government has no business interfering.

[chip]

Yep, money is involved, making it a commercial enterprise, and hence the government's business. If no money was involved (and since the club advertises, money is involved), I would say the government has no business interfering.

Sorry but even if no money was involved.

You start putting 200 cars of people into a neighborhood that dont live there the city is going to crack down.

Rightfully so.

[WorldWatcher]

I can see both sides here. However...this is a business....and the 'owners' are not licensed to run a business...nor are they licensed to run a business out of the residential home.

Before I can comment, can you show anything in the OP where it shows they are a business and charge people for participating?


The "Health Club" down the street is a business w/ business license.


My mothers Bridge Club is not, it's just a group that shares the same interest.


Thank you.


>>>>

[WorldWatcher]

Sorry but even if no money was involved.

You start putting 200 cars of people into a neighborhood that dont live there the city is going to crack down.

Rightfully so.


Correct, but then you address the activity about parking 200 cars on the neighborhood streets and not about the specific activities going on inside a private residence.


>>>>

[MrShotShot]

I never advertise my orgies.

[NascarGirl2448]

They are advertising and they are charging people.

This is a zoning issue and cities have every right to protect residents of their cities against having to live next to an adult sex business.

Where in the OP is any sort of "charge" to participate mentioned?? I'm not seeing it.

[chip]

Before I can comment, can you show anything in the OP where it shows they are a business and charge people for participating?


The "Health Club" down the street is a business w/ business license.


My mothers Bridge Club is not, it's just a group that shares the same interest.


Thank you.


>>>>

Google Cherry Pit. They are charging.

[Pudge]

Duncanville (in Dallas county) just passed an ordnance banning adults from having orgies:
LINK (http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_311003532.html)

Several years ago in Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme struck down the sodomy law that had criminalized homosexual sex in Texas.

LINK (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html)

I'm not sure if that can be compared to this story, but the adults in Duncanville are engaging in consensual sex in a private residence. Many people wouldn't have know what was going on in the house if they didn't go to the website and check it out. They are not charging people to have sex with others, so prostitution is not involved. Not all of those who go to these parties are wife-swappers, many who are there are husbands and wives who are into voyeurism and liked to be watched.

Would you have voted to ban this behavior?

No, and I don't think the law will stand if it's challenged either. Unless the place is making money off of the orgies, then there is no way they can hope to enforce this.

[NascarGirl2448]

Yep, money is involved, making it a commercial enterprise, and hence the government's business. If no money was involved (and since the club advertises, money is involved), I would say the government has no business interfering.

By that logic, people shouldn't be allowed to have friends over to play poker, since money is involved in that game.

[Pudge]

They are advertising and they are charging people.

This is a zoning issue and cities have every right to protect residents of their cities against having to live next to an adult sex business.

Ah, see... the charging thing is what gets you.

If these were just free parties that were private invite only, there would be nothing the city could do.

My advice to the club is to take it outside the town limits.

[NascarGirl2448]

Sorry but even if no money was involved.

You start putting 200 cars of people into a neighborhood that dont live there the city is going to crack down.

Rightfully so.

Well then my neighbors are breaking the law all the time then, because they constantly have people over for parties during the holidays and summer barbecues, and no one else in the neighborhood complains.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

Before I can comment, can you show anything in the OP where it shows they are a business and charge people for participating?


The "Health Club" down the street is a business w/ business license.


My mothers Bridge Club is not, it's just a group that shares the same interest.


Thank you.


>>>>


The ordinance defines a sex club as "any premises, person or organization that is presented, advertised, held out or styled as, or which provides notification to the public that it is a swinger's club; an adult encounter group or center; a sexual encounter group or center; party house or home; wife, spouse or partner-swapping club; or that it provides permission, an opportunity or an invitation to engage in or to view sexual activity, stimulation or gratification, whether for consideration or not."

Ms. Norris said she does not let "just anyone" visit her home. She also said that though she does ask for donations from guests to cover expenses such as food, they are not necessary to the operation.

Glenda Moses, 30, who said she has been attending the swingers group for three years, said 60 to 70 people are regulars at the house on the weekends.

From this site

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/110707dnmetcherrypit.39dbe2f.html

Now...advertising for a private activity is fine. Advertising alone does not make for a business. Take a dog park expo for example..there is a fee...there is advertising..and there is a sponsor. One major difference....it is on public park land and over seen by the department of parks and rec. A fee is also paid for use of facilities which covers insurance and waiver fee's for public use.

Now ..take your mom's bridge club...does she advertise? Does she charge a fee? Does she have a open private list of 200 people coming every day to play? Has she paid her use and license fee's to have that many people on private lands...or paid a usage fee for use of public parks? NO...well then...your example does not compare to the topic at hand. Nice try though.

~Mysty

[NascarGirl2448]

I know I'd be fed up if 200 or more cars showed up even once a week at my next door neighbors....and I wouldn't care what they were doing...I would care about the noise, the traffic...and the possible emergency issues that arise from that many people in a residential neighborhood.


Well then I guess its a good thing you don't live in my neighborhood, because my neighbors are always having parties or various other gatherings and people park all up and down the road, albeit mostly in the grass so they don't block the road itself, which only tears up everyone's grass.

[Pudge]

This house also happens to sit right across the street from the Boyscouts Camp Wisdom.

So? Unless the scouts are breaking into the house, how do they know what's going on?

[WorldWatcher]

Google Cherry Pit. They are charging.


Well I'm at work and given the nature of the subject, I'd be kind of hesitant on going and looking through their site - but I'll take you word for it.


That being the case there are justifiable restrictions on running a business out of residential property and if the attorneys had checked into it there probably already ordnances on the books pertaining to high traffic businesses.


As an officer for our homeowners association I know for a fact that my county has just those types of laws on the books, as well as we have them in the developments bylaws.


Did the City Council need a new law or did they simply need to enforce the laws already on the books?



>>>>

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

Well then I guess its a good thing you don't live in my neighborhood, because my neighbors are always having parties or various other gatherings and people park all up and down the road, albeit mostly in the grass so they don't block the road itself, which only tears up everyone's grass.

If you have 200 or more cars parked along your road for one house....not the whole neighborhood...but one house..and left no parking for anyone else...then how would you feel? This is not a neighborhood that is overtly active in partying....that is their right.....having one house that takes up all street parking so that no one else can visit or party is a hazard.

Most neighbors also turn it down or shut it down around 10 or 11 pm...move the party inside....so to speak. That is being neighborly. No one is saying that these people can't do whatever they want in their own home...not even close. Holding a party is one thing....having a open advertised business is another altogether. Having to have parking for those people who have come to the advertised event is another issue. Emergency services is another consideration. What if the poor woman down the street from this needs an ambulance..and can't get to her due to the congested parking issue on that street? Again...I don't care what they are doing at these parties...I would care if someone was operating any business out of their home that brought that many cars to my neighborhood that may block other services from doing their jobs if needed.

If anything..these people should find a large parcel of land..and build their private club there. That way no one could complain or whine.

~Mysty

[chip]

So? Unless the scouts are breaking into the house, how do they know what's going on?

Um there are rules against sexually oriented business near places where children congregate.

[WorldWatcher]

The ordinance defines a sex club as "any premises, person or organization that is presented, advertised, held out or styled as, or which provides notification to the public that it is a swinger's club; an adult encounter group or center; a sexual encounter group or center; party house or home; wife, spouse or partner-swapping club; or that it provides permission, an opportunity or an invitation to engage in or to view sexual activity, stimulation or gratification, whether for consideration or not."

Ms. Norris said she does not let "just anyone" visit her home. She also said that though she does ask for donations from guests to cover expenses such as food, they are not necessary to the operation.

Glenda Moses, 30, who said she has been attending the swingers group for three years, said 60 to 70 people are regulars at the house on the weekends.

From this site

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/110707dnmetcherrypit.39dbe2f.html

Now...advertising for a private activity is fine. Advertising alone does not make for a business. Take a dog park expo for example..there is a fee...there is advertising..and there is a sponsor. One major difference....it is on public park land and over seen by the department of parks and rec. A fee is also paid for use of facilities which covers insurance and waiver fee's for public use.

Now ..take your mom's bridge club...does she advertise? Does she charge a fee? Does she have a open private list of 200 people coming every day to play? Has she paid her use and license fee's to have that many people on private lands...or paid a usage fee for use of public parks? NO...well then...your example does not compare to the topic at hand. Nice try though.

~Mysty


And the question is does the city already have ordnances against high traffic business being conducted out of the home and if so why didn't they enforce those laws?

