Yah cain't shake yor pom-poms in Texas!

Associated Press:<p>

AUSTIN, Texas -- If some Texas lawmakers have their way, "overtly

sexually suggestive" cheerleading will be banned. <p>

http://www.thewmurchannel.com/irresistible/4447240/detail.html?

ontheside=story

<p>

Texas! . . . where "inappropriate photography" is not tolerated

either!<p>

The prosecution of cheerleading offenses will no doubt be hampered by the fact that it would likely be unlawful to photograph overtly sexually suggestive cheerleading.

Texas has other more pressing problems than legistlating chrisitian/right wing

morality. Is this photography related?

I propose we start with prosecuting war crimes first and senators taking

payoffs from lobbyists, then we can move on to crumbing infrastructure,

executing mentally retarded juveniles, and slowly work our way down the

ladder to what right-wing christian men would prefer our daughters should

wear to sporting events. Things like this piss me off.

On one hand I agree that this is absurd.

 

On the other hand, I would guess that many of the people most offended by this, people who are politically "liberal", are strong supporters of government run and protected public school monopolies. And that these same people can't see the connection between having government own a school and having government dictating absurd rules at said school.

 

A public school is, by definition, owned by the public. And if the majority of the public in a given area wants to impose "right wing conservative Christian" rules on property that they own, well, guess what creek your liberal canoe is up and where the paddle went. Liberals cling to the public school model because of the control it gives them. I don't feel sorry for them now that they're getting burned because conservatives have learned how to use the system liberals created.

 

All the in-fighting over sex ed, origins, rules of conduct, dress code, teaching style, curriculum, etc, etc, etc would come to a screeching halt if parents chose the school that fit their world view from a private market place of choices. Good luck trying to convince liberals that's a preferable model.

You think Gary's ticked off now...wait until the Federal government mandates that all public schools close their darkrooms and switch to digital.

<I>from a private market place of choices.</i><P>

 

And if the poor can't afford this capitalist utopia let 'em eat cake.<P>

 

<I>Good luck trying to convince liberals that's a preferable model.</i><P>

 

Liberals like Thomas Jefferson - a man who was all for public education? I wish someone had talked some sense into him.<P>

 

My photography will be much better now that I've seen the conservative light. Thank you.

Daniel, most public schools are lucky to have their water fountains working

much less offer digital photography classes, but I would be pissed.

If under-age drinking is 'allowed' -- who cares what the cheerleaders do?

I'm about as far to the left as you can get without falling off the edge, and you have no idea what it is like living in Texas if you are a liberal. I love my homestate, but the weirdness and outright hostility of the political process in Texas is something you have to witness firsthand to believe. It is a continuous assault on personal freedoms and desires and the extreme conservative right along with the politicians think that this is just fine. It is an old political trick that when things are bad and crumbling around you and you have no answer for the problems, well then of course, you start to legislate morality. That must be the problem. Right?

Ahhhhhhh for them "good old days" in Texas when men were men and cows were nervous. I also remember in that state a time, within my adult lifetime I might add, when a woman couldn't drive the family car [or pick-up truck as circumstance might have it[ or hold a bank account in her own name without her husband's permission. It has always been a bass-ackwards state in the individual personal liberty area, ESPECIALLY when it comes to a women's personal liberty.

 

As for cheerleaders I remember, once, when I saw first-hand two of them critters doing their thing without their nickers on... and that was in 1960!... and it did perk up an interst in photography amongst the male spectators... and it was NOT in Texas.

 

If you haven't figured it out yet, Texas politicans are the best that money can buy!

 

Hunter

In regards to the question of appropriateness to this forum:<p>

Considering how many images of cheerleaders are in our space, it seemed appropriate. As a former sports journalist/photographer, the news layouts I did frequently had