Is it a business or a private matter? I’m conflicted, so I will hold off…
If the same law were to apply to regularly held prayer meetings, attended by the same number of people, where a collection plate was passed around to raise money to cover expenses of refreshments etc, then I would be fine with it.
The law should be activity blind. It should focus on the effect on the neighborhood. If Joe Schmo was inviting a hundred people round every weekend to watch the Notre Dame game, and asking for money in donations for refreshment and the cost of the satellite feed, then I can see how that would annoy the neighbors, far more than if it was a group of 5 friends.
But if the law prohibits what is going on inside the privacy of the home, rather than the effects on traffic, noise, etc in the neighborhood, then I have issues with it.
This is a joke, right?! There is no adultery or fornication in Texas!
I think **villa ** nailed it in one. Nobody would complain if it were a weekly prayer meeting or a book club. It is enforcement of morals through selective enforcement of the law. Speaking as a Texan, I say, “Fucking Texans.”
Well, see, there is where my confliction comes from. The 1st amendment protects a prayer meeting, but not an orgy parlor.
And your second example would sort of seem silly because I can’t see a scenario where a hundred people would come to a residence for satellite TV. A lot of people have it, and you can go to any bar and watch it.
But, on the other hand, you can’t exactly rent out the local Moose Lodge for your swingers club. And you should have control of your house if you want to hold it there. And it can’t be a business if you don’t require payment for entry (drum roll w/rim shot). But the host wouldn’t be having these without donations.
So, I still don’t know if it is a business, or a private matter. I can’t believe you can have 100 people fucking in a residential neighborhood without violating a noise ordinance. 
We talked about some of these issues in this thread: Swingers Clubs Ruled Legal - Great Debates - Straight Dope Message Board
So call the orgy a sacrament.
And local ordinances can constitutionally be used to restrict religious expression. If you don’t believe me, try holding an open air prayer meeting with amplified sound in a residential neighborhood at three in the morning. Alternatively, see how far claiming you were attending Church gets you when you fight a parkign ticket in court.
Now, and unfortunately, and IMHO unconstitutionally, zoning rules are often bent/ignored to benefit religious organizations. But the bottom line rule is that content neutral rules that impact first amendment protected activities can be and often/usually are upheld from constitutional challenges.
You could not have a law that banned you holding prayer meetings in your house. You could have a law that banned you having 100 cars parked outside your house every Sunday. That kind of law I would support, whether it prevented prayer meetings, Notre Dame watching (which should be a crime anyway) or gangbangs. A law that focuses on what you are doing inside the house, on the other hand, is the government sticking its nose in where it is not needed or wanted.
I don’t disagree with you, but I was taking issue with your contention that a 100 person prayer meeting can be outlawed the same way that a 100 person gangbang can.
The 1st protects a “free exercise of religion” but not a 100 person gangbang.
I also agree that the laws are skewed to benefit a religious function, and to prevent a swingers club, because the former is socially and constitutionally preferred, while the latter is not.
In court, though, the intent behind the law is what usually rules. You can call it a sacrament, but an orgy is not one in any known or accepted religion.
It would in fact, and in my opinion, come down (another rim shot) to the particular circumstances behind this swingers club. If it is set on 5 acres of land with trees all around, then it really isn’t bothering anyone.
If it is on a quarter-acre parcel of prime residential property, where school children look at passed out swingers on the back patio, the next morning at the bus stop, then the city has an interest…
Not what I said. I did not say a 100 prayer meeting can be outlawed the same way as a 100 person gangbang.
There are no religions that view sex as an integral part of worship? If you think jurisprudence is settled on what is a “known or accepted religion,” you aren’t very aware of the law in this area. Read up on peyote, for example.
I don’t think we need to go into the whole religious jurisprudence. All I am saying is that there is no way any court will rule that a gangbang is a protected religious activity, nor are these people claiming any such thing…
Fair enough, but the bottom line is that this law should be activity neutral. If the “business” is causing problems for the neighbors, then there is a legitimate interest in the state controlling it. If it is not causing trouble for others, then that interest is less pressing. And the problems strike me as pretty similar whatever the 100 people in the house are doing.
Though, of course, specious arguments regarding the “bad elements” attracted by sex-oriented businesses have been used to justify zoning laws that have first amendment implications. As my First Amendment professor used to say, courts just get it wrong many times when it comes to sex.
I tend to agree, but I am a little more skeptical than you. I would think that a swingers party would cause more external disturbance than, say, a 100 person meeting regarding the implications of the U.S. Civil War on modern day school children.
