Tennessee bans hand holding in schools

[FaxModem1]

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/04 ... ?mobile=nc

Tennessee Senate Approves Bill To Warn Students That Hand-Holding Is A ‘Gateway Sexual Activity’

By Scott Keyes on Apr 13, 2012 at 8:30 am

Like any state legislature dealing with 8 percent unemployment and thousands of its residents facing disenfranchisement, the Tennessee Senate is targeting the menace of underage hand-holding.

Last week, the Senate passed SB 3310, a bill to update the state’s abstinence-based sex education curriculum to define holding hands and kissing as “gateway sexual activities.” Just one senator voted against the legislation; 28 voted in favor.

Since the bill specifically bans teachers from “demonstrating gateway sexual activity”, educators would be prohibited from even demonstrating what hand-holding is. Breaking these laws could result in a lawsuit, as Hunter from Daily Kos notes:

If your teacher teaches you anything about sex that isn’t specifically on the approved curriculum, like demonstrating “holding hands” for the class instead of quietly tsking about the dangers it poses, they can be sued.

Still, this anti-hand-holding push may only be the second-worst bill passed in Tennessee this month. Nearly a century after the Volunteer State played host to the Scopes Monkey Trial, the legislature has now enacted a new law allowing educators to teach creationism alongside evolution.

Now this is just silly.

[PeZook]

Since the bill specifically bans teachers from “demonstrating gateway sexual activity”, educators would be prohibited from even demonstrating what hand-holding is. Breaking these laws could result in a lawsuit, as Hunter from Daily Kos notes:

Holy crap. It's like trying to legislate away reality. Might as well declare the color red illegal

Also, you know what else is a gateway sexual activity? Being alive

[The Romulan Republic]

Only one voted against it. Just how fucking retarded is the Tennessee legislature?

[Dalton]

Tennessee seems to be well on-track to outdo Kansas. They can't outright replace the state constitution with the Bible, so it seems they're kinda trying to slipstream it in just so.

[Ultonius]

If a parent holds their child's hand while crossing the road, could they theoretically be accused of sexual abuse under this law?

[Batman]

Ludicrously stupid as this bill is, I do think it only applies to teachers, and/or on school grounds (assuming the bill extends beyond teachers being forced to teach that holding hands is evil but prevented from demonstrating what that actually means to actually prohibiting the holding of hands amongst pupils).

[Patrick Degan]

Even as things stand, the Tennessee statehouse is, for the time being, not as bad as the batshit-crazy Arizona legislature and their even more batshit-crazy governor, Jan Brewer (R-Imbecile), who today signed an anti-abortion bill into law that defines the beginning of life as occurring up to two weeks before conception.

Not an Onion article.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

For a moment, I thought this was some Arab country...

[Skgoa]

(R-Imbecile)

TBH, nothing beats Jon Stewart's "R - you serious?"

[Grumman]

Even as things stand, the Tennessee statehouse is, for the time being, not as bad as the batshit-crazy Arizona legislature and their even more batshit-crazy governor, Jan Brewer (R-Imbecile), who today signed an anti-abortion bill into law that defines the beginning of life as occurring up to two weeks before conception.

Not an Onion article.

That part of the law isn't inherently unreasonable. The law is functionally identical to a 16 week+ ban starting from the first missed period (2+ weeks into the pregnancy), but uses a more readily identifiable reference point (something that happened as opposed to something that didn't happen). Your complaint should be about where the line is drawn, not whether it's measured in Celsius or Kelvin, so to speak.

[Patrick Degan]

That part of the law is wholly unreasonable. In no way does it solidly define the actual moment when a life supposedly begins, which means the standard is so vague as to violate due process, and in any case totally shits on the standard established by Roe v. Wade, which I suspect was the entire purpose —to force the latest challenge of the 1973 decision before the courts. It's an even more radical legal concept than zygote personhood, the core principle of the antiabortion amendment recently defeated by a referendum before Mississippi voters.