So, enough to buy several bottles of decent wine, then? Unless you have some specific knowledge about this specific sex club, I don’t see how you can possibly make any definitive statements about the financial arrangements.
:rolleyes: yeah, ok, I pulled that one out of my (censored!) =P
Alcohol is usually BYOB.
And ummm…
What is this - the presidential elections? ok fine! I tried it but I never inhaled… errr… inter-coursed… at one of these parties. You see, it was a suprise birthday present that I was lured into… yeah, that’s it… and I was young and naive (some things just havent changed over the years) and curiosity got the best of me (besides, I was try-sexual at the time)… and a recovering cathaholic with a control freaked mother… It was either that or years of psycho-therapy. I decided on the less expensive and drug-free way to increase endorphines. And I’d do it over again if I had to, dabnabbit!
A hundred people arriving at a home on a residential street is a huge traffic problem, unless you’re busing them in. If I had a neighbour who was regularly holding parties of a hundred people late at night and their cars were all over the place and the guy was charging money to get in (and please don’t pretend that isn’t happening here) I’d call the city council and demand action, too. I wouldn’t care if they were fucking or watching “Hoosiers” on the big screen in there.
But one of the important distinctions is that Duncanville does. They didn’t outlaw having public events at one’s home where donations are encouraged; they outlawed “sex clubs in residential areas”. It seems Duncanville hasn’t recognized the same type of traffic and other problems would result if someone were having huge poker tournaments in their homes; they specifically went after the sex club angle to it.
Nope
Yeah? Because they’re on city streets? And the Church is shoehorned in-between other buildings, maybe?
But we’re not talking about the urban northeast. We’re talking suburban Texas.
Goody for Nashville. But we’re not talking about Nashville. We’re talking residential areas in Duncanville, Texas.
With all the red herring you’re tossing out, you’re either from Norway, or a fishmonger.
Noooo… :dubious: They outlawed sex clubs.
Clubs
Parties
C-L-U-B-S
P-A-R-T-I-E-S
See the difference? And what do you want to bet that it is indeed part of the zoning code for Duncanville?
Let’s look at your comment to which I was replying…
As I suggested, house churches don’t have their own buldings. Furthermore, I then responded to “every” church you had seen having its own parking, by indicating that was probably because you had a limited experience of churches if you thought that was the case. Oddly enough, you did not say “every church in Duncanville Texas” which you had seen, but instead “every church.” From seeing your location on your post as having nothing whatsoever to do with Duncanville, Texas, I assumed you were talking from personal experience, you know, like “every church [you have] seen.” I somehow missed that you were permitted to draw on your own personal experience and have it not be a red herring, yet when anyone else did, it of course became irrelevant.
Similarly, I used Nashville, a city of which I have personal experience, to draw a comparison. In Nashville, and indeed other towns and cities south and north that I have experienced, Churches are regularly treated differently under traffic laws. I am assuming from your post that you know Duncanville, Texas to be different.
Here is the Phoenix Code, upon which the Duncanville code was based:
Here is a link to Duncanville’s local ordinances: http://library4.municode.com/mcc/DocView/13711/1/49 (which does not appear to include the recently adopted ordinance)
IOW, you have no idea what goes on at a wife swapping party, but you’re going to feel free to make broad assumptions based upon nothing but your own imagination, have I got that right?
How is it clear that this is not a business? I saw no information that detailed just how much money the folks running the sex party collected versus how much they actually spent on foods, refreshments, etc.
Marc
I’ve heard several references to “prohibiting live sexual performances”. When does something go from people having sex to a live sexual performance?
Not all swinger-parties involve loud music, alcohol, and drugs - and that assumption is like saying all blondes are ditzy.
Most reputable party gatherings consist of professionals -Dr’s, Lawyers, Nurses, IT’s, Businessmen, etc. They also consist of “regular” people as well, but no matter the background these people are respectable and careful.
The only thing I would be able to confirm is the noise level - Laughter and voices tend to carry regardless if it’s a football party, birthday party, or “adult” party. And I would think it’s accurate to say that the more people involved, the louder the noise level.
Now, from my experience (and I’m certain things have changed over the years), these parties were by word of mouth only and there was an interview period as well. You could be invited by a regular guest if allowed (that’s how I was introduced and I’m not sure if I was more shocked by the fact that there were such parties or that my friends were involved in the lifestyle), and it certainly wasnt something advertised to the general public. Regardless the terminology used - club, party, whatever… it is what it is, isnt it?
Ok, so maybe I’m sticking my foot in my mouth and being too opinionated…?
Not that there’s anything wrong with that 
I guess you are right. My apologies if I offended anyone…
Because if you call this a business then if I have a few friends over to watch the game, and they chip in a few bucks for beer, then the city could ALSO call that a business under the same premise. It’s a far too overreaching definition when it is talking about things you are doing in your home.
The city should be honest and simply say that they are trying to outlaw these sex clubs, and not a “business”. What if the owner of the house footed the whole tab and charged nothing and didn’t accept donations?
The same thing would be going on, so why does the city care about the financial aspect of it?
I found this wording in a different article. While the discussion here and elsewhere seems to be whether the Cherry Pit is a business, the code referenced here doesn’t seem to care. As worded, there is no way the Cherry Pit does NOT fall under the description, so my question is whether the ordinance is constitutional or not.
Maybe. As I said we don’t actually know whether or not we can consider this a business because we don’t know whether the amount of money collected actually goes towards covering expenses or if there is a profit for the organizers. So I ask again, how is it clear that this is not a business? Are you privy to the internal machinations of this particular sex club? Do you possess knowledge that the rest of us don’t have access to?
What if the owner doesn’t foot the bill and would not do it without making a profit? Personally I don’t think anyone in town would have cared all that much were it not for the traffic problems .
Marc
Wait, it’s just a $2000 fine? So if I have 100 guests at my sex party, and they chip in 20 bucks apiece, the fine is taken care of. Problem solved!