Secondly why such a focus on the activities of club specifically?



Given that ordnance it would be perfectly OK for me to invite 200 or so good buddies over every day for a drunk'n bash and charge them 20-50 per person to cover the Beer and the Snacks and to advertise it as a Football Game Watching Club (notice no reference to Party House or Home as specified in the ordnance). I wouldn't be in trouble for that while still using the public streets for parking in the same way this club is.


Address the impact on the public and neighborhood, keep government out of a person home. That's my motto.


>>>>

[foxgurrrl]

The only reason I would have voted against it is due to the residential issue. If it's not around private homes/neighborhoods, I don't see a problem. Otherwise, consenting adults...not my business...don't care.

[Pudge]

Um there are rules against sexually oriented business near places where children congregate.

Only when those businesses have the flashing lights and signs that mark them as such.

This is a home, indistiguishable from other homes. They wouldn't know that there's sex going on in there unless they went inside.

[chip]

Well I'm at work and given the nature of the subject, I'd be kind of hesitant on going and looking through their site - but I'll take you word for it.


That being the case there are justifiable restrictions on running a business out of residential property and if the attorneys had checked into it there probably already ordnances on the books pertaining to high traffic businesses.


As an officer for our homeowners association I know for a fact that my county has just those types of laws on the books, as well as we have them in the developments bylaws.


Did the City Council need a new law or did they simply need to enforce the laws already on the books?



>>>>

The city hasnt been able to document the business activities. Which is probably going to be the next problem for these people. Id bet they arent paying taxes.

[WorldWatcher]

Only when those businesses have the flashing lights and signs that mark them as such.

This is a home, indistiguishable from other homes. They wouldn't know that there's sex going on in there unless they went inside.


Or sneaking up and peeking through the windows. he he he


>>>>

[Pudge]

Or sneaking up and peeking through the windows. he he he


>>>>

I am sure they have rooms where peeking is not possible- hell, they had better, or they're in for more than just a reactionary, knee-jerk law.

[chip]

Only when those businesses have the flashing lights and signs that mark them as such.

This is a home, indistiguishable from other homes. They wouldn't know that there's sex going on in there unless they went inside.

Thats not true. Zoning laws dont allow ANY sexually oriented business near parks, schools etc. Look up your own zoning laws, they dont care if you have signs or flashing lights.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

And the question is does the city already have ordnances against high traffic business being conducted out of the home and if so why didn't they enforce those laws?

Secondly why such a focus on the activities of club specifically?



Given that ordnance it would be perfectly OK for me to invite 200 or so good buddies over every day for a drunk'n bash and charge them 20-50 per person to cover the Beer and the Snacks and to advertise it as a Football Game Watching Club (notice no reference to Party House or Home as specified in the ordnance). I wouldn't be in trouble for that while still using the public streets for parking in the same way this club is.


Address the impact on the public and neighborhood, keep government out of a person home. That's my motto.


>>>>

Actually that is the second question...not the first one you asked. I answered your first question...and will now have to look into the second. Although, with your background...I'm sure you could find it as easily as I could. So knock yourself out.

As to a guess? The neighborhood is tired of having no privacy in a private residential area. They did not buy their homes next to a 7-11 or AM/ PM ...so some anticipation of privacy in their residential homes is to be anticipated. BBQ's and Football parties are just that...even if you are charging a 'fee'. Kinda like a keg party that cost five dollars at the door in college. That is not a business with advertising on a daily bases and "asking for" or assuming donations will be given for services rendered. In fact, the more one looks at the cherry pit enterprise..it is the model of a beginning business that is being run out of the home...without permits for such. No license to run a business or a business license has been pulled. Which is required to run any business..home related or not. Once a license is issued...it then goes further into what kind of business one can run from their home...what standards and practices are to be met...which varies from county to county and state to state...but it also gives that business the various demands on permits for activities, insurance and tax guides on what is expected from them to maintain that license.

These people are trying to go around all of that in order to stave off the county or 'government' from legislating their business activity. Plain and simple.

They need to move to a place where their operation will not be encumbered by private residential laws an stipulation.

~Mysty

[WorldWatcher]

The city hasnt been able to document the business activities. Which is probably going to be the next problem for these people. Id bet they arent paying taxes.


But that doesn't answer the question, were there already laws on the books pertaining to businesses in a residential area and if so why weren't they applied.


If there are no laws currently on the books, why address so specific a case as this. Why not make then more applicable to the proper application of zoning.


>>>>

[chip]

But that doesn't answer the question, were there already laws on the books pertaining to businesses in a residential area and if so why weren't they applied.


If there are no laws currently on the books, why address so specific a case as this. Why not make then more applicable to the proper application of zoning.


>>>>

Yes it does answer the question. There are existing laws but the city couldnt document the business activity. They have regulations pertaining to sexually oriented businesses.

[Pudge]

Thats not true. Zoning laws dont allow ANY sexually oriented business near parks, schools etc. Look up your own zoning laws, they dont care if you have signs or flashing lights.

Ah well, I really don't care anyway. I agree that if they are operating a business then they're subject to more regulation than a private citizen. It bothers me a little that they would streeeeeeetch to define them as a business, though, if they're not profiting from the venture.

Besides, I don't care about children anyway. Sick of hearing about why we need all these laws and policies that restrict the freedom of adults because of the chiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiildren. To hell with the children, let them grow up with a sense of reality about them instead of living in an artificially-created bubble that prevents them from seeing how the world really is.

[WorldWatcher]

Actually that is the second question...not the first one you asked. I answered your first question...and will now have to look into the second. Although, with your background...I'm sure you could find it as easily as I could. So knock yourself out.

As to a guess? The neighborhood is tired of having no privacy in a private residential area. They did not buy their homes next to a 7-11 or AM/ PM ...so some anticipation of privacy in their residential homes is to be anticipated. BBQ's and Football parties are just that...even if you are charging a 'fee'. Kinda like a keg party that cost five dollars at the door in college. That is not a business with advertising on a daily bases and "asking for" or assuming donations will be given for services rendered. In fact, the more one looks at the cherry pit enterprise..it is the model of a beginning business that is being run out of the home...without permits for such. No license to run a business or a business license has been pulled. Which is required to run any business..home related or not. Once a license is issued...it then goes further into what kind of business one can run from their home...what standards and practices are to be met...which varies from county to county and state to state...but it also gives that business the various demands on permits for activities, insurance and tax guides on what is expected from them to maintain that license.

These people are trying to go around all of that in order to stave off the county or 'government' from legislating their business activity. Plain and simple.

They need to move to a place where their operation will not be encumbered by private residential laws an stipulation.

~Mysty



Which is what I'm trying to get at, target the business model itself.


I could use the EXACT SAME advertising techniques and charge the EXACT SAME amounts for a Football Watching Club and not run afoul of the law.



>>>>

[chip]

OMG these people are stupid.

The owner makes this statement.

Ms. Norris said she does not let "just anyone" visit her home. She also said that though she does ask for donations from guests to cover expenses such as food, they are not necessary to the operation.

But on her website it clearly says

On FRIDAYS, if you have never been to The CherryPit before, we have a One-Time special of $20.00 for you to check us out. All other times it is only $30.00 On SATURDAYS, Couples are only $50.00 but if you Carpool with others, all couples in a single vehicle are only $80.00 TOTAL.

What if we have never been before and we just want to check it out. Well we have a GET ACQUAINTED special every Friday Night for First Time visitors to the Cherry Pit. We only ask for a $20.00 Donation for this one time.

[WorldWatcher]

Yes it does answer the question. There are existing laws but the city couldnt document the business activity. They have regulations pertaining to sexually oriented businesses.


You say there are existing laws, do those laws only involve sexual activity? There are no stipulations as to impeding traffic flow in a residential neighborhood?

So you can run any business out of your home in that area, no matter how much traffic it generates so long as the business doesn't involve sex.


OK, got it.

>>>>

[Apatriot]

Where in the OP is any sort of "charge" to participate mentioned?? I'm not seeing it.

"Donations" were mentioned.

[Apatriot]

By that logic, people shouldn't be allowed to have friends over to play poker, since money is involved in that game.

I believe, technically, playing poker for money is illegal. Also, I don't know how many people have 200 people over for poker.....

[flores_in_texas]

Right...exactly right...and I should have been more clear. Business that require high volume customer based service out of the residential home is what I'm against. Having an Ebay or cleaning business..or other home based business that requires the service be preformed out of the home...should be perfectly legal.

