« Defend Our Defenders | Main | Open Thread »

Gateway Pundit has a list and excerpts from the explicitly pronographic literature promoted by Safe Schools Czar Jennings for use in the classroom and school libraries.

Only in SAN FRANFREAKHOLE a city of wackos where plastic grocery bags are banned over this green crap and clean needles are exchanged do they come up with even more stupid ideas

God help U.S. Please send Your Son...YESTERDAY!

Gay sex in the streets drew complaints from even liberal residents, so the promoters are considering moving it out of "public" view, by placing it in these tents.

Once in the tents, the promoters can claim it is no longer public, and therefore, nobody has a basis for an objection.

Question: If gay sex tents, shielded from public access, and only open to adults who voluntarily choose to enter them, are to be considered a "private" space in which there is no acts of "public" sex occurring, then why are San Francisco bar owners prohibited from designating their property as either a smoking or no smoking zone?

These tents are arguably more public, as there is a much weaker private right of exclusion (due to state affiliation) than a business owned by private citizens operating on private property.

Does San Francisco consider a bunch of strangers who do not know each other, engaged in unprotected promiscuous sex, to not be a health hazard? (it clearly is)

If adults can choose to walk into a gay sex tent at a public event, and engage in sexual activity with an unknown stranger despite widespread HIV infection, then why can that same adult not be allowed to choose between a smoking and a non-smoking establishment?

Just wondering, could you have "Underage Drinking Tents" and get away with it in San Francisco? How about "Drinking Forbidden Bottled Water and Not Recycling the Bottles" Tents?

How repulsive. Look at your decadent liberals, america. They love to shove things in their butts so much they make fairs out of it.

I was about to say something pissed off, but I remembered THIS:
http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0676.html

I think I feel sick. Perhaps this is a place where we can use the services of some rabid jihadi.

anonymous countermoonbat...
Thats an excellent point!
I'm keeping that for talking points!
Thx
DM

But it won't be any fun if other people aren't subjected to it. That's the point of the whole spectacle.

I think they should keep it "in the bedroom" where we were promised it would stay. I stay out of your bedroom, then no cornholing in the street - tent or no tent. Deal?

you know that the super-opressive attempts by the jesus-based flat earth society are entirely responsible for this, right?

Historically, religious views forced gays to essentially be invisible or become outcasts. Now that it is culturally ok to be gay, you have only yourselves to blame for the fact that they, too, are taking it too far. Piss people off for centuries, and they will eventually fight back.

You reap what you sow....

Bill S., I've felt the same way for a long time.

You reap what you sow....

Great quote. Any idea where it comes from?

Posted by: Anonymous at December 4, 2009 2:43 PM

That's the silliest argument I've ever heard as to why homosexuals are prone to excess--"The Christians made them do it!"

I still don't get it. How the hell is nudity and sex in public legal anywhere in the US? I am from the Bay Area, thank god not from SF, and I just can't believe this stuff goes on in public. These people are sick and twisted. And they think we're nuts LOL!!! Two Words for SF: Sodom - Gomorrah

I still don't get it. How the hell is nudity and sex in public legal anywhere in the US?

In the state of California, public sex is a crime. The SFPD simply ignores the law during this event, much to the detriment of anyone who lives, works, or owns property in the area.

The behavior falls into the category of illegal, but tolerated - very much similar to how California behaved towards medical marijuana prior to prop 215.

This phenomenon isn't all that unusual. Until 2005's Lawrence v. Texas, roughly half of states had valid criminal laws on the books prohibiting premarital sex or oral sex between consenting adults, even within a private dwelling.

Dear God,

Hit SF with a meteor. PLEASE!

Historically, religious views forced gays to essentially be invisible or become outcasts.

This is not about orientation, so can the identity politics and nauseating cries of victimization.

Your argument falls flat in several ways:

1. The religious lobby would still be firmly opposed to heterosexual street orgies, even if every participant was only having sex with his or her opposite-sex spouse.
2. Residents, workers, and property owners do not need to make a religious or orientation issue out of this to have a problem with it. The street is simply the wrong place for orgies, as far as public order is concerned. Can you imagine trying to raise a family or do business in that atmosphere?

Here are some comments from disgusted residents with secular objections:

"I've been to the Folsom St. Fair once inadvertently when a large client and I stepped out of our hotel smack dab in the middle of it. Haven't been back to San Francisco since and we moved our N. California regional offices to San Jose. We lost a lot of IT business with folks who would fly in from Middle America. The City is disgusting aesthetically and morally and I'm certainly no prude but the fact that I can eat a funnel cake while having no choice but to observe performing strap on dildo’s is not my idea of a festive family atmosphere. Any parent who would subject their kids and I saw a lot of small children witnessing this. I can’t believe folks who are raising families there allow this and even more bazaar is keeping the Star Wars Cantina Crew on as City Council. America needs to steam-clean and sanitize this city post haste." -Tangerinesong 12/3/2009 3:11:35 PM

"And you wonder why tourism is down? Duh" -theotherone 12/2/2009 8:59:51 AM

"One word: Disgusting. I wish I could get this image out of my head but you can find pics from one of the "fairs" of some dude whacking off out a window and depositing his man juice onto the crowd below. How is this tolerated? How is this not a sign of some sort of mental disturbance. How is this family fun? Public sex should not be allowed. Keep your debauchery to yourself." -randywatson 12/3/2009 4:35:25 PM

These are secular objections to what is a quality of life issue, in the same vein as the policy considerations in keeping drug-addicted transients from making street homes in commercial districts, loud music out of quiet residential neighborhoods, or excessive through traffic from clogging up two lane roads.

