Is my favorite club doomed?

Man I hope not. This is going to hurt a lot of girls if it it passed. This was posted on Thestate.com "Lap dances would be illegal in South Carolina under a bill passed by a House subcommittee Thursday. The bill, introduced by Rep. Scott Talley, R-Spartanburg, would require dancers in strip clubs to perform on a stage and maintain a 6-foot distance between themselves and patrons.
The bill also would require all sexually oriented businesses to close at midnight.
Strippers and club customers who violated the 6-foot rule could face up to one year in prison and a $1,000 fine. Club owners staying open past midnight could face three years in prison and a $1,000 fine.
The House Judiciary Committee will next take up the proposal."
I hope that the rest of the legislature has more sense than this prick Talley. He must be a real pole sitter.He's probably scared of being too close to pussy.

Assholes like the one you describe here are religious feminists. Being married, they don't understand why everyone else isn't happily married, and of course being married, why would you want to see another woman naked-it just doesn't make sense to them. They think men who go to clubs are monsters who want to enslave, degrade, and objectify women, therefore they want the clubs closed.

From AP, proposed new legislation in South Carolina. Still in the early stages.


Exotic dancers would have to stay six feet from strip club customers and those businesses would have to close at midnight under legislation approved by House panel Thursday.

The measure would effectively ban lap dances, and strippers and club customers who violated the proposal could face up to one year in prison and a $1,000 fine. Club owners staying open past midnight could face three years in prison and a $1,000 fine.

"There's documented evidence of illicit drug trafficking and those types of problems in these establishments," Tennessee-based attorney Scott Bergthold told a House Judiciary subcommittee on behalf of the Palmetto Family Council, a conservative groups pushing the legislation with the South Carolina Baptist Convention.

While courts have ruled that nude dancing is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment, they have also found physical contact that leads to prostitution and back room sexual activity is not protected, Bergthold said.

"There's no constitutional right to a lap dance," Bergthold said.

A strip club owner said banning lap dances "would probably kill the business."

"That kind of alleviates the personalness with customers, " said Jeff Foster, who owns two topless clubs and an all nude club along the coast. "It's all fantasy. They want to feel like they're the only one in the building."

Foster owns Thee Southern Belle and Diamonds North in Charleston and Club Paradise on Hilton Head Island.

"If we're made to close at 12, I've lost probably 70 percent of my revenues," Foster said.

The House Judiciary Committee will next take up the proposal.

Introduced by a legislator from Spartanburg...home of a Penthouse Club. Perhaps his constituents can point out to him the $$$ that strip clubs generate in his home base.

Read and follow it here
http://www.scstatehouse.net/sess117_2007…

The central group on this ongoing push to regulate adult business is the Family Research Council. They have affiliated groups in each state, such as the Palmetto Family Council in South Carolina. They all line up under the same agenda, which is essentially to impose Christian (i.e., Biblical) values on all of us. In summary, they are against abortion, in favor of abstinence as birth control, opposed to homosexuals and same sex marriages, against stem cell research and human cloning, and opposed to adult businesses.

It seems to me the above topics are all worthy of a healthy debate. I have at times been a devout and practicing Christian. But when there is a breakdown in the separation between Church and State, and a rush by conservative Christians to enact new laws and/or change the Constitution, alarm bells go off in my head. How is this different from fanatical Muslims using precepts from the Koran to craft "Islamic Law"?

By the way, these family values organizations are all run by men. I guess women really are the "weaker vessels"! Lord, help me.

Maybe a large group should try to set up homo sexual shops next to this guys neighborhood or start promoting all the other things he is against. Obviously he is trying to impose his beliefs on everyone else. I have never seen drug use in strip clubs and I've been visting years. Maybe one or two dancers use them in their private rooms but I have never been in there. I certainly don't want our south carolina tax money wasted by requiring the police to stay inside strip clubs making sure we all stay 6 feet away from all strippers. I could get more action in a church brushing up against girls in the aisle. I certainly would dread the thought I could be arrested and jailed and fined 1000 dollars because a female was only 5 feet away from me or accidently came into contact with me. Heaven forbid that a dancer slipped and fell off a stage and I would have a choice between catching her and going to jail for violating the no touch rule or simply let her break her neck or leg and be crippled or killed.

Some lawyers are just plain evil and it would be nice if the people involved in this case saw that this lawyer really just wants the money and to inflict as much pain as possible on a legitimate business, the dancers, the customers, and the tourism business of south carolina just to line his own pocketbook or his ego or sense of power.