If I were a neighbor to this type of advertised business...had small kids or was just old and wanted my peace and quite in my own home...then yeah...I'd be spitting mad too! I can't believe that these people didn't think about the complaints that would naturally come from having two hundred or more cars on a private street...much less the noise aspect. One would think that they would have thought of this and done something about it. Poor planning in my opinion.

~Mysty

I don't know how close you are to your neighbors, but I'm sure most do not have a clue what their neighbors are doing. There are tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of websites out there, you do not know if your neighbors are on any of them doing things you dislike. The front of the house doesn't have any neon signs or something to tell others what goes on inside. If someone didn't tell you what website to go look at, as far as you know it is a bunch of people watching football.

[flores_in_texas]

The ordinance defines a sex club as "any premises, person or organization that is presented, advertised, held out or styled as, or which provides notification to the public that it is a swinger's club; an adult encounter group or center; a sexual encounter group or center; party house or home; wife, spouse or partner-swapping club; or that it provides permission, an opportunity or an invitation to engage in or to view sexual activity, stimulation or gratification, whether for consideration or not."

Ms. Norris said she does not let "just anyone" visit her home. She also said that though she does ask for donations from guests to cover expenses such as food, they are not necessary to the operation.

Glenda Moses, 30, who said she has been attending the swingers group for three years, said 60 to 70 people are regulars at the house on the weekends.

From this site

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/110707dnmetcherrypit.39dbe2f.html

Now...advertising for a private activity is fine. Advertising alone does not make for a business. Take a dog park expo for example..there is a fee...there is advertising..and there is a sponsor. One major difference....it is on public park land and over seen by the department of parks and rec. A fee is also paid for use of facilities which covers insurance and waiver fee's for public use.

Now ..take your mom's bridge club...does she advertise? Does she charge a fee? Does she have a open private list of 200 people coming every day to play? Has she paid her use and license fee's to have that many people on private lands...or paid a usage fee for use of public parks? NO...well then...your example does not compare to the topic at hand. Nice try though.

~Mysty

There is no fee, just donations... like tithing for party goers. Where do you get this "200" number from? Why not say 1,000 cars are being parked all up and down the streets? From your quote:
Glenda Moses, 30, who said she has been attending the swingers group for three years, said 60 to 70 people are regulars at the house on the weekends.
Surely not everyone drives 3 cars to this place. What they should do is tell this group to carpool, thereby saving the environment and not taking up as many parking spaces.

[chip]

There is no fee, just donations... like tithing for party goers.

Thats not what her website says.

Where do you get this "200" number from?

One of the news videos from last month was shot and they counted 200 cars.

[PeterGriffin]

Yeah, and if you get cheap and don't make your "donation", then they start a whisper campaign that you have crabs.

[chip]

Yeah, and if you get cheap and don't make your "donation", then they start a whisper campaign that you have crabs.
:))

[WorldWatcher]

Yeah, and if you get cheap and don't make your "donation", then they start a whisper campaign that you have crabs.


What's the matter Peter, don't you like seafood?


I know there just has to be some way to get a "shrimp" reference in her regarding Peter.
:wall::wall:

>>>>

[Abe Babe]

From the Duncanville article
"There's a lot of traffic, there's noise, there's lights. This is what we are trying to address here," said Councilwoman Johnette Jameson during Tuesday night's city council meeting. "We have to be good neighbors to each other." Councilwoman Jameson proposed the ordinance.

I wonder if her nickname is Jenna.

[Vaard]

Cmon Vaard. Everyone wants 200 carloads of strangers in their neighborhood on a Fri or Sat nite.

This house also happens to sit right across the street from the Boyscouts Camp Wisdom.

i got it.. they can park at the boyscout campgrounds and just walk to the orgy!


:razz:

[Vaard]

Which is what I'm trying to get at, target the business model itself.


I could use the EXACT SAME advertising techniques and charge the EXACT SAME amounts for a Football Watching Club and not run afoul of the law.



>>>>

and i would stil be against 200 people all congregating at one house at one times solely do to the traffic involved...........

[flores_in_texas]

Thats not what her website says.



One of the news videos from last month was shot and they counted 200 cars.

It sounds like the major problem had to do with the parking, or lack of it. Their is probably some city ordinance that could be enforced instead of legislating what goes on in private among consenting adults.

A few cities over recently passed an ordinance banning fraternities in a neighborhood. It was a Christian book club, and the neighbors said they were polite and not rowdy, but the problem was there were too many cars and the neighbors ran out of parking spots.

These are 2 groups within a 1 week period that were banned for what was going on INSIDE a house rather than focusing on the real issue, which is lack of parking space.

Something else to chew on...Duncanville has a $150 citation for prostitution and a $250 citation for parking on the grass.

[WorldWatcher]

and i would stil be against 200 people all congregating at one house at one times solely do to the traffic involved...........


:shrug: To me it would depend. If it was the neighbors son graduating from high school and it was a one time even, then ya know, we all have those things.


If it is a business and they are tying up the street multiple nights during the week and every Friday and Saturday, then we have a serious issue.


My disagreement with the ordnance stems from trying to regulate what people are doing in their bedroom (well in this case bedrooms, living room, kitchen, den, etc...) :mrgreen:.


I could very easily support laws which ensure that the public roads remain clear for residents and that buildings are used for their intended purpose (i.e. zoning residential v. zoning business).



>>>>

[PeterGriffin]

I had the unfortunate experience of living on the same street for a short time that had a home based swingers club similar to what was outlined in the OP, and it is a genuine nuisance. The sex part I could care less about, but having several dozen cars clogging up your neighborhood street parking and a bunch of scantily clad moomamas traipsing to the house giggling in anticipation and back is a drag when it happens every ****ing weekend. Judging by the sweathogs going in, it cured me of any curiousity I might have ever had about attending one.

If you're going to run a swing club out of your home, don't live in a subdivision. Move out to the country on some land.

[PeterGriffin]

:shrug: To me it would depend. If it was the neighbors son graduating from high school and it was a one time even, then ya know, we all have those things.


If it is a business and they are tying up the street multiple nights during the week and every Friday and Saturday, then we have a serious issue.


My disagreement with the ordnance stems from trying to regulate what people are doing in their bedroom (well in this case bedrooms, living room, kitchen, den, etc...) :mrgreen:.


I could very easily support laws which ensure that the public roads remain clear for residents and that buildings are used for their intended purpose (i.e. zoning residential v. zoning business).



>>>>

Agreed that it's poorly crafted legislation. It should be about zoning, but it focuses on the sexual aspect.

[chip]

It sounds like the major problem had to do with the parking, or lack of it. Their is probably some city ordinance that could be enforced instead of legislating what goes on in private among consenting adults.

A few cities over recently passed an ordinance banning fraternities in a neighborhood. It was a Christian book club, and the neighbors said they were polite and not rowdy, but the problem was there were too many cars and the neighbors ran out of parking spots.

These are 2 groups within a 1 week period that were banned for what was going on INSIDE a house rather than focusing on the real issue, which is lack of parking space.

Something else to chew on...Duncanville has a $150 citation for prostitution and a $250 citation for parking on the grass.

The real issue is that there is a sexually oriented business located in a freaking neighborhood filled with children and across the street from the Boyscouts Camp Wisdom.

[ThrowCop]

If they eliminated the traffic issue, I wouldn't have a problem (and maybe some soundproofing).

I think they should run shuttle buses from the Mall.

[WorldWatcher]

The real issue is that there is a sexually oriented business located in a freaking neighborhood filled with children and across the street from the Boyscouts Camp Wisdom.


The business issue is one aspect.

The sexual activities in a private home are another.



If the sexual activities are taking place inside the house and not on the lawn and front porch, how are people supposed to know what's going on inside the house unless they are trying to peak through the drawn curtains.



>>>>

[chip]

If the sexual activities are taking place inside the house and not on the lawn and front porch, how are people supposed to know what's going on inside the house unless they are trying to peak through the drawn curtains.



>>>>

Im sure it being advertised gives people a clue.

[flores_in_texas]

Im sure it being advertised gives people a clue.

There are no signs in front of the house, there are no television commercials, and there are no radio spots. People have to actively search to find out what is going on in someone else's house.

I wouldn't want this place next to my house, BUT I don't believe we should legislate what kind of sex consenting adults participate in (that didn't break previous laws like prostitiution for example).

The ordinance defines a sex club as "any premises, person or organization that is presented, advertised, held out or styled as, or which provides notification to the public that it is a swinger's club; an adult encounter group or center; a sexual encounter group or center; party house or home; wife, spouse or partner-swapping club; or that it provides permission, an opportunity or an invitation to engage in or to view sexual activity, stimulation or gratification, whether for consideration or not."

