Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bill would make sale of sex toys illegal in South Carolina
AP ^ | 4/23/6 | Seanna Adcox

Posted on 04/23/2006 5:47:00 AM PDT by Crackingham

Lucy’s Love Shop employee Wanda Gillespie said she was flabbergasted that South Carolina’s Legislature is considering outlawing sex toys. But banning the sale of sex toys is actually quite common in some Southern states.

The South Carolina bill, proposed by Republican Rep. Ralph Davenport, would make it a felony to sell devices used primarily for sexual stimulation and allow law enforcement to seize sex toys from raided businesses.

"That would be the most terrible thing in the world," said Ms. Gillespie, an employee the Anderson shop. "That is just flabbergasting to me. We are supposed to be in a free country, and we’re supposed to be adults who can decide what want to do and don’t want to do in the privacy of our own homes."

Ms. Gillespie, 49, said she has worked in the store for nearly 20 years and has seen people from every walk of life, including "every Sunday churchgoers."

"I know of multiple marriages that sex toys have sold because some people need that. The people who are riding us (the adult novelty industry) so hard are probably at home buying it (sex toys and novelties) on the Internet. It’s ridiculous." The measure would add sex toys to the state’s obscenity laws, which already prohibit the dissemination and advertisement of obscene materials.

People convicted under obscenity laws face up to five years in prison and a $10,000 fine.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; Government; News/Current Events; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: appliances; gardening; talibornagains
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 441-445 next last
To: upchuck
They can take my wife's vibrator when they pry it from her cold, dead........

Oh, nevermind.

101 posted on 04/23/2006 9:48:50 AM PDT by SC Swamp Fox (Join our Folding@Home team (Team# 36120) keyword: folding)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Salo

But, the Bible says, "Thou shall make misdemeanants and felons of fellow citizens who might be having too much fun, thereby making you feel all smug and superior while you systematically ruin their lives." It's in there somewhere.


102 posted on 04/23/2006 9:49:50 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
"Let's make a deal. You can have your freedom to live next door to crack houses with prostitutes walking the streets and an OTB parlor nearby, and I have the freedom to live in a community without those things."

We should both have the freedom to chose where we want to live and what we chose to buy. But such logic is wasted on some.

I am sorry you have made the, no doubt accurate, self-assessment that you cannot handle living in a free society. I am worthy of freedom.

103 posted on 04/23/2006 9:50:33 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido
I thought we already had laws against battery. :-)

What a turn-off: even in the privacy of one’s own kitchen?

104 posted on 04/23/2006 9:51:34 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
"How about a city? A state? Can't the citizens of a state decide how they want to live? Can't the citizens of a state ban sex toys?"

Why stop there? By your logic, why not ban redheads or left-handed people or Jews or Blacks? Certainly the majority should be able to make such choices, right?

Sorry to give you any more ideas.

105 posted on 04/23/2006 9:53:45 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (Free Sirhan Sirhan, after all, the bastard who killed Mary Jo Kopechne is walking around free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: tlb
Maybe his next piece of legislation should be to ban tight jeans and push-up bras, so nobody will get turned on by looking.

That's next.

"And we better not hear any buzzing under those things!"

106 posted on 04/23/2006 9:53:54 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dighton

What a sinful waste of beer.

Plus, the yeast could cause an infection....


107 posted on 04/23/2006 9:55:22 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

That's right--California has the right to do that--that's why I don't live there, or Chicago, or New York. I like guns, I own several.

It really works out well--the People of the State of California want to ban guns, I want to own a gun, so I don't live there. What's the problem here?

There's a real simple solution: you want to own an assault weapon? There are like 45 other states to live in.

Where is it again that the right to sell dildos exists in the Constitution?


108 posted on 04/23/2006 9:57:02 AM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius
"The "will of the people" [majority rule] that ignores our Constitution is called democratic tyranny."

Paulsen trolls:
And that has what to do with this article? 92

Even assuming incorporation, there's a right to own a dildo in the constitution? 93 Val

You two are really that 'innocent'? Whatta laugh.
Prohibitions on 'toys' are the issue.
And there's a right to own all the toys you want in the Constitution. -- Its unenumerated. -- Check out the 9th.

