SC proposes to ban “sex toys”

[Back]

WTF century is this again???

Bill would make sale of sex toys illegal in South Carolina (http://www.independentmail.com/and/home/article/0,1886,AND_8195_4641568,00.html)


COLUMBIA — Lucy’s Love Shop employee Wanda Gillespie said she was flabbergasted that South Carolina’s Legislature is considering outlawing sex toys.

But banning the sale of sex toys is actually quite common in some Southern states.

The South Carolina bill, proposed by Republican Rep. Ralph Davenport, would make it a felony to sell devices used primarily for sexual stimulation and allow law enforcement to seize sex toys from raided businesses.

-------------------------------------------------------

Apparently this is common in the South? Holy hell. Now, I’m just guessing here, but I imagine this law will affect many more women than men, yet a man wrote the bill? This dosen’t even have any biblical foundation as far as I know. Scientifically speaking, its the safest sex around. No STDs, no unwanted kids...

I completely fail to understand the reasoning behind why sex toys should be banned.

[Jorddyn]

I completely fail to understand the reasoning behind why sex toys should be banned.

Because some people are far, far, far too worried about what everyone else is doing in their bedrooms.

And sex is dirty. And wrong.

Jorddyn

[HarmNone]

There will always be those who feel they know what's best for your moral growth. It MUST be best because they believe it to be so. Thankfully, in most cases, proposals like this never really see the light of day when it comes to becoming law.

[Back]

Its a total fucking joke. They’ll have to ban cucumbers and bananas at grocery stores.

[DeV]

And lets not forget about gerbils! Some people use them as a sex toy. I'm not naming names though.

[peam]

(Wezas)

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Basically, people and politicians like this.. namely, republicans (not ALL republicans, mind you) are more worried about what people are doing in private behind closed doors than what is going on around the world, how people are actually suffering, and the state of our country and economy.

Basically, the guy is a total dumbass.. it annoys me to no end how sex is demonized in American Culture. Shit like this makes me wonder just how many people feel that we should revert back to the good ol' days of the Middle Ages.

[Jesuit]

Backlash you should write them a letter telling them it's not fair to take your sex toys away

[Ilvane]

It really is scary how the government feels they can try to regulate what we do in our bedrooms.

I mean, they've banned gay marriage in many places, a bunch of states have taken birth control off the lists of covered drugs under Medicaid, and then of course abortion is getting restricted more and more..Now sex toys?? Give me a break.

All I have to say is I want the government out of the bedroom!!

[Sean of the Thread]

Basically, people and politicians like this.. ...... are more worried about what people are doing in private behind closed doors than what is going on around the world, how people are actually suffering, and the state of our country and economy.



O RLY??

[Hulkein]

I mean, they've banned gay marriage in many places, a bunch of states have taken birth control off the lists of covered drugs under Medicaid, and then of course abortion is getting restricted more and more..Now sex toys?? Give me a break.

All I have to say is I want the government out of the bedroom!!

Not allowing gay marriage and not allowing sex toys are two completely separate issues.

If you meant to say 'not allowing gay sex,' then you'd have a point.

[radamanthys]

they just wanna nerf gays

[Latrinsorm]

All I have to say is I want the government out of the bedroom!!Yeah, quit trying to stop rapists, government!!

Oh, you probably meant you only wanted the government out of the bedroom when it suits your particular philosophy, just like SC Representative Moronport.

[Tisket]

would make it a felony to sell devices used primarily for sexual stimulation

Sex toy manufacturers and shop owners will find a way around this. All they'd have to do is list multiple household uses for an item. I'd think plain vibrators would be exempt as some people use them for actual self-massage of muscle groups other than sexual organs.

lmao, trying to think of some tongue-in-cheek household useages other than sex that you could claim for sex toys and failing miserably.

[Warriorbird]

Yeah, quit trying to stop rapists, government!!

Oh, you probably meant you only wanted the government out of the bedroom when it suits your particular philosophy, just like SC Representative Moronport.

Cute associations.

[Latrinsorm]

Thanks, I think they're my second-best feature after my eyelashes.

[HarmNone]

Yeah, quit trying to stop rapists, government!!


Umm, this thread is about South Carolina trying to outlaw sex toys. Your comment, which I have quoted above, is in answer to a post by Ilvane that mentioned abortion, gay marriage, and birth control. The majority of rapes probably do not happen in bedrooms. So...how in the hell do you connect rape to this discussion?

HarmNone, the ever curious

[Warriorbird]

It's a variant of the conservative "homosexuality and beastiality" are equivalent nonsense. Good to see it's not just me noticing him pull his "logic" for once.

[Stanley Burrell]

Wow, maybe I should go corner South Carolina's cucumber market.

Is this a joke?

[Latrinsorm]

The majority of rapes probably do not happen in bedrooms.If rape was legal in a bedroom, the percentage would rise pretty sharply. Of course, the phrase "in the bedroom" is being used here to describe sexual activity in any sense, otherwise Ilvane's position would have piqued your curiosity just as highly, as most people don't get married in their bedrooms.

Ilvane's position that the government should have no position on any sexual activity is untenable unless she's willing to at the very least condone rape, which is unlikely. Therefore, she must make the case that a ban on the sale of sex toys is immoral/nonmoral on its particulars and not its general class (sex law). "I don't like this ban so it should go away" is as reasonable a position as "I don't like it so we should ban it", namely not at all.
Good to see it's not just me noticing him It was a lot funnier when it was your "ballsiness" and not your powers of observation that caused you to hold yourself in such high esteem, but this is still worth a chuckle.

[HarmNone]

On the contrary, Latrinsorm. I read Ilvane's reference to government staying out of "the bedroom" as referring to sex between consenting adults. If my reading of her statement is correct, rape would have no place in the discussion and her position would not require that she be willing to "condone rape". Additionally, she said nothing that would lead us to believe that she thought the government should have no position on "any sexual activity".

Heh. I should also point out that rape is not a sexual activity. Rape has little to do with sexual activity and a great deal to do with hate and resentment.

[Warriorbird]

It was a lot funnier when it was your "ballsiness" and not your powers of observation that caused you to hold yourself in such high esteem, but this is still worth a chuckle.

IE: Fuck, I got called on it! Now I have to get defensive and snappy!

[Latrinsorm]

I read Ilvane's reference to government staying out of "the bedroom" as referring to sex between consenting adults.Given her explicit referral to abortion and the status of abortion in this country, I think inferring "consenting adults" is pretty risky.
I should also point out that rape is not a sexual activity.I'd say sexual assault has (at the least) a sexual component to it, which is why it's called "sexual assault" and not "nonsexual assault" or "assault".
Now I have to get defensive and snappy!Rest assured, no defense is required against the fumbling, incoherent attacks you make. :)

[Ilvane]

No, I did not mean all sexual activity, Latrin..and to twist my words to say I somehow condone rape, is pretty damn sickening.

Grr.

Angela

[HarmNone]

Consenting adults can find themselves faced with an unwanted pregnancy just as can unconsenting adults, Latrinsorm.

As far as sexual assult is concerned, the only thing sexual about rape is the fact that a sex act is committed. The motivation behind that sex act has little to do with sexuality. This is a widely accepted viewpoint and not one I made up. Sex, in the case of rape is much like a gun in the case of murder by shooting. It's a weapon.

[DeV]

Trying to get back on topic, but what the hell does sexual assault have to do with banning sex toys? Where is the coorelation? Furthermore, a proposal such as this is not going to affect anyone that makes it their business to rape other people.

[Skirmisher]

No, I did not mean all sexual activity, Latrin..and to twist my words to say I somehow condone rape, is pretty damn sickening.

Grr.

Angela

It was a rather dissapointing ploy from one who is more than capable of understanding what was meant, yes.

[HarmNone]

Trying to get back on topic, but what the hell does sexual assault have to do with banning sex toys? Where is the coorelation? Furthermore, a proposal such as this is not going to affect anyone that makes it their business to rape other people.

Heh. That was my original question, DeV. :wtf:

[Latrinsorm]

to twist my words to say I somehow condone rapeAgain, the point was that your original post was inconsistent, not that you support rape or anything like that. In short, you'd have to support rape for your position to make sense and you clearly don't support rape, therefore your position makes no sense. If I thought you *did* support rape I'd just have said "Ilvane supports rape, she's clearly bonkers".
Consenting adults can find themselves faced with an unwanted pregnancy just as can unconsenting adults, Latrinsorm.Whatever fetuses are, they are certainly not adults capable of granting consent. One cannot have an abortion without a fetus, HarmNone.
The motivation behind that sex act has little to do with sexuality.I agree with that. It doesn't make the act non-sexual anymore than shooting someone is assaulting someone without a weapon. Using sex as a weapon necessarily implies that one is using sex.
but what the hell does sexual assault have to do with banning sex toys?Original argument: the government should "stay out of the bedroom", therefore the government should not ban sex toys.
Counter-argument: The government should be "in the bedroom", because some people do extremely bad things "in the bedroom" (e.g. rape).

[HarmNone]

Heh. I think I shall refrain from discussing any issue with one who is bent on rationalizing the irrational. I have too damned much to do! :rofl:

[Sean of the Thread]

Heh. I think I shall refrain from discussing any issue with one who is bent on rationalizing the irrational. I have too damned much to do! :rofl:


Such as moderating.

[Wezas]

Counter-argument: The government should be "in the bedroom", because some people do extremely bad things "in the bedroom" (e.g. rape).

The government should stay out of bedrooms of consenting adults. Seriously Latrin you should have avoided this thread because most of the time people just tolerate your viewpoint. In this case everyone sees it as completely off-base.

Prime example:


The majority of rapes probably do not happen in bedrooms. So...how in the hell do you connect rape to this discussion?


If rape was legal in a bedroom, the percentage would rise pretty sharply.

This is the most retarded thing I think I've ever heard you say. And there are pages to pick from.

[Latrinsorm]

The government should stay out of bedrooms of consenting adults.Consent has some pretty sturdy ethical basis. "Adult" has always been an arbitration. Arbitrary decisions (like 18 years = adult, sex toys = bad) are indefensible. Saying one is bad and another is good is unacceptable.
This is the most retarded thing I think I've ever heard you say.I'm sure you could think of worse.
I think I shall refrain from discussing any issue with one who is bent on rationalizing the irrational.It's peculiar how people who feel the need to make accusations like this appear physically unable to actually back up any of their assertions. Whether it's "out of context!!", "circular argument!!", or the new fave "irrational/illogical!!", the pattern never changes.

[Solkern]

I live in SC too!

[peam]

Latrinsorm, I normally stay out of arguments that turn serious real quick, but everyone is exactly right about your argument, it is fucking retarded.

[peam]

Such as moderating.

Dude, shut the fuck up. If we moderated everyone who posted something retarded, in an effort to protect them, this would be a full time job.

[Sean of the Thread]

Dude, shut the fuck up. If we moderated everyone who posted something retarded, in an effort to protect them, this would be a full time job.

HAHAHA Peam talking about moderating.. AHAHHAAH.


HAHAHA

[Satira]

Dear Eric,

There is no reason to debate or argue this topic. It is 100% retarded to suggest sex toys should be taken out of bedrooms. PERIOD. Leave these good people alone.

Love your friend,
Coley

[Solkern]

lol

[Tisket]

I live in SC too!

Enough reason to avoid that state (and all surrounding states). You're a contaminant.

[Warriorbird]

Funny how all these other folks are making "fumbling attacks" that seem to be hitting the mark, Latrin.

[Hulkein]

Dear Eric,

There is no reason to debate or argue this topic. It is 100% retarded to suggest sex toys should be taken out of bedrooms. PERIOD. Leave these good people alone.

Love your friend,
Coley

It's 100% retarded to say Latrinsorm said that.

Not that I read all of his argument, didn't really have an interest, but I do know he never said that.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

O RLY??

YA RLY.

[Latrinsorm]

It is 100% retarded to suggest sex toys should be taken out of bedrooms.As Hulkein noted, I did not suggest that. It puzzles me how *anyone* could get that from my posts when I explicitly stated that the designation of sex toys as bad was arbitrary (and therefore indefensible). Do people think I mean "really grade-A, quality position" when I say "indefensible"?

I didn't think it'd be necessary to note this, but my disagreeing with a certain argument for a position doesn't mean I don't hold the position itself. I disagree with the teleological (design) argument for God's existence, but that doesn't make me an atheist.
Funny how all these other folks are making "fumbling attacks" that seem to be hitting the mark, Latrin.A "fumbling attack" is you making some random quip that has nothing to do with anything (c.f. bestiality) in an apparent attempt to discredit me. A person reading what I post and making a response to it is neither fumbling nor an attack.

[DeV]

Do you think sex toys should be banned in SC, Latrin?

[Stanley Burrell]

Trying to get back on topic, but what the hell does sexual assault have to do with banning sex toys?

I can jack up my wanted level to 5 stars with the enormous purple dildo, so I think it's a safe bet to assume that the banning of sex toys and pixelated dildo beat-downs are intercorrelated. I'm spot on. Word is bond.

[Satira]

I got 3 IMs from different people going "What is your friend Eric thinking in this thread" so I didn't really read the thread. I just left him a message.

Anyway, I told him he should have started a thread "the government should be allowed in the bedroom" or something of that nature instead of arguing that point here.

He is still 100% retarded, though. HEE.

[Latrinsorm]

Do you think sex toys should be banned in SC, Latrin?a) This should be obvious from what I've said.
b) No.
He is still 100% retarded, though. HEE.c) :C

p.s. d) <3

[Tsa`ah]

Yeah, quit trying to stop rapists, government!!

Oh, you probably meant you only wanted the government out of the bedroom when it suits your particular philosophy, just like SC Representative Moronport.

Does god know you're a moron?

[Warriorbird]

Just for Latrin...to quote "Thank You For Smoking."

"If you argue right, you're never wrong."

It's funny as I included precisely where you went wrong logically (though after Harmnone did) but removed it because I thought it was too mean and too personal. Keep on with the extended analogies. Then you can move back to unfounded assertions.

[Stanley Burrell]

"Thank You For Smoking."

Saw this the weekend before this last. Almost worth starting a new thread over.

Almost.

Stanley Burrell.

[Tisket]

As Hulkein noted, I did not suggest that. It puzzles me how *anyone* could get that from my posts when I explicitly stated that the designation of sex toys as bad was arbitrary (and therefore indefensible). Do people think I mean "really grade-A, quality position" when I say "indefensible"?

I didn't think it'd be necessary to note this, but my disagreeing with a certain argument for a position doesn't mean I don't hold the position itself. I disagree with the teleological (design) argument for God's existence, but that doesn't make me an atheist.

Oh I don't know...let's see...

You spend time composing the most serpentine, verbose sentences known to mankind. They are lacking in compactness and pointedness of style. The more outrageous a stance you take on an issue the less some of your statements make sense. Occasionally I feel the need of a map to work my way out of some of your sentence structure. Truly, you and Stanley have far more in common with each other than either of you probably wish to contemplate...

You are also pathologically incapable of admitting you are wrong when it comes to an argument here (I claim no knowledge of you to say so regarding your real existence) or even that someone else might have a valid point. Not so surprisingly, this can lead to feelings of frustration. Perhaps you enjoy instilling bafflement in others. Or perhaps, it makes you feel as though you have conquered a particular argument when it becomes easier for others to simply give up than to try to follow your self-vaunted "logic".