Some may not see this as LAWRENCE V. TEXAS, but that started out as a right to privacy case. Duncaville had to write a new ordinance to ban this group whenever they could have used existing laws on the books. They could have been crafty and wrote $250 tickets all day long or started towing cars that were parked by the "No Parking" signs the city put up in front of the house. Hit people in the pocket books, not everybody has deep pockets.

[WorldWatcher]

Im sure it being advertised gives people a clue.


Could you provide images of this "advertising". Are there neon signs in the windows? Billboards in the lawn? Adds in the newspapers giving the address? Commercials on Radio and T.V. giving the address ro showing the house?


Since I got home I went through their web-site. Yes I agree its a business since they are charging for admission with a set "donation" schedule. However even on their web-site there is no address and no pictures of the houses exterior. There is a phone number, but no location.



Again would I want this activity in my neighborhood. Hell no. However I believe that existing zoning laws, business laws, and traffic laws could have been applied without attempting to write a law restricting the consensual sexual conduct of adults inside a private home.

I have NO PROBLEM addressing the issue as business v. residential zoning. I guess I do have issues with Big Brother peaking into peoples bedrooms because some might be having sex.


>>>>

[flores_in_texas]

Swinger sues Duncanville over sex club ban
Resident says ordinance violates his privacy, due process rights - December 13, 2007

A Duncanville swinger sued the city Wednesday, contending that a new ordinance banning sex clubs violates his privacy and due process rights.

Jim Trulock, 59, and his partner, 29-year-old Julie M. Norris, call themselves advocates for the swinging lifestyle. On weekends, they turn their home near Cedar Ridge Drive and Interstate 20 into the Cherry Pit, where guests can mingle, dance and have sex.
---
The Cherry Pit's attorney, Ed Klein, said the city is trying to regulate private acts in a private home. The ordinance is unconstitutionally vague and overly broad, according to the lawsuit, filed in Dallas County Court-at-Law No. 2.

"The ordinance as written criminalizes the behavior of a substantial portion of the population of Duncanville who seek to engage in sexual activity," the suit says, "as well as each and every person who may be present on the premises at the time in question."

The suit alleges that a man interested in sex with his wife could be prosecuted. And if the encounter occurred in a hotel, every guest could face criminal action, the suit says.
LINK (http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/stories/DN-cherrypit_13met.ART0.West.Edition1.36a130b.html)

On the news, they said that the Cherry Pit website no longer asks for donations, but I haven't checked it yet. If that is true, then they can't call it advertisement for the business.

I agree with WorldWatcher
<snip>
However I believe that existing zoning laws, business laws, and traffic laws could have been applied without attempting to write a law restricting the consensual sexual conduct of adults inside a private home.

I have NO PROBLEM addressing the issue as business v. residential zoning. I guess I do have issues with Big Brother peaking into peoples bedrooms because some might be having sex.

[waynevan]

Which is what I'm trying to get at, target the business model itself.


I could use the EXACT SAME advertising techniques and charge the EXACT SAME amounts for a Football Watching Club and not run afoul of the law.



>>>>

With 200 cars in your driveway every week? Not in a residential neighborhood.

[flores_in_texas]

With 200 cars in your driveway every week? Not in a residential neighborhood.

So do you agree that existing traffic laws should be enforced instead of making a new law to legislate what goes on in the bedroom (and kitchen and living room)?

[WorldWatcher]

With 200 cars in your driveway every week? Not in a residential neighborhood.



1. 200 Cars wouldn't fit in my drive way, and if they did fit in yours you probably wouldn't be living in a middle class neighborhood in Duncanville. :razz:


2. Accourding to the Duncanville City Council it's perfectly alright to have a Football Watchers Club and clog the street parking with 200 cars every week. See they wrote the ordinance, not to address the effect on the neighborhood, not to address the possibility of running a business out of a home not zoned for customer service business, they wrote it specifically to target someone peeking into windows and seeing someone having sex.


I could have a Football Watchers Club...

...I could have a Quilting Club...

......I could have a Wine Tasting Club...

..........I could have a Bridge Club...

..............I could have a Hula Dancers Club...


All parking 200 cars on the street every week and not violate the ordinance they wrote to peek into someones bedroom.

Hell we could probably have sex while watching Football, Quilting, Drinking some wine, while playing a rubber of Bridge, in our Hula Skirts and not be in violation of the ordinance they wrote.


>>>>

[joedog]

Traffic/parking is the only real issue here.
They just kept the sex part in so people would pay attention.

Passing legislation that specifies the type of activity in the house is leaving those criminal politicians wide open to lawsuits (violation of civil rights), and will result in the eventually overturning of the law - at great expense to the taxpayers. A law that directly addressed the issues of traffic and parking would have been the appropriate response - and one that is moral, ethical, and constitutional.

[waynevan]

So do you agree that existing traffic laws should be enforced instead of making a new law to legislate what goes on in the bedroom (and kitchen and living room)?

Absolutely.

[angelicmadrigal]

Would you have voted to ban this behavior?

Prudes.

[Rotaredom]

Talk about the government sticking its big nose where it does NOT belong!! The government has no business legislating sex between CONSENTING ADULTS in a private residence, especially when they are not charging anyone anything to participate, or even "advertising" for that matter.

So you have no problem with gay marriage?

[jb1500]

Wasn't a woman arrested in Texas a few years ago for having sex toy parties (using the same sales techniques as Tupperware)? Those parties rarely have more than 20 or so people, but she was arrested for selling the products, not using too many parking spaces.

[Vaard]

So you have no problem with gay marriage?

well, to be fair, gay marriage has nothing to do with sex......

[Rotaredom]

well, to be fair, gay marriage has nothing to do with sex......

But it dose have to do with what consenting adults do. Either the state has the right to regulate adult behavior or it doesn't.

[flores_in_texas]

Wasn't a woman arrested in Texas a few years ago for having sex toy parties (using the same sales techniques as Tupperware)? Those parties rarely have more than 20 or so people, but she was arrested for selling the products, not using too many parking spaces.

I think your right. It is illegal to own more than 5 dildos in TX (I can't search here at work, but I think that number is very close). They have to have a disclaimer that it is for gag gifts only and not for recreational use.

[flores_in_texas]

So you have no problem with gay marriage?

But it dose have to do with what consenting adults do. Either the state has the right to regulate adult behavior or it doesn't.

They can and do regulate adult behavior between consenting adults (think prostitution and polygamy).

I think what they are doing in Duncanville in this case is legislating what is going on within the confines of someone's home.
They seek to control a personal relationship that, whether or not entitled to formal recognition in the law, is within the liberty of persons to choose without being punished as criminals. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to choose to enter upon relationships in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons.
LINK (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html)

[melinda]

I think your right. It is illegal to own more than 5 dildos in TX (I can't search here at work, but I think that number is very close). They have to have a disclaimer that it is for gag gifts only and not for recreational use.

you mean buy more than 5 at a time?
or own more than 5?
how are they gonna know how many I own??

[WorldWatcher]

you mean buy more than 5 at a time?
or own more than 5?
how are they gonna know how many I own??


Isn't there a law in Texas that requires individuals to register all devices used for personal sexual stimulation?


Once you are registered you can then get a Concealed Carry permit for up to 3 at one time.

:eek:


[J/K]


>>>>

[melinda]

Isn't there a law in Texas that requires individuals to register all devices used for personal sexual stimulation?


Once you are registered you can then get a Concealed Carry permit for up to 3 at one time.

:eek:


[J/K]


>>>>
:)) :)) :))



and, I certainly hope not.
I'd hate to have to admit what I do own. ;)

[melinda]

Isn't there a law in Texas that requires individuals to register all devices used for personal sexual stimulation?


Once you are registered you can then get a Concealed Carry permit for up to 3 at one time.

:eek:


[J/K]


>>>>

OK...after posting here, I just saw the thread "poll: do you carry?" which took on a whole NEW meaning to me. :))

[Rotaredom]

They can and do regulate adult behavior between consenting adults (think prostitution and polygamy).

I think what they are doing in Duncanville in this case is legislating what is going on within the confines of someone's home.


Yeah I know. But someone said the government has no right to do that. And it seems they do. The question is to what extent?

[TombRaiderBC]

Here's the way I see it... we have an absolute right to worship in this country.

But suppose my neighbor decided to establish a 'private worship club' at his home and had 20 or 30 visitors come over each Sunday to engage in lawful group prayer... Is that private worship in my neighbor's home? Or has he established a church?