Well, I know where Lao, GoW and Burt will be...

The problem with the social left as a whole is they don’t understand the difference between “some behavior outside the norm should be tolerated” and “all behavior outside the norm should be celebrated.”

you know that the super-opressive attempts by the jesus-based flat earth society are entirely responsible for this, right?

Historically, religious views forced gays to essentially be invisible or become outcasts. Now that it is culturally ok to be gay, you have only yourselves to blame for the fact that they, too, are taking it too far. Piss people off for centuries, and they will eventually fight back.

You reap what you sow....

Posted by: Anonymous at December 4, 2009 2:43 PM

Betcha a can of Coke this is the guy that was jerking off out the window at the public PillowBiter parade, otherwise known as Folsom Street. How in earth did he find Moonbattery?

If I had not followed the links to the coverage of the "fairs" I wouldn't have believed this shit!

We have a large gay community where I live. For the most part we all exist in harmony. I've NEVER witnessed this kind of crap. Because of my girlfriend's previous career (managing "the" flower shop in Santa Fe) I've attended parties where > 1/2 of those in attendance were gay. This stuff would shock even them!

Maybe the mountain air makes for a more civilized fag?

Yep, I checked up on the links too. Uh. . . too bad for me. All I can think is that this totally disproves the theory of evolving into a MORE intelligent species. If Darwin could see this not only would he up-chuck, he would probably burn up all his notes and hung himself.

S'cuse me - Hang himself. Should be hang. (Bad use of hung after the pics.)

Sorry, I've just cum.

Dibs on the first tent! (You know I'm king of the Folsom Street Fair - make that, "Queen" of the Folsom Street Fair.) I hereby extend a very warm invitation to Burt, Andy, Lao, and Ghost of America to join me in my personal tent. I'll even supply the KY!

Sorry, I've just cum again.

Historically, religious views forced gays to essentially be invisible or become outcasts.

One look at the Folsom Street photos shows why making them invisible and outcasts was a good call.

I've just cum again.
I think I'll have to sit down.

What they need is another EARTHQUAKE

I tell all my gay friends: "Hey guys, pay attention to your continuing lack of approbation by the broader public as reflected by your continuing losses in marriage referendums across the country and, just once, consider whether it has anything to do with your insistence that your lifestyle mandates assless pants and public orgies."

"You want to convince the mainstream that your lifestyle commands reenactment of Sodom and Gomorrah, then don't complain when the rest of society declines to take you at your word when you say homosexuality is a private choice about private time in private bedrooms."

Just in the last couple weeks, the damage done to the "gay" cause by that kid from American Idol was incalculable. But everyone else are bigots when they recoil in horror at this kind of behavior.

This clinches it for me. I will vote against every gay marriage proposal I every have a chance to.

You've got a date, Bevan!

Your tent or mine, Burt?

Yours, buddy. Mine kind of got burned up thanks to a bad meth accident,

Oh, you guys, trying to be funny again by acting stupid, ha ha!

Everyone knows that "under advisement" is politician speak for "shut up and go away".

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 4, 2009 11:00 AM

Easy. It's a question of transmission. In the instance of the tents in question, the only ones being placed at risk are the active participants. With smoking, there is a risk to everyone in the vicinity including those who do not voluntarily join in the activity.

Easy. It's a question of transmission. In the instance of the tents in question, the only ones being placed at risk are the active participants. With smoking, there is a risk to everyone in the vicinity including those who do not voluntarily join in the activity.

When an adult walks into a smoking establishment, they are voluntarily joining in the activity.

Bars are not necessary. Nobody has to go to them. All entrants do so completely voluntarily.

Given the distaste for smoking, and the power of the entrepreneurial spirit, the market will assure an ample supply of non-smoking establishments, even without government involvement.

I don't smoke, but I find it absurd that adult smokers are not permitted to voluntarily congregate on private property, due to government edict, yet the government goes out of its way to enable public gay sex at a street fair.

I have to say this is a great idea. I wish I could make use of one of the buttfuck tents with a couple of illegal aliens, and maybe some federal agents cause I love the government. After I was made airtight and filled with baby batter we can hunt down gold owning ron paul supporters.....

Also wanted to say again as a homofacist I love the federal government. If the feds wanted to kill my family that would be fine with me. I love the government so much.

Meeting Lao, Burt and Ghost in SF for this!

I can't wait!

Here is an idea:

If SFPD sees public sex..... arrest the people doing it. If they resist, beat the shit out of them with nightsticks or shoot teargas into the crowd.

Pretty fucking simple.

Posted by: Anonymous Countermoonbat at December 6, 2009 1:49 AM

Well, bar fights happen too. If a person in a bar is punched in the face, are they not protected by the law since they "volunteered" to go into a risky environment? I don't think so.

Also, where were you in the 80s? There was no "ample supply" of smoke-free environments. Smokers were and are simply too large a group to completely alienate. People were exposed to unnecessary risk constantly so that other people could commit slow, messy suicide. There's not a single thing about that situation which was acceptable, and that's why laws were passed.

Also, "goes out of its way to enable"? The only actual fact we can pull out of this pile of homophobia is that a politician said "under advisement", which 95% of the time means "I listened to you, now go away so I don't have to say NO to your face".