I hope the other legislators have more sense but I plan on writing to them as soon as I find out their addresses. I urge everyone else to write as well even if you are out of state just to let them know your tourism dollars will no longer be spent here in South Carolina if this law takes effect.

Does anyone have a constitional right to drive a car? Just because it's not in the constition, that is not a good reason to ban something.

By the way, the constitution was drafted because our Found Fathers knew there would be people like this lawyer trying to restrict everything we do. There was no such thing as a car or lap dance back then.

I hope this does not become law. The trend does not seem to be in our favor. I suspect the majority of Americans have no use for strip clubs but at the same time they really do not care what goes on inside one. However a small group of religious zealots can bring up a petition like this and the weak politicians are not going to object. Without more Libertarian legislators or other free thinkers we are at their mercy. For those of you old enough to remember, the "Warren" Court was bold enough to rule these types of laws unconstitutional, but current Supreme Court members seem intent on slowly eroding our freedom. Even if a Democrat wins the election I don't expect any change in the Court's supporting these types of restrictions. They will probably stick with "Roe v. Wade" but when it comes to consensual sexual behavior I don't see any help coming from them.It is an absolute shame that in a "FREE" country we have to be subjected to laws against gambling, prostitution, stripping,etc. I work very hard for my money and should be able to spend it in any way I see fit as long as it does not infringe on someone else's rights.

From some of the recent headlines, I think there is more drug use in the legislature than I've seen in the club I frequent.

At least now I know to print out these names or to remember them and never to vote for them again.
General Bill
Sponsors: Reps. Talley, Davenport, Brantley, Leach, Clemmons, Barfield, Pinson, J.R. Smith, W.D. Smith, Walker, Brady and Haskins

They aren't names that I recognize.

Too bad our politicians aren't concerned about the same things I was. Things like a possible financial meltdown, the economy getting worse, business demand going downhill, possible runs on banks. The Fed devaluing our dollar relative to all other currencies around the world. Everyone working here in the US has already taken a big pay cut relative to what they can buy in terms of foreign goods. Foreign goods include things like oil or gas and many other products. Chinese goods and electronic items having been holding their prices I believe here in the US while they have been getting a lot cheaper overseas. It might be we have all taken a 40 percent pay cut compared to the rest of the world. Many state budgets are going to come up short either this year or next. What are South Carolina officials concerned about? Some supposed drug problem caused by strippers getting too close too customers while showing their breasts. I do wonder if our politicians are on something. I would rather believe they are just clueless about reality and where the real problems are. New strip club laws won't help the state budget. New laws will only make it worse. The state will have to pay the police to enter clubs and enforce all these new rules. Maybe South Carolians would rather keep the police off the streets and safe and secure watching strippers in the strip clubs. Then all the real criminals won't be bothered. Drunk driving, not a problem here in South Carolina, the police will be busy making sure I'm not within a 6 foot limit. (my sarcasm) I heard South Carolina has a number of drunk drivers but the lawyers help write the laws so people aren't prosecuted. hmmm, maybe we can have the same lawyers help write these laws if the bill isn't killed.

I really haven't spotted any drunk drivers on the road myself and I drive at night a lot. knocking on wood now.

I'm surprised to read that "nude dancing is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment"...I hadn't heard that before. Canada went thru this same nonsense a while back, and they ended up allowing LDs (but I forget the legal reasoning)...they also laxed the rules on prostitution and left a lot of the specifics up to the provinces & localities. Is it legal for women to go topless in public in SC (like it is in places like NY state)? That might be an angle to explore for ya'll...good luck...

Hmmmm...cars & LDs...I think that driving a car is deemed a privilege. I guess we'll see someday about LDs.

The main point here is that the purpose of state and federal constitutions in this country were to define the POWERS (not Rights) of government. They were not to define the RIGHTS of the citizens.

This guy that says there is no constitutional right to a lapdance is well...un-american to say the least...

I've never understood what a 6 foot rule means. If she's sitting at a table with you, does she have to be 6 feet away? If you order a sandwich, does she have to toss it to you from 6 feet? And what about a drink? How is my female barber going to cut my heir from 6 feet away. And how about my massage therapist? I don't understand how a rule like that could possibly be enforced.

Yeah, and how many dancers actually HAVE six feet? Or six legs, for that matter?

Now, a six BREAST rule I'd be all in favor of ... :)

I don't see how this could be enforced either, unless the dancers were also prohibited from mingling with customers. Anyone who's been in a crowded strip club knows that it's damn near impossible to walk through the club while keeping a six-foot radius of space around oneself. But, then again, maybe the 6-foot rule doesn't apply if the dancer is NOT in a state of nudity or semi-nudity.

The funny part is that I've seen clubs where there is an "x-number of feet away" rule in effect where the girls will just plant their feet that number of feet away from you and then lean over towards you with the rest of their body. It's probably a no-no for them to do that, but whatever. Is the new 6-foot rule in question when the dancers are nude, partially nude, or fully-clothed? That's another way around getting a lame LD...with the dancer on you having all of her naughty bits covered...lol...

I think the six-foot rule is an artifice.

It is obviously intended to counteract the "Nude Dancing is an expression of Free Speech and Therefore Protected by the Constitution". The six-foot rule is trying to say, "OK she can dance naked on stage, but she can exercise her free-speech right to nudity from six feet away, just as well as on the guy's lap." After all, nobody objects to being six feet or more away from stage acts and public speakers. So it is just a way to change the subject of the conversation.

When I first started going to strip clubs, the girls danced on a stage, and us guys were all six feet or more away from them. It was considered very daring and risque to walk up to the stage and insert a dollar bill in their garter (forget about the g-string.) Things have changed a lot since then. In today's environment, I would not consider going into a strip club that ENFORCED a six-foot rule.

But the good news is, I have heard there are places where a six foot rule is the LAW, but LE refuses to ENFORCE it. So there is always hope.

Also we can hope that South Carolina defeats this bill. BUt look what happened recently in Ohio.

What about "Life, liberty, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS..." - isn't that a basic "right"? So if going to strip clubs makes me happy why is that not a protected "right". I thought Conservatives were for less government.
The other thing is we have this SC State Treasurer, Thomas Ravenell who just got busted for cocaine possession and is awaiting sentence - I guess being in elected office also promotes drug abuse and should be banned. Makes about as much sense.

Well, no rights, Constitutional or otherwise, are absolute. Don't get me wrong...this kind of legislation is just more of the Right Wing in this country trying to legislate their unique view of morality, which I'm strongly opposed to.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is from the Declaration of Independance, not the U.S. Constitution. The "happiness" part is usually interpreted to mean "the right to pursue any lawful business or vocation, in any manner not inconsistent with the equal rights of others, which may increase their prosperity or develop their faculties, so as to give to them their highest enjoyment"...whatever that means...

I just STILL don't get, how sex-dancing (or, use some other name) is protected by the First Amendment. There's no "self expression" going on when Yahoo McBoobies waggles about on stage. She's not thinking, "This is the real me and I just have to express my opinion. I'm so proud to be American. I believe McCain should suck THIS tittie, and Obama should such THIS one ... ". I don't get it.

I never said the pursuit of happiness was a constitutional right; hence I used parentheses to denote this. I simple interpret the aim of the founding fathers that no one should oppress the people, and I feel that the religious right is oppressing me. This is my interpretation and, to me, the only one that counts. I will, as a citizen of South Carolina, express this to my state representatives, and urge others who feel the same way to do likewise. How others interpret "happiness" is irrelevant to me.

Ironcat: oh, don't worry, I'm not arguing with you personally here. I certainly WOULD prefer it if the First Amendment were found to protect such behaviors as lap dancing, whether the giving or the receiving there-of. I just don't SEE that it could. I'm not trying to say what I think ought or ought not be the case; I'm just trying to find the strengths and the weaknesses in a given defense of what, as I agree with them, some sensible people probably want.

I think the best current legal defense for lap-dancing, or any other sexually related behavior, is that it take place in a light-industrial area where there are few existing "community standards." I think the obscenity law comes into play here. The idea, that if there's a lot of Baptist churches there-bouts, then there's a lot of peole who object to lappers, and since it's their neighborhood, they define the "community standards" of their community. Well, put 'em in neighborhoods where nobody lives! Duh ...

But that's not the current vogue in defenses of lappers or of strip clubs. It's generally taken as a First Amendment issue instead. I just can't see that it is a First Amendment issue. It's not about establishment of religion, or about limitation of verbal self-expression in a political context, or about limitation of peaceful assembly. It's about ... no more sexually oriented behaviors. And so, it doesn't sound to me like anything which the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they approved the First Amendment.