Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by zimv20, Jan 3, 2004.
thanks for the update. This was already posted under current events by giaguara, but an that was about a month ago. I glad to see that her lawyer is planning to challenge the constitutional nature of this archaic ''blue" law. You think Texas would have learned with the ruling on its sodomy laws, but I guess it only made some folks look for ways to continue their stupidity.
i missed it (not surprising, i don't venture into that forum often). i guess i'm surprised it didn't end up here at some point
I presume the State of Texas would never have pardoned Lenny Bruce.
"He said 'blah-blah-blah'"?
We've been fighting the bluenoses for decades, in Texas. They have the same emotional deal going as many other groups of anti-somethings. "I don't like it, so you can't do it."
Liquor by the drink, stores open on Sunday...Lotsa long fights against some sort of fundamentalist types...
in your estimation, of what percentage of the total population is this group comprised?
Hey, I live in Kommie Kali and an adult store was just evicted from the downtown area and the city council is looking at "creative" ways to rezone to keep those kinds of places in the industrial area near the RR tracks. We'll see if they can meet constitution muster or if they get overly specific. There's a big fight between another adult store owner and my city as well and his store hasn't even opened yet. This is far from a redneck texan-type issue. Although I kinda doubt they would bust you for dildos around here.
This is sounding more and more like a personal-vendetta-via-law-enforcement kind of thing.
Cities can zone for adult book stores and the like -- this was decided in a Supreme Court decision 30 years ago. Most of the local ordinances are modeled on the Detroit regulations that were the subject of the challenge. What they can't do is prohibit them outright, though certainly the zoning restrictions can make finding a lawful location for one quite difficult.
Emphasis on two-part constitutionality test mine.
Here are some relevant cases.
Renton v Playtime Theaters, Inc
Young v. American Mini Theaters, Inc.
Young was the Detroit ordinance case. It was decided in 1976, so make that 28 years ago. (I was an undergraduate in City Planning at the time.) Many cities adopted the "Detroit Ordinance" in the years following, and I can well remember some of the local planning agencies where I worked maintaining maps showing where adult businesses could be located.
It basically means the zoning ordinance can't specifically target adult-oriented businesses, and it can't make the laws so restrictive that there is no place for the business to be run (ie. banning said businesses from within 1500' of a church or school, knowing full well that there are enough strategically located churches or schools for that distance requirement to completely ban said business.
I didn't know you'd been in the planning field. Interesting.
That's my recollection, yes. Later court cases may have changed some of this; I'm not sure as I've been out the city planning biz for over ten years now. Got my degree at the "other" Cal Poly, btw.
Edit: I noticed in the another thread you've just received your degree in Architecture. That's where I started out many moons ago.
zim, I dunno if anybody knows for sure. My seat of the pants view is that the "Baptists & Bootleggers" are maybe a fourth to at most a third of Texas' population. (They're not all Baptists, of course. ) "Bluenoses" aren't necessarily or exclusively churchy types.
Many states still have a lot of these old blue laws on the books; they just haven't done enough house cleaning. They're not actively used in enforcement except when there's the bad luck to find a bluenose as a prosecutor, or when there is some antagonist as in the Burleson incident. Odds are that the prosecutorial/judicial establishment in Burleson is highly embarrassed...