I think I'd be inclined to say the latter... and I don't want a church opened next door. Neither do I want a sex club.

Of course we always run into the 'slippery slope' argument. What if only 10 people came to pray... or just five? Could some whacky judge abuse the law and rule that a church? Or could a whacky judge rule that having a threesome violates the 'sex club' law? Possibly, but I trust we can deal with these issues if they arise.

No to 'sex clubs' in private neighborhoods.

:exclaim:

[WorldWatcher]

Here's the way I see it... we have an absolute right to worship in this country.

But suppose my neighbor decided to establish a 'private worship club' at his home and had 20 or 30 visitors come over each Sunday to engage in lawful group prayer... Is that private worship in my neighbor's home? Or has he established a church?

I think I'd be inclined to say the latter... and I don't want a church opened next door. Neither do I want a sex club.

Of course we always run into the 'slippery slope' argument. What if only 10 people came to pray... or just five? Could some whacky judge abuse the law and rule that a church? Or could a whacky judge rule that having a threesome violates the 'sex club' law? Possibly, but I trust we can deal with these issues if they arise.

No to 'sex clubs' in private neighborhoods.

:exclaim:


So right now they would have to pass a separate ordinance because 200 cars a week clogging the neighborhood are perfectly OK, Prayer Clubs are fine, Sex Clubs are out.



>>>>>

[melinda]

So right now they would have to pass a separate ordinance because 200 cars a week clogging the neighborhood are perfectly OK, Prayer Clubs are fine, Sex Clubs are out.



>>>>>

well, a prayer club would never attract as many people, therefore as many cars, as a sex club. ;)

[waynevan]

Isn't there a law in Texas that requires individuals to register all devices used for personal sexual stimulation?


Once you are registered you can then get a Concealed Carry permit for up to 3 at one time.

:eek:


[J/K]


>>>>

I could come up with some clever names for THAT permit, but I might get booted outta here..........

[waynevan]

Here's the way I see it... we have an absolute right to worship in this country.

But suppose my neighbor decided to establish a 'private worship club' at his home and had 20 or 30 visitors come over each Sunday to engage in lawful group prayer... Is that private worship in my neighbor's home? Or has he established a church?

I think I'd be inclined to say the latter... and I don't want a church opened next door. Neither do I want a sex club.

Of course we always run into the 'slippery slope' argument. What if only 10 people came to pray... or just five? Could some whacky judge abuse the law and rule that a church? Or could a whacky judge rule that having a threesome violates the 'sex club' law? Possibly, but I trust we can deal with these issues if they arise.

No to 'sex clubs' in private neighborhoods.

:exclaim:

That happened in my town. After much wrangling it ended up in state supreme court and the people were forced to stop having 40 and 50 cars every weekend.

[flores_in_texas]

I think your right. It is illegal to own more than 5 dildos in TX (I can't search here at work, but I think that number is very close). They have to have a disclaimer that it is for gag gifts only and not for recreational use.

But officer, they are for massaging my aching back!

Texas mom faces trial for selling sex toys

Two undercover police officers posed as a couple trying to spice up their love life and Webb sold the woman a vibrator. Webb instructed her on its use and explained how it could enhance lovemaking.

That's where she got into trouble.

Texas law allows for the sale of sexual toys as long as they are billed as novelties, BeAnn Sisemore, a Fort Worth attorney representing Webb, told the Houston Chronicle before a gag order was issued by the judge presiding over the case. But when a person markets sex toys in a direct manner that shows their actual role in sex, then that person is subject to obscenity charges, she told the newspaper.
---
Passion Parties has been doing booming business. The company racked up $20 million in sales in 2003 and saw 30 months of consecutive growth above the 50 percent mark.
LINK (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/11/obscenity.trial.reut/)

:mrgreen: A gag order for vibrators? no pun intended.

[joedog]

Get our of our private homes big government!!!!

OTOH - what if you are abusing or neglecting your children - in the privacy of your own home?

What if they are renters, instead of property owners? What if a bank actually owns thehome (they are paying a mortgage)?

I know that here in CA you are legally prohibited from keeping a firearm in your home if you rent unless the property owner knows of the firearm and approves of you having it in the home.

That seems like utter ******** and a clear violation of 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendment rights for renters.

Maybe renters shouldn't get to vote either? Oh, wait - in some cases, that is the way the elections are set up as well. Non citizens who own property can vote, but citizens who rent can't vote in certain types of elections (again, here in CA). I think the logic behind this is that the property owners pay property taxes, and renters don't. If that's the case, shouldn't my rent be much less than it currently is - because any fool should realize that it's my rent that pays the property taxes (and all other expenses) for the house I'm renting.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

Duncanville (in Dallas county) just passed an ordnance banning adults from having orgies:
LINK (http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_311003532.html)

Several years ago in Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme struck down the sodomy law that had criminalized homosexual sex in Texas.

LINK (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html)

I'm not sure if that can be compared to this story, but the adults in Duncanville are engaging in consensual sex in a private residence. Many people wouldn't have know what was going on in the house if they didn't go to the website and check it out. They are not charging people to have sex with others, so prostitution is not involved. Not all of those who go to these parties are wife-swappers, many who are there are husbands and wives who are into voyeurism and liked to be watched.

Would you have voted to ban this behavior?

Hold up...wait a minute....this story was talked about in another thread a while back. What the issue is parking in a residential neighborhood...the noise that is created by 200 or so participants at these parties...and they do charge a fee...called donations...at the door. The what are they doing in those parties is a negligible part of this story. They..the councilmen and council women who voted on this, did not make a decision based on the activity....they based it on the complaints of fellow private residents who complained about the mass amount of cars and the mass amount of noise. The residents of that private suburb complained that the parties created not only a parking hazard for emergency vehicles..if one of their neighbors had need of them..would have no way of getting into the neighborhood to help with emergency services. They also complained that the noise ordinances were broken...for many of these 'parties' go on way after ten o'clock. The issue of orgies didn't' come up in the complaint until the end of the fight.

Now...the council did find the activity outside the realm of a lawful home based business...to which the owners of said activities did not have a license to provide those services from home. Running a quasi business from home does mean you have to have the proper licenses and permits for such activities. Seeing as their parties are very popular...parking would have to be provided so not to exclude normal traffic or emergency vehicles from servicing that suburb. The noise...well, everyone has their right to peace and quiet after a certain time...most communities are 10 o'clock or so.

I don't think this particular county did a great job in dealing with this...and it got twisted up and centered itself upon the activity...not the complaint that uncovered the activity. I don't know what the actual law states about private sex parties...but the dmv code for parking/noise/ and suburb communities is pretty clear. They got um dead to rights on those issues. If these parties are so popular..then the creators of them should lease a building that is off county/city bounds...ensure a safe environment...plenty of parking..and a noise barrier....so that no one is infringed upon in a private neighborhood setting. If I remember correctly, the phrat houses laws were brought in as a comparison to this one. We don't want to know what your doing in there...but you do have to ensure that not only are your guests safe, but the neighborhood your in is also safe, and able to enjoy their peace and quiet after a decent hour is met.

Pretty clear to me...

~Mysty

[jb1500]

But officer, they are for massaging my aching back!

LINK (http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/02/11/obscenity.trial.reut/)

:mrgreen: A gag order for vibrators? no pun intended.

That is really over the top! I thought Texas was mostly conservatives? Doesn't that mean you want government to stay out of people's lives? Would a sex counselor also be booted out of town, or arrested?

[ScottFree]

So? Unless the scouts are breaking into the house, how do they know what's going on?


There's a nature trail that follows a ridge along a fenceline. There's an open view in one spot of the Cherry Pits hot tub. The Scoutmasters got suspicious after all the requests by the boys wanting to earn their bird watching merit badges. Some of them already had their bird watching merit badges.:D

[melinda]

That is really over the top! I thought Texas was mostly conservatives? Doesn't that mean you want government to stay out of people's lives? Would a sex counselor also be booted out of town, or arrested?

the Dallas area is very liberal...

[WorldWatcher]

the Dallas area is very liberal...


Whew, thanks for letting us not in Texas know. For a minute there I thought it was conservatives holding the party.

:eek:


>>>>

[FidelisAdMortem]

The people who have these clubs are the ugliest people on the face of this earth. It should be against the law for those people to even have sex with one another.

[melinda]

Whew, thanks for letting us not in Texas know. For a minute there I thought it was conservatives holding the party.

:eek:


>>>>

in the last major election, Dallas voted the most liberal in the state.... Austin has the reputation of being the most liberal city in our state...but in reality, Dallas holds that crown.