I’ll admit that I’m not a swinger, and have never attended such a gathering, but I’m sure that there is loud music, alcohol, possibly drugs that a home owner in the area could be pissed off about as it affects his property values and/or quality of living.
But, IMHO, the city is full of it when they call this activity a “business”. It clearly isn’t. Just because they have a web site and take donations doesn’t make it a business. It’s more like the above Civil War club, which uses the donations to defray the costs of the “meetings”.
Just because one involves erudite discussions and the other is a gangbang SHOULD not make a difference to the city, but it does. I still can’t help but thinking that the external effects of a 100 person gangbang should create a noise problem with the neighbors…
Aren’t there already laws sufficient to cover the problems? I agree with Villa. It’s stupid to have laws that make judgement calls when you can just as easily makes laws against specific activity that is harmful to others. Who cares why there are 100 people in the house? If they are creating a noise disturbance than cite them for noise disturbance - there’s no reason to go into WHY they are making noise. If there are parking problems then cite them for exceeding building occupancy limits or zoning rules.
Definitely 1) they should just use whatever laws are already on the books, and if they really must make a new law, 2) make it a blind generic law that focuses on the specific harmful actions, and not whatever activity happens to be coinciding with it in a particular instance.
Dude, fucking Texans are the perceived problem here!
According to the article (and unless someone has specific evidence of anyone in the article lying, either directly or through ommission, I will accept the stated positions of the people interviewed in the article) the problem isn’t the group sex; it’s the multitude of vehicles parked on the street, probably causing a good deal of problems with blocked driveways, of residents unable to get into or out of their own driveways, etc., as well as what is perceived as an open-to-the-paying-public business being operated out of a residence.
And yes, I do acknowledge that there are, in all probability, some (plenty!) people who object to the activity, and are using the law to shut it down. But the law itself (zoning laws regarding the numbers of vehicles parked at or near a residence) is probably legally (IANAL) on solid footing.
Every Church I have seen has had their own building, even in predominantly residential areas, with sufficient parking on their own property.
My Mom tried the Amway thing in the mid-80s, and had to be careful about how many people she invited at any one time due to parking concerns on our street. We had a local cop living next door (very nice man, and family, too) who looked into it for Mom and gave her the info she needed.
I thought Amway considered themselves to be a religion…
According to the article:
Implying that they are not using existing zoning laws, but have created a new law, specifically addressing sex parties, and not these other related issues.
Never heard of the House Church movement? And also if you look up in the urban North East, for example, you will see plenty of Churches without parking. Even in suburban Nashville when I was there I saw plenty of Churches that would have special parking dispensations made for them.
I can see where a neighborhood wouldn’t want a live sex show operating there. I’m surprised it became a legal matter.
From the article:
Grrr. Why do i have to be tempted to donate my opinion on this one? Double Grr.
OK. Does anyone really believe that the money at $10-$20/person or couple is just to cover the food & refreshments? Pah-leeeeez! First of all, there is a person - usually the male host or a male “bouncer” - that greets people at the door and instructs people to drop their donation into the jar (or whatever they use). They are very careful not to touch the “donation” (hmmmm, if they do, would this be considered money for sex? aka solicited sex?). As for the ones that do not donate - they are usually single females that are encouraged to attend - afterall, who wants to go to a swinger’s party overwhelmed by men? There are also a few (usually single men or a couple) that donate their time by cleaning up during and after the party, and I recall one guy being the “shuttle-bus” driver that would take people from a public parking lot to the house party to eliviate some of the traffic issues.
Let’s look at this on a financial perspective: $20/couple x 20 couples = $400. Add the singles @ another $10 x 30 = $300. That’s $700 for 50 people. We’ll assume there are another 30 females, free of charge that puts the total up to 80. Most of the food consists of snack items such as chips, dips, and sandwhich items. I’d say the grocery total (including tea and soda) will be no more than $200 max. They have “volunteers” to clean up, so no maid costs. They would be bringing in apx $500 give or take EACH WEEKEND they have the parties. Figure that at 2x a month for a grand total of $1000 net.
Are they claiming said donations as additional income? Are they donating the after-expenses to charities? I think not!
This IS a business hidden in a residential area and people are throwing out controversial issues to confuse others into thinking this is merely a subject of morality vs privacy. If they want to knock-off the question of money, then change the donation from currency to food-items (hello!). No more question on if it’s a business or private-party, now is there?