109 posted on 04/23/2006 9:58:55 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

Come to think of it, hold the Tabasco.


110 posted on 04/23/2006 10:00:57 AM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Crackingham

Illegal aliens are turning some of South Carolina's nicest state parks into third-wrold hellholes, are putting undue pressure on the budget; and THIS clown is worried about some couple using sex toys in the privacy of their own bedroom? What a moron. Like someone stated earlier...WHERE is this forbidden in the Word of G-d? Anyone? Bueller?


111 posted on 04/23/2006 10:02:04 AM PDT by who knows what evil? (New England...the Sodom and Gomorrah of the 21st Century, and they're proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

Well, as I noted--it should more accurately be the right to SELL these toys.

So the 9th Amendment means that the people can do whatever they want? The 9th Amendment protects gay marriage? It protects sodomy? It protects consentual pedophilia? It protects necophilia? It protects polygamy?

If not, why not? How do you draw the line--and I'm being serious here, and I'd appreciate a serious answer: if the 9th Amendment doesn't protect those things, how does society determine which actions are protected and which aren't? How is the line drawn?

Until you can answer that question with a statement other than "the will of the people" (since that's what is at work here) then I don't think we can carry on any further. Any conversation on your part would be entirely irrational.


112 posted on 04/23/2006 10:02:28 AM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius

whoops! consensual, rather.


113 posted on 04/23/2006 10:03:31 AM PDT by Publius Valerius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Taxman; dighton; Dashing Dasher
Thus creating a sex toy black market?

Driving sex toys into the back alley. Oh, wait . . . .

114 posted on 04/23/2006 10:08:08 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Guess what, bobbie? -- You have the freedom to live in a community without those things.
There are hundreds of planned communities all over the USA without crack houses, - prostitutes walking the streets and an OTB parlor nearby.
Feel free to buy a house in one.

-- And abandon your efforts to subvert our Constitution with prohibitions on life, liberty or property.

How about a city? A state? Can't the citizens of a state decide how they want to live?

You bet they can bobbie, as long as they use constitutional due process in writing & enforcing laws.

Can't the citizens of a state ban sex toys?

Nope. - Prohibitions on toys, guns, drugs, etc, -- all violate due process.

115 posted on 04/23/2006 10:08:13 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: FightThePower!
The Southern Baptist vote is important and not to be toyed with.
116 posted on 04/23/2006 10:10:39 AM PDT by Rebelbase ("truth is not invalidated by suppression"--nicmarlo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ReformedBeckite; Drango

The regulation diameter of "neck massagers" in South Carolina shall henceforth be three inches minimum.


117 posted on 04/23/2006 10:18:07 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido; ReformedBeckite

118 posted on 04/23/2006 10:29:35 AM PDT by Drango (No electrons were harmed in this posting. Several however, were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: Publius Valerius
Val wrote:

No, it's not a different story. This is the idea of Federalism -- South Carolina isn't enslaving anyone and they haven't put up guards at the border to keep people from leaving.
So tell me again, how is their freedom affected?

You want to own or buy an 'assault weapon'?
Don't Drive to California -- they can legally prohibit them according to a lot of so-called 'conservative' FReepers.

Are you one Val?

That's right--California has the right to do that--that's why I don't live there, or Chicago, or New York. I like guns, I own several.

And yet you agree that I can't own an 'assault rifle' because I live in CA. Some conservative.

It really works out well--the People of the State of California want to ban guns, I want to own a gun, so I don't live there. What's the problem here? There's a real simple solution: you want to own an assault weapon? There are like 45 other states to live in.

I moved to CA close to 50 years ago, with a rifle that is now 'banned' because of how it looks. -- Bet me that the will of the majority now has the 'right' to ban me and my gun from the state.

You cannot see the problem in such laws? BS.
There is some other agenda in play here. Can you tell me what it is?

119 posted on 04/23/2006 10:30:07 AM PDT by tpaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Drango; ReformedBeckite

The dreaded red "x." I figured those were illegal in every state. :-)


120 posted on 04/23/2006 10:31:04 AM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 441-445 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson