Headlines everywhere are saying that a federal judge has upheld a drag show’s right to perform in a public park.
Federal court orders St. George City Council to allow Southern Utah Drag Stars show to continue
Concerned citizens are panicking that the government is siding with the targeting of children. But don’t jump to conclusions, the details matter, this is just a political game to counter all the push-back against “Child Targeting Pride Month”. Let’s think through this, step by step.
The danger here is that good people will read the headlines and think that the feds have ruled on the legality of these “family friendly drag shows” (targeting children) and that we lost in the battle to defend children, as if the court has changed the law and made targeting children legal.
But this is not the case at all. Nothing has changed.
This article is to demonstrate to you that this actually proves we are in a strong position, and the pedophiles had to invent this situation in order to fool people into backing off. By them forcing a court decision about a trivial issue, they’re ignoring the real arguments where they would lose in court and in public opinion.
If they are successful, then in the future they’ll say we allowed this and claim it is the new “community standard”. Such a standard will become the real legal precedent. But we’ll prevail if we keep pushing back as a community that we do not accept this standard.
WHAT’S WRONG WITH THESE “DRAG SHOWS”
The problem with these “drag shows” is not that people don’t have the right to be drag queens. People have the right to unpopular opinions and to make themselves look like fools in public. People can believe in drag queens, just like anyone can believe in any religion of their choice. The old Mormon motto applies here, as written by President John Taylor,
There are more people attending to the eleventh commandment in the city of Nauvoo than in any other place of the same size on the globe, that is they mind their own business in Nauvoo, without interfering with others.
– Nauvoo Neighbor, April 7, 1845
The problems with these “drag shows” are:
– (2) Public lewdness, which is illegal under the law. Nationally and at the state level.
We can emphasize that we’ll defend their right to be clowns where there are consenting adults only. This could be an adults-only public area or private area.
Eventually this can push them out of public spaces back into private only if we understand the process. The pedos will lose because they won’t be able to resist the temptation to keep targeting children and pushing the lewdness-boundary.
THE RECENT COURT RULING of 6/19/2023
Court rulings are always going to be very specific to the details of the case.
The ACLU and pedos have set up this court case to stand on a trivial argument about advertising too early, which is more easily won in court. But the headlines can create the illusion that the case is actually about something totally different. Reading between the lines, there’s really nothing newsworthy about this ruling.
Let’s look at what the court concluded in this case:
“Public spaces are public spaces. Public spaces are not private spaces,”
and
“Public spaces are not majority spaces. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution ensures that all citizens, popular or not, majority or minority, conventional or unconventional, have access to public spaces for public expression.”
The city now may not enforce any new advertising prohibitions against the group or its show, Nuffer ruled, ordering that the performance must “take scheduling precedence over any other event.”
As a principled liberty community, the court ruling is a non-issue. In fact, we hope that we also always maintain our own rights to use public spaces to promote family values, our own forms of marriage, and our religious beliefs. Let the best arguments prevail in the public square on opinions, but as for the children, we must never stop standing for them.
CHANGE THE DISCUSSION – WIN THE BATTLE
– Cities may use this case to say “Sorry, we have to allow these shows”, but you need to make sure you know how to keep fighting successfully. Push the issue that the case had nothing to do with the real issues, and therefore does not apply. They can successfully honor the court case and deny these events on different legal grounds.
The court made no ruling whatsoever on the targeting of children, just generic first amendment statements that we actually can agree with. So don’t fight a correct principle, instead fight on the grounds of where the problem actually is. Targeting children and public lewdness.
1. These events are intentionally targeting children. “Family friendly” means targeting children. Using puppets and painting activities and reading books in the library, are all children’s activities. The theme of targeting children is crystal clear.
2. These events violate state and national laws on public lewdness, even intentionally to minors. (Use the laws we’ve listed below with these argument)
If we don’t understand and present the correct arguments, based on correct principles, then we will lose our battles when the pedos actually have a better argument.
Let’s stay focused on the correct arguments, and we can still win in our cities and counties.
ARE THEY REALLY TARGETING CHILDREN?
Our article on last year’s BYU drag show did a full deep dive to prove the undeniable targeting of children. I’ll defer to that article if you need to read it.
Shock: BYU linked, Dragshow, Exposing Children, Enough! Take Action
ARE THEY REALLY BEING LEWD?
When the drag shows happened last year across the state, they denied in advanced that they would be lewd. So, we gathered the evidence. You need to go these shows and record the evidence, and present them back to the cities and publish them to the public with the lewdness laws. These pedos cannot resist being lewd to the children, because that’s what their real goal is. The non-pedophile drag queens don’t have a problem keeping these to adult-only private spaces. That is their right.
LAWS AGAINST PUBLIC LEWDNESS
1. Utah Code 76-9-702 – Lewdness
2. The Supreme Court has ruled how to determine if something is obscene. We must argue that these shows are intentionally obscene on these grounds (The following is from Justice.gov):
The U.S. Supreme Court established the test that judges and juries use to determine whether matter is obscene in three major cases: Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15, 24-25 (1973); Smith v. United States, 431 U.S. 291, 300-02, 309 (1977); and Pope v. Illinois, 481 U.S. 497, 500-01 (1987). The three-pronged Miller test is as follows:
- Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests (i.e., an erotic, lascivious, abnormal, unhealthy, degrading, shameful, or morbid interest in nudity, sex, or excretion);
- Whether the average person, applying contemporary adult community standards, finds that the matter depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way (i.e., ultimate sexual acts, normal or perverted, actual or simulated, masturbation, excretory functions, lewd exhibition of the genitals, or sado-masochistic sexual abuse); and
- Whether a reasonable person finds that the matter, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Any material that satisfies this three-pronged test may be found obscene.
Notice the theme is the community standards. Those standards are set by how well we make our public arguments, and that we don’t back down and we continue to maintain the argument indefinitely until we win in defense of children.
LAWS AGAINST CHILD GROOMING
1. Legal Definition – Grooming is part of the evidence of conspiracy to abuse a child
Child grooming refers to an act of deliberately establishing an emotional connection with a child to prepare the child for child abuse.
– USLegal.comGrooming is the act of establishing a close relationship with a child to prep them for abuse later on. The action of grooming is not a crime in and of itself. However, facilitating a crime especially one of a sexual nature is considered criminal activity.
– SnellLaw
2. National Laws
18 U.S. Code § 2251 – Sexual exploitation of children
3. Utah State Laws
76-4-401 – Enticement of a Minor
If any of these laws prove insufficient, this battle can easily lay the groundwork of public pressure to get the laws updated as needed. What’s important here is the spirit of the law is laid out clearly, and that’s enough to continue this argument with city councils.
KEEP UP THE FIGHT – ACTION ITEMS
Again, let’s stay focused on the correct arguments, and we can still win these local battles and we can win in the war against children overall.
– Keep pushing your city and county BY STATING THE ACTUAL PROBLEM (lewdness and targeting children).
– When they still have drag events, show up and record and document the lewdness and anything that shows how they target children.
– Like the work that Defending Utah does? Want to educate yourself more on the constitution and be part of winning teams across the state? Join Defending Utah today as a member and attend our weekly trainings and monthly events.
– Not ready to join yet? You can still sign up for our mailing list to keep up with the latest.
– Read the full article on pushing back against drag at BYU and consider signing the petition.
4 Responses
Yes, it’s all over the headlines and the Federal judge is David Nuffer, an Obama-appointed judge who resides in Washington County. He is the one responsible for overturning the will of the people and imposing his own interpretation of the First Amendment. So sexual grooming of children and deviancy is now a “protected right” under the Constitution. I doubt the Founding Fathers would agree.
So now that this is being forced on the people of St. George, the people need to BOYCOTT this “event.” What’s the point of an event if nobody shows up?? The message needs to be sent that public displays of sexual deviancy will not be tolerated particularly as it involves children. We need to protect our families and children from these groomers.
The main point of the article is a slight correction to your statement, which is a very important distinction. Grooming children was not ruled as a protected right, that’s not what the court ruled on. The point of the article is that the groomers were able to avoid this argument by having standing on something else trivial (advertising schedules). If the case was about grooming, and evidence had been presented, it would have been a different outcome. It’s important that we stand on the right arguments, otherwise we lose. Had the permits been denied originally because of child grooming and public lewdness, then the courts could not have ruled on the grounds they did.
Yes, I agree. I was saddened, however, to hear that this drag show went on anyway in St George last night. The group the “Southern Utah Drag Stars” now feel empowered thanks to a corrupted federal judge David Nuffer. I agree that if the permits were denied on the basis of child grooming and public lewdness then perhaps the courts and the judge may have ruled differently.
But there are a couple of things that are concerning. The first being that these groups have the power of the government and the courts on their side. The other being that conservatives are too shy and too nice to take a stand against this evil that is infiltrating our communities. Where was the boycott last night? As long as people are willing to watch this perversion then they (drag ) have the power. But conservatives have the power by boycotting these sickening events that target our children. But as long as people in our communities tolerate this perversion, then we have lost the battle.
With how freaking disgusting and mentally ill their “family friendly” shows are, I’d sure not want to hear any of the details about the ones that they admit aren’t family friendly.