On a side note:

WB...you've developed a stalkerish attitude toward Latrin and it's rather annoying. Everyone knows you both have profound differences of opinion but really, is it necessary to turn every thread he posts in into a conflict? Maybe I am way off base and everyone else enjoys those kind of threads. If so..carry on.

[AnticorRifling]

As long as the don't ban surgical tubing, cool whip, super soakers, golf clubs, and stuffed buffalo is there really anything to worry about? I think not.

[Warriorbird]

WB...you've developed a stalkerish attitude toward Latrin and it's rather annoying. Everyone knows you both have profound differences of opinion but really, is it necessary to turn every thread he posts in into a conflict? Maybe I am way off base and everyone else enjoys those kind of threads. If so..carry on.

You're right. I should back off. He does well enough for himself.

[Celephais]

As long as the don't ban surgical tubing, cool whip, super soakers, golf clubs, and stuffed buffalo is there really anything to worry about? I think not.

You forgot the ice cubes. And if they ban stuffed buffalo, we could always switch to live, but I don't think they'd ban stuffed buffalo, for saftey sake.

[Stanley Burrell]

Oh I don't know...let's see...

You spend time composing the most serpentine, verbose sentences known to mankind. They are lacking in compactness and pointedness of style. The more outrageous a stance you take on an issue the less some of your statements make sense. Occasionally I feel the need of a map to work my way out of some of your sentence structure. Truly, you and Stanley have far more in common with each other than either of you probably wish to contemplate...

Just so we get things cleared up, he totally be crampin' my serpentine verbosity, yo.

The stylistic serpentine verbosity vocalizing incarnate of some sort.

[Latrinsorm]

You are also pathologically incapable of admitting you are wrong when it comes to an argument here ... or even that someone else might have a valid point.I take umbrage to this and cite this very thread where I agreed with one of HarmNone's statements. Further, I challenge you (or anyone) to find a thread where I was shown to be wrong and didn't admit as much. I don't tend to knuckle under when someone throws out winning shots like "Does God know you're a moron?", no. It would be disrespectful to do so.

The second paragraph I find clever and insightful.
It's funny as I included precisely where you went wrong logically How convenient.
Keep on with the extended analogies.To be fair, the only analogy in this thread was HarmNone's, though I certainly expounded upon it to show how it in fact favored my position.

[Tisket]

I take umbrage to this and cite this very thread where I agreed with one of HarmNone's statements. Further, I challenge you (or anyone) to find a thread where I was shown to be wrong and didn't admit as much.


Yeah, like I am going to wade through your bullshit a second time. Anyway, do us both a favor champ, list where you admitted you WERE wrong. Or even conceded a point to someone else. Go ahead...you have 9000+ posts so there must be a few...

And by the way, agreeing with a poster does not constitute admitting you were wrong. Well, maybe it does in your twisted logic...

[Latrinsorm]

or even that someone else might have a valid point.:)

And though I think it's in bad form to make an accusation and demand that the accused prove eir innocence, http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=18191

There's one for me, how about backing up your assertion?

[Caiylania]

Lame law proposel that will be shot down. As for this whole side-bar debate... I pretty much read the post to mean 'the law should stay out of consenting adults bedrooms and let them do what they want in private'

This does not mean 'stay out of bedroom' in the sense of: Husbands raping wives is ok, date rape drugs are ok, breaking into a womens home and raping her in her bedroom is ok.

[FinallyDomesticated]

"People convicted under obscenity laws face up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine."

I want to be there when the first prim and proper church/PTA woman is asked if she has ever been convicted of a crime and she has to admit to her future employer than she got locked up for circumstances revolving around a dildo.

[Skirmisher]

Lame law proposel that will be shot down. As for this whole side-bar debate... I pretty much read the post to mean 'the law should stay out of consenting adults bedrooms and let them do what they want in private'

This does not mean 'stay out of bedroom' in the sense of: Husbands raping wives is ok, date rape drugs are ok, breaking into a womens home and raping her in her bedroom is ok.

Yes to all of the above.

It's not really complicated.