Yesterday, Nov 6, was state and local election day here in Texas. One city passed an ordinance outlawing "swingers clubs" in the city limits. The reason was because a neighborhood in the city was protesting meetings of a swingers club in the home of a couple who invited couples of like mind to attend partener swapping parties at the home. There were no criminal activities and the place was not a private club requiring a license. There were no charges for admission but donations were allowed to cover expenses for the homeowners. Now, here is the question, is this a matter to criminalize? Choose an answer.

there was a town in oklahoma that outlawed topless clubs within the city limits, but had fully nude clubs on the city border.

depends on the local government. you will have two sides with valid constitutional points on both sides. it is a matter of interpretation

I meant to make this into a poll at the last minute so I added a poll above.

The fact that this was being done at the home of a private residence and that no other criminal activity was going on at the time, sounds like a very clear violation of a persons right to both freedom and privacy.

Here is why:

In 2003, Lawrence vs Texas the USSC ruled that all sodomy laws amongst consenting adults were unconstitutional (sodomy during the course of a rape is still illegal). Its pretty much the same sort of case.

A government cannot regulate the sexual activities of consenting private citizens within their own homes provided that no other crime is being committed.

It seems pretty open and shut, at least in my opinion.

[quote=mmarsh;376037]

"In 2003, Lawrence vs Texas the USSC ruled that all sodomy laws amongst consenting adults were unconstitutional ."


So is sodomy compulsory yet? Outside of State Pen, I mean.

And weren't the people in that house contributing to global warming, a green offence?

the first three.

The legislators are just jealous they're not getting in on the action.

The Libertarian in me says that the city can't make ordinances that are invasive to the right to privacy. But, the conservative part says that even though grownups have the right to practice adultry in their own homes, the neighborhood kids should not be exposed to such behavior by their elders who are supposed to set an example of morality. I had to agree with no. two, with some hesitancy.

I choose the last, but I chose it for personal reasons, not fully, "constitutional" reasons. (Sorry my heart and head have to work together). I do think that neighborhoods should be able to have a say in what they do not want right in the middle of their surroundings.

People need to take other's into consideration before attacking things, or setting up a more...adult businesses (or swinger homes) in the middle of a family and child orientated area.

Sorry, I wouldn't want my 3 year old waking me up in the middle of the night with, "mommy the neighbor lady is screaming."

Can't force your values on someone else. So IMO the puritanical nieghbors need to get a grip and realize that. No laws were broken, no ordinance needed.