[cyph3r7]

when the actions in your home impact the citizenry around you, the government gets involved. Wnaa do things in private, keep it private from others.

[ScottFree]

when the actions in your home impact the citizenry around you, the government gets involved. Wnaa do things in private, keep it private from others.


Pretty much sums it up. Doesn't it?
Inviting the world to a website which covers exactly what goes on in your home is a kin to having an uncovered bay window on every room.

[WorldWatcher]

when the actions in your home impact the citizenry around you, the government gets involved. Wnaa do things in private, keep it private from others.


Psst - inside the home is "private".


Personal liberties and freedoms. Nice sounding words until people don't agree with how someone else exercises those personal liberties and freedoms, then it's a call to big brother to implement MORE laws restricting what consenting adults to in the privacy INSIDE their homes. Well so much for big government.


People having sex inside their home has no impact on the citizenry around them. Now if they were on the front lawn that's a totally different proposition.


If the actions are such that they impact the traffic an a neighborhood, that is OUTSIDE the home, and should be subject to regulation as it DOES impact the neighbors and as such can be restricted.

If someone is conducting a Customer Service based business out of their home in an area zone residential, then that DOES impact the neighbors and as such can be restricted.

If the group of people is exceeding the noise limits and disturbing the neighbors, then that DOES impact the neighbors and as such can be restricted.


>>>>

[jb1500]

Psst - inside the home is "private".


Personal liberties and freedoms. Nice sounding words until people don't agree with how someone else exercises those personal liberties and freedoms, then it's a call to big brother to implement MORE laws restricting what consenting adults to in the privacy INSIDE their homes. Well so much for big government.


People having sex inside their home has no impact on the citizenry around them. Now if they were on the front lawn that's a totally different proposition.


If the actions are such that they impact the traffic an a neighborhood, that is OUTSIDE the home, and should be subject to regulation as it DOES impact the neighbors and as such can be restricted.

If someone is conducting a Customer Service based business out of their home in an area zone residential, then that DOES impact the neighbors and as such can be restricted.

If the group of people is exceeding the noise limits and disturbing the neighbors, then that DOES impact the neighbors and as such can be restricted.


>>>>


That's why I don't understand why a private poker game in someone's home is illegal (at least in Maryland). Earlier this year several people at the shore were arrested for gambling, although it was a private game in someone's home--for large stakes.

[ISYairio]

If it was a small group of friends freely and quietly engaging in it within the home with no impact on the rest of the community, not alerting others, etc, they'd be protected, imho.

If they're making a business of it, bringing in substantially increased amounts of traffic, bringing in unwanted types of individuals into the community, causing disruptions due to displays or advertisements, and so forth, engage in it openly and blatantly through various means so that the community is being de facto labeled such a place, etc, the community has a valid position, imho.

Plus the community, as well, simply has the right to protest such activity.

[ISYairio]

So right now they would have to pass a separate ordinance because 200 cars a week clogging the neighborhood are perfectly OK, Prayer Clubs are fine, Sex Clubs are out.



>>>>>Well, plus the TYPE of people being attracted...

[WorldWatcher]

That's why I don't understand why a private poker game in someone's home is illegal (at least in Maryland).


I don't live in Maryland and don't have the inclination of checking but a private poker game is someone's home is probably not illegal.

It is the gambling involving the transfer of real winnings (i.e. money) that is illegal.


Earlier this year several people at the shore were arrested for gambling, although it was a private game in someone's home--for large stakes.


Income from gambling is taxable, high stakes private games would provide no means of tracking income that must be claimed and taxes paid/owed on those winnings. I'm not a gambler myself, but in a commercial gambling establishment, I believe your winnings are reported to the IRS and/or taxes are paid when they are cashed out.

Unregulated, high stakes private games provide an avenue for tax evasion and money laundering for income from other illegal activities.


>>>>

[cyph3r7]

That's why I don't understand why a private poker game in someone's home is illegal (at least in Maryland). Earlier this year several people at the shore were arrested for gambling, although it was a private game in someone's home--for large stakes.

If your private poker party became advertised on the web and led even a few dozen people to your neighborhood I am sure your neighbors would start to complain. These guys had upwards of 100 vehicles show up according to a few stories. Once for a wedding party or something I can see. But every Friday and saturday night....c'mon.

Your rights end when they infringe upon mine...period.

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

Freedom of association.

I don't care what the neighbors think.

[WorldWatcher]

If it was a small group of friends freely and quietly engaging in it within the home with no impact on the rest of the community, not alerting others, etc, they'd be protected, imho.

I agree with the general sentiment.

If they're making a business of it,

I agree, if they are operating a business out of their residential home in violation of zoning laws there is a valid complaint.

bringing in substantially increased amounts of traffic,

I agree, if they are impacting the neighborhood homeowners ability to use street parking and/or increasing the danger to children because of increase traffic there are valid civil concerns and controls are appropriate.

bringing in unwanted types of individuals into the community,

I disagree, who I invite into my home is none of the business of neighbors.

causing disruptions due to displays or advertisements,

I agree, causing disruptions outside the house, setting up displays and or advertisements is also a valid concern.

When I looked at their web-site a couple of weeks ago, there was no indication of where the "Cherry Pit" was located, only a phone number.


and so forth, engage in it openly and blatantly through various means so that the community is being de facto labeled such a place, etc, the community has a valid position, imho.

I don't say the community doesn't have a valid position. They do.

My questioning goes to the validity of outlawing sex inside a private residence.


Plus the community, as well, simply has the right to protest such activity.


They can protest all they want, that goes part and parcel with the right to Free Speech.

The question is whether they have the right to outlaw sex in a private home between consenting adults.

Under the present ordinance I could have a Sports Club that meets every weekend clogging the neighborhood streets and be perfectly legal.


>>>>

[cyph3r7]

Psst - inside the home is "private".

what is your tire leaking?

what part of the story did you not read to keep pushing this only affected "inside the home".

100's of people show up...every weekend....cars, noise, traffic....no longer contained within the home.

Your rights end when they infringe upon mine...period.

Personal liberties and freedoms. <<snipped drivel>>

Your rights end when they infringe upon mine...period.

[cyph3r7]

Freedom of association.

I don't care what the neighbors think.

Your rights end when they infringe upon mine. Period.

[WorldWatcher]

Your rights end when they infringe upon mine. Period.


And your rights end when they infringe upon others.

As in attempting to limit private conduct inside a private home.



Traffic and operating a business are external factors to the home and are well within the bounds of a legal remedy. Determining who can have sex in a private home is not.


>>>>

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

Your rights end when they infringe upon mine. Period.

And your rights being infringed are?

[flores_in_texas]

If they're making a business of it,
When I was younger, a big group of us would get together for boxing, football games, etc. We would chip in $10 bucks for beer and snacks. Many cars, $10 donation.... that is now a business?

bringing in unwanted types of individuals into the community
Just because some are swingers, they are an unwanted types? Do not forget that some of them are doctors and lawyers.

causing disruptions due to displays or advertisements,

They were there for years before anybody found out what was going on inside. You have to actively search for them to know what is going on inside the house.

Plus the community, as well, simply has the right to protest such activity.
It is one thing to protest them, it is another to write a NEW LAW to ban adult sexual activity among consenting adults who were not breaking any other laws (such as prostitution).

They have resorted to carpooling to reduce the parking traffic. If they used a few vans to pick everyone up (and got further reduced parking traffic), they would still be breaking this new law that is regulating their sexual behavior.

[mysticbeauty_nbeast]

And your rights end when they infringe upon others.

As in attempting to limit private conduct inside a private home.



Traffic and operating a business are external factors to the home and are well within the bounds of a legal remedy. Determining who can have sex in a private home is not.


>>>>

I have no looked for a more current link to this story....so bear with me....I thought the council determined that the adults at this party can do whatever they wish within a private setting.....the issue was the payment of these free activities that broached government to make a determination on private activity? Meaning, had no donation/fee's been asked for at the door...then it wouldn't have mattered if these parties where all knitters sitting by the fire every Friday and Saturday night. It wouldn't have mattered if they were all foot fetish people trying on shoes....it was that they paid for the services and use of the house to have sex parties that created the ruling by the council. Do I have it backwards? Did I miss something?

Does government have the right to tell us what we can and can't do with our bodies? Well, in some cases..yes it does. Like the Shivo case...like the issue of abortion...like prostitutes and public sex....like refusing medical care/receiving medical care....government is brought in and asked to decide on those cases that float on the near insane. Do they always come to the right determination? Depends on what side you sit on I suppose.

