Dancer’s for Democracy: The Underlying Issue

Update: Some of this post references Scott’s post here (and my comment there) – meant to link it but didn’t.

OK, funny ha-ha time over. I’m on record as giggling my ass off over the thought of strippers at my old office. I’m also on record as not a big strip club fan. However, the issue doesn’t really stop at the 6 feet rule or hours of operation. I’ve been thinking about this alot and was on my way to writing why this is, indeed, important – and even a “progressive cause”. As happens sometimes, someone else ends up doing it better. So go read it.

Putting all other issues aside, like the fact that 4 of the dancers fighting against SB16 are law school students not intent on any of Naugle’s “unscrupulous and criminal intentions”, this issue is important because they won’t stop at chipping away at strip clubs. CCV is against an adult choosing to watch an adult movie in a hotel. Me. You. Anyone. They want to control us. We need to show them the door unceremoniously – legislation is a way we do that. Even if it does cause some to get a giggle or some to get sanctimonious. Next they’ll tell me I can’t play poker and that gay couples can’t adopt kids. Think about it. If you don’t think this is a progressive cause, then think of it this way: laying down on this benefits a right-wing conservative cause and they won’t stop here. They win this, then they get more clout to come after other things – and they will.

Interesting comments on CCV leader Phil Burress in that thread by Bluefish as well. I know that was a long-winded way to point you to a post, so just go read it already!