https://newrepublic.com/post/171025/tennessee-house-bill-gutting-marriage-equality The Tennessee House of Representatives has passed a bill that would allow people to refuse to perform a marriage if they disagree with it. According to the bill, which passed Monday night, “a person shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person’s conscience or religious beliefs.” Tennessee law already says that religious leaders do not have to officiate weddings they object to. Critics say the new bill goes beyond that and would empower county clerks to refuse to certify marriage licenses, meaning that LGBTQ, interfaith, or interracial couples could be unable to get married at all, rather than just needing to find a new officiant for their ceremony. The bill, which now moves to the state Senate, is the latest in an onslaught of measures that the Tennessee legislature has passed attacking LGBTQ rights. This bill could also apply to couples where at least one partner is transgender, or to mixed race couples.
free speech absolutists y'all A TexasRepublican lawmaker proposed a bill allowing everyday people to sue anybody who hosts or performs in drag where any child is in attendance. Critics say the measure will create a bounty-hunting culture that targets drag queens and transgender people. Houston-area state Rep. Steve Toth filed HB 4378 on Thursday. He seeks to define “a cause of action for drag performances performed in the presence of a minor.” According to the bill, “An individual who attends a drag performance as a minor may bring an action against a person who knowingly promotes, conducts, or participates as a performer in the drag performance that occurs before an audience that includes the minor….” A winning plaintiff can expect to be paid actual damages, attorney’s fees, and statutory damages of $5,000. The bill uses the same tactics of the controversial 2021 SB 8 in Texas, which gave private citizens the right to sue anybody they thought could have been involved with any part of an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. This election cycle, Republicans are positioning themselves as the defenders of “parental rights,” which those on the right believe have been eroded by “woke” ideology being pushed secretly by teachers and professionals who work with children. However, this bill strips parents of the right to, for example, take their children to a family-friendly brunch hosted by a drag queen. “It is not a defense to an action brought under this chapter that the minor was accompanied at the drag performance by the minor’s parent or guardian,” the bill states. The bill states that civil action can be brought up to ten years after the offending event. Activists warn that the bill’s language will paint a target on transgender people and potentially make their participation in the arts illegal because of how drag is defined by the Republican legislature, which makes performing in any way representative other than one’s gender assigned at birth verboten. For example, transgender rights activist and reporter Erin Reed points out that the bill could potentially bar Grammy-winning singer Kim Petras, the first out trans person to win the coveted award for best pop performance by a duo or group, from performing in Texas. "These bounties can easily be turned against trans performers," Reed wrote. "It could ban a trans person singing karaoke. It could ban pride."
Robin Williams would be hauled to prison if he showed up at a library to read. Hell, if there's a public showing of Mrs. Doubtfire w/kids in the audience, does that venue also get fined? What about Dr. Dolittle since Eddie played the whole family? Tyler Perry? https://www.cbs19.tv/article/news/l...nces/501-1d7f821a-3204-4d10-a9d2-8e3ba7384993 AUSTIN, Texas — An East Texas senator has authored two bills that would ban drag shows held on public property or in the presence of a child and take away funding for local libraries allowing those dressing in drag to read to kids. Sen. Bryan Hughes, R-Mineola, filed both Senate Bills 12 and 1601 in March, according to the Texas Legislature website. SB 12 would restrict a business owner from presenting a "sexually oriented performance" on their premises if a person younger than 18 is present. The proposal also seeks to prohibit these performances from happening on public property. Hughes' bill defines a sexually oriented performance as featuring: A nude performer A male performer presenting himself as female or a female presenting herself as a male, who "uses clothing, makeup, or other similar physical markers and who sings, lip syncs, dances, or otherwise performs before an audience" Appeals to the lewd interest in sex The bill states that a person commits this offense if the performance (whether or not compensation is involved) happened on public property or in front of someone under 18 years old. Someone found guilty of this could face a criminal charge of a Class A misdemeanor. A business owner who presents one of these performances in front of a child could face a civil penalty of no more than $10,000 for each violation. The attorney general can take action to recover the money or get a court order to restrain the violation. According to the proposed legislation, cities and counties would be able to regulate these performances while considering public health, safety or welfare, but the shows cannot be on public property or in front of a child. Regarding the other bill, SB 1601 would take a state funding away from a municipal library if that library hosts an event, where the main performer is dressed as the opposite gender and reads a book to a child. The text of the bill said state funds would be denied the following fiscal year in which the library hosted the event. If approved by both the Senate and House and later Gov. Greg Abbott, the bills would become law on Sept. 1 this year.