I don't see a blatant attack from government into the bedrooms of this community. I see a council trying to enforce and maintain a quiet suburb from turning into the cities epicenter whore house. I think the very real concern by the community has out weighed the obvious rights that private citizens have...although on the other hand..these Cherry Pit owners have stretched their rights and privacy to the very brink. There is a middle ground here...one that is being ignored by the owners of this Cherry Pit. There is a middle ground here with the council...and let's hope they come to a determination that upholds everyone's rights...not just their int rests and feelings on the issue.

~Mysty

[flores_in_texas]

I have no looked for a more current link to this story....so bear with me....I thought the council determined that the adults at this party can do whatever they wish within a private setting.....the issue was the payment of these free activities that broached government to make a determination on private activity? Meaning, had no donation/fee's been asked for at the door...then it wouldn't have mattered if these parties where all knitters sitting by the fire every Friday and Saturday night. It wouldn't have mattered if they were all foot fetish people trying on shoes....it was that they paid for the services and use of the house to have sex parties that created the ruling by the council. Do I have it backwards? Did I miss something?

Does government have the right to tell us what we can and can't do with our bodies? Well, in some cases..yes it does. Like the Shivo case...like the issue of abortion...like prostitutes and public sex....like refusing medical care/receiving medical care....government is brought in and asked to decide on those cases that float on the near insane. Do they always come to the right determination? Depends on what side you sit on I suppose.

I don't see a blatant attack from government into the bedrooms of this community. I see a council trying to enforce and maintain a quiet suburb from turning into the cities epicenter whore house. I think the very real concern by the community has out weighed the obvious rights that private citizens have...although on the other hand..these Cherry Pit owners have stretched their rights and privacy to the very brink. There is a middle ground here...one that is being ignored by the owners of this Cherry Pit. There is a middle ground here with the council...and let's hope they come to a determination that upholds everyone's rights...not just their int rests and feelings on the issue.

~Mysty

Actually you are wrong about the donation thing. They have taken all references of donations off of the website, yet it is still being considered an adult oriented business by the city. You will read that I have given examples where the government does legislate what we can do with our bodies. However, the city created a new sex ordinance specifically for this group. The main problem had to do with the parking, and there are traffic and nuisance laws that could have been enforced instead.

The attorneys are citing LAWRENCE V. TEXAS as a defense on this one. Many jumped for joy whenever homosexuals could have sex legally in their own home. Heterosexual couples having sex with multiple people? Let's ban it. LINK (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html)

Many complain about "big government" yet are applauding one more law added to the books that was unnecessary.

[ISYairio]

I disagree, who I invite into my home is none of the business of neighbors.Au contraire, if it is known such a thing is going on and an incident occurs in the neighborhood... guess who is going to be accused of exposing the neighborhood to increased risk?

I agree, causing disruptions outside the house, setting up displays and or advertisements is also a valid concern.

When I looked at their web-site a couple of weeks ago, there was no indication of where the "Cherry Pit" was located, only a phone number.By that, I meant basically "yelling" they're open for orgies. I think they made a smart move, on this part, by not explicitly identifying their community.

I don't say the community doesn't have a valid position. They do.

My questioning goes to the validity of outlawing sex inside a private residence.Outlawing orgies is ridiculous, they can't stop it: they'd have to keep track of what goes on inside the houses, and they'd have to start pretty much going to the extreme to invade privacy. But, the individuals involved... having so many people come over, and so forth, pretty much brought this on themselves. They'd be perfectly protected and have overwhelming support of freedom on their side if they had gone about it in a more low-key manner... assuming the community doesn't really know that every friday when say a car or so pulls over at Marys house that something is going on, etc.

They can protest all they want, that goes part and parcel with the right to Free Speech.

The question is whether they have the right to outlaw sex in a private home between consenting adults.

Under the present ordinance I could have a Sports Club that meets every weekend clogging the neighborhood streets and be perfectly legal.


>>>>The outlaw part of the act is ridiculous, but the community is well within its rights and authority to speak out and so forth at such a thing. Comparing a prayer meeting, sports club, and so forth to a residential sex club with equal numbers of meeting attending is ridiculous... each would have trouble just for number of the individuals in such a small area, and rightfully so, but the community is well within reason to protest such a... thing. Those people better be hoping that community doesn't have a lot of kids running around, the parents will probably be the ones most infuriated.

Wanna have orgies?
Don't identify your community.
Don't make it a business. Sex for money, you gonna get burned.
Keep the traffic low, probably move it around a bit so not same day every week.
Don't have people coming during the daytime and when kids are outside.
Not smart to have an Internet, aka virtual, window into your home and the sexual activities going on within.
Mark every day on your calender that the community doesn't find out they have such a place within it and scream for joy each time you do mark the calender. If you are found out, probably just better to get over it and move on: the community response to such a thing can be seen as a legitimate concern.


Frankly, imho, go go go community protest!

[ISYairio]

When I was younger, a big group of us would get together for boxing, football games, etc. We would chip in $10 bucks for beer and snacks. Many cars, $10 donation.... that is now a business?Sex and money, it is going to evoke ire. They probably should have just brought the stuff, not the money.


Just because some are swingers, they are an unwanted types? Do not forget that some of them are doctors and lawyers.Such alone doesn't enhance "your value", or however someone wishes to think of it, though I can't think of a different way to describe it. And some are scum. On the Internet, can be risky.

I also see it as insulting in regards to family values, Doesn't mean I want to make swinging a crime, as I think the law they did is a bit ridiculous, but they provoked the response, imho.

They were there for years before anybody found out what was going on inside. You have to actively search for them to know what is going on inside the house.By having so many people come over, if it is really those amounts, they provoked the response.


It is one thing to protest them, it is another to write a NEW LAW to ban adult sexual activity among consenting adults who were not breaking any other laws (such as prostitution).

They have resorted to carpooling to reduce the parking traffic. If they used a few vans to pick everyone up (and got further reduced parking traffic), they would still be breaking this new law that is regulating their sexual behavior.The law is a bit amusing, hard to enforce, and not how they should handle it, but I sympathize with the community.

Seems kind of stupid, to me, to want to engage in such activity with so many people and want to live and do so in a suburb. But, yeah, creating a new law for a sexual act that isn't involving a profit, etc, isn't the way to go about it if the community wants such activity to stop. The people in Pasadena, TX who are against Joe Horn and have been protesting in front of his house should be flown over and told Joe moved there :))

Pray they get this messed up part of their life over with.

[ISYairio]

Ah well, I really don't care anyway. I agree that if they are operating a business then they're subject to more regulation than a private citizen. It bothers me a little that they would streeeeeeetch to define them as a business, though, if they're not profiting from the venture.

Besides, I don't care about children anyway. Sick of hearing about why we need all these laws and policies that restrict the freedom of adults because of the chiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiildren. To hell with the children, let them grow up with a sense of reality about them instead of living in an artificially-created bubble that prevents them from seeing how the world really is.

I'm sorry, but that just reminds me of the Left Behind Series. All the kids and Christians are gone, so all the adult adherence to modesty standards drops to 0... :))

But, I disagree. Perfectly valid and admirable to want to shield children from such vulgarity.

[ISYairio]

That's why I don't understand why a private poker game in someone's home is illegal (at least in Maryland). Earlier this year several people at the shore were arrested for gambling, although it was a private game in someone's home--for large stakes.
I really don't like the gambling thing being illegal.

You can gamble through the government almost everywhere... why not elsewhere? :think:

Don't really have government sex clubs... I hope...

[DeltonaCouple]

After reading some of the comments here I actually had to register just to comment on some of these. As background information, I was a regular at the Cherry Pit. So I know the area, and I am also WELL informed on the people who attend, and the donations that are asked for. If you have a question, I will give you an appropriate answer, but I will not reveal any personal information, so don't ask for that.

With that said: The city passing an ordinance to ban the activity IS the dang point. Since the Cherry pit has been going on for well over 15 years, and nothing has been said before, its not like things have changed much there. What is at the core of it is that the city is using the EXCUSE of parking and traffic to find a way to force them to stop what is going on in a PRIVATE home. I mean seriously, if the root of the problem was traffic and parking, it would take MUCH less effort to set up traffic signs and regulations that to create a ordinance banning what people do in their own home.

Hold up...wait a minute....this story was talked about in another thread a while back. What the issue is parking in a residential neighborhood...the noise that is created by 200 or so participants at these parties...and they do charge a fee...called donations...at the door. The what are they doing in those parties is a negligible part of this story. They..the councilmen and council women who voted on this, did not make a decision based on the activity....they based it on the complaints of fellow private residents who complained about the mass amount of cars and the mass amount of noise. The residents of that private suburb complained that the parties created not only a parking hazard for emergency vehicles..if one of their neighbors had need of them..would have no way of getting into the neighborhood to help with emergency services. They also complained that the noise ordinances were broken...for many of these 'parties' go on way after ten o'clock. The issue of orgies didn't' come up in the complaint until the end of the fight.

Now...the council did find the activity outside the realm of a lawful home based business...to which the owners of said activities did not have a license to provide those services from home. Running a quasi business from home does mean you have to have the proper licenses and permits for such activities. Seeing as their parties are very popular...parking would have to be provided so not to exclude normal traffic or emergency vehicles from servicing that suburb. The noise...well, everyone has their right to peace and quiet after a certain time...most communities are 10 o'clock or so.

This business crap I keep hearing is rediculous. The donations are used to pay for food and NON ALCOHOLIC drinks. as well as laundry services for sheets, pillow cases, and things such as condoms. YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED to give money. If you chose to not donate, you will NOT be told you can't come in. The parties are by INVITATION ONLY. If you want to attend, you call ahead, and ask if you can come. they will tell you yes or no based on how many people are in attendance for that weekend. So since it is by INVITE and donations are accepted, they are NOT a business, therefore NOT required to obtain a business license. It drives me and my wife CRAZY that so many people DO use what is happening to get support. As was said before, if I had a football party every weekend and had a bunch of cars parked on my property, it wouldnt cause such a media sensation as a swinger's party. So sex IS THE POINT of the whole thing. Otherwise the odinance would be passed to dictate parking requirements. If this ordinance were to pass, and not be overturned (which I do believe it will be overturned) then even if the owners of this home were to buy a house on 10 acres, they STILL couldn't have their parties. So how can ANY of you who say so, believe that is has more to do with parking, than what is going on!

Instead of addressing what can be done to fix the parking, they are trying to put out a match with a firehose by blanketing the activities. This ordinance will only stop parking problems at THIS type of activity, NOT others, like football parties, and new years parties. So yes, the root of all this is a bunch of Conservative stuckups trying to force their own beliefs on others!

[Remus Lupin]

After reading some of the comments here I actually had to register just to comment on some of these. As background information, I was a regular at the Cherry Pit. So I know the area, and I am also WELL informed on the people who attend, and the donations that are asked for. If you have a question, I will give you an appropriate answer, but I will not reveal any personal information, so don't ask for that.

With that said: The city passing an ordinance to ban the activity IS the dang point. Since the Cherry pit has been going on for well over 15 years, and nothing has been said before, its not like things have changed much there. What is at the core of it is that the city is using the EXCUSE of parking and traffic to find a way to force them to stop what is going on in a PRIVATE home. I mean seriously, if the root of the problem was traffic and parking, it would take MUCH less effort to set up traffic signs and regulations that to create a ordinance banning what people do in their own home.



This business crap I keep hearing is rediculous. The donations are used to pay for food and NON ALCOHOLIC drinks. as well as laundry services for sheets, pillow cases, and things such as condoms. YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED to give money. If you chose to not donate, you will NOT be told you can't come in. The parties are by INVITATION ONLY. If you want to attend, you call ahead, and ask if you can come. they will tell you yes or no based on how many people are in attendance for that weekend. So since it is by INVITE and donations are accepted, they are NOT a business, therefore NOT required to obtain a business license. It drives me and my wife CRAZY that so many people DO use what is happening to get support. As was said before, if I had a football party every weekend and had a bunch of cars parked on my property, it wouldnt cause such a media sensation as a swinger's party. So sex IS THE POINT of the whole thing. Otherwise the odinance would be passed to dictate parking requirements. If this ordinance were to pass, and not be overturned (which I do believe it will be overturned) then even if the owners of this home were to buy a house on 10 acres, they STILL couldn't have their parties. So how can ANY of you who say so, believe that is has more to do with parking, than what is going on!

Instead of addressing what can be done to fix the parking, they are trying to put out a match with a firehose by blanketing the activities. This ordinance will only stop parking problems at THIS type of activity, NOT others, like football parties, and new years parties. So yes, the root of all this is a bunch of Conservative stuckups trying to force their own beliefs on others!

Welcome aboard. I have an old friend that lives in Deltona Florida.

[Dreamy]

They are advertising and they are charging people.

This is a zoning issue and cities have every right to protect residents of their cities against having to live next to an adult sex business.

This is the crux of the issue. The quality of life for the neighborhood is impacted.

[Dreamy]

After reading some of the comments here I actually had to register just to comment on some of these. As background information, I was a regular at the Cherry Pit. So I know the area, and I am also WELL informed on the people who attend, and the donations that are asked for. If you have a question, I will give you an appropriate answer, but I will not reveal any personal information, so don't ask for that.

With that said: The city passing an ordinance to ban the activity IS the dang point. Since the Cherry pit has been going on for well over 15 years, and nothing has been said before, its not like things have changed much there. What is at the core of it is that the city is using the EXCUSE of parking and traffic to find a way to force them to stop what is going on in a PRIVATE home. I mean seriously, if the root of the problem was traffic and parking, it would take MUCH less effort to set up traffic signs and regulations that to create a ordinance banning what people do in their own home.



This business crap I keep hearing is rediculous. The donations are used to pay for food and NON ALCOHOLIC drinks. as well as laundry services for sheets, pillow cases, and things such as condoms. YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED to give money. If you chose to not donate, you will NOT be told you can't come in. The parties are by INVITATION ONLY. If you want to attend, you call ahead, and ask if you can come. they will tell you yes or no based on how many people are in attendance for that weekend. So since it is by INVITE and donations are accepted, they are NOT a business, therefore NOT required to obtain a business license. It drives me and my wife CRAZY that so many people DO use what is happening to get support. As was said before, if I had a football party every weekend and had a bunch of cars parked on my property, it wouldnt cause such a media sensation as a swinger's party. So sex IS THE POINT of the whole thing. Otherwise the odinance would be passed to dictate parking requirements. If this ordinance were to pass, and not be overturned (which I do believe it will be overturned) then even if the owners of this home were to buy a house on 10 acres, they STILL couldn't have their parties. So how can ANY of you who say so, believe that is has more to do with parking, than what is going on!

Instead of addressing what can be done to fix the parking, they are trying to put out a match with a firehose by blanketing the activities. This ordinance will only stop parking problems at THIS type of activity, NOT others, like football parties, and new years parties. So yes, the root of all this is a bunch of Conservative stuckups trying to force their own beliefs on others!

We all have sex regularly,we do not all create traffic jams everytime we do. If any neighborhood activity is causing problems in any neighborhood it can and should be addressed. Many people have to share a neighborhood.

[flores_in_texas]

I was in agreement with your post until this part:
<snip>
This ordinance will only stop parking problems at THIS type of activity, NOT others, like football parties, and new years parties. So yes, the root of all this is a bunch of Conservative stuckups trying to force their own beliefs on others!

If you read my posts, you will read that I repeatedly defended your right to partake in whatever you do behind closed doors among consenting adults and even inferred what the city was doing is unconstitutional.

I am a conservative and find your last comment rather rude. This post has over 100 posts, and just as many liberals as conservatives agree with the city's ruling. If those on this board were voting in your city, you could also state "So yes, the root of all this is a bunch of Liberal stuckups trying to force their own beliefs on others!"

[Dreamy]

I was in agreement with your post until this part:


If you read my posts, you will read that I repeatedly defended your right to partake in whatever you do behind closed doors among consenting adults and even inferred what the city was doing is unconstitutional.

I am a conservative and find your last comment rather rude. This post has over 100 posts, and just as many liberals as conservatives agree with the city's ruling. If those on this board were voting in your city, you could also state "So yes, the root of all this is a bunch of Liberal stuckups trying to force their own beliefs on others!"

Another *yawn" tedious swipe from the "enlightened ones" that presumes a stereotype about conservatives and sex. Just because some people do not flaunt their sexual activity on open forums does not mean there is no fire in the bedroom.

Talk is cheap.

[flores_in_texas]

Another *yawn" tedious swipe from the "enlightened ones" that presumes a stereotype about conservatives and sex. Just because some people do not flaunt their sexual activity on open forums does not mean there is no fire in the bedroom.

Talk is cheap.

Agreed.

Let's see if DeltonaCouple was a 1-hit wonder and will not return. The last reply to this thread was December 18th and it was on page 20-21. That is a lot of pages to read and only find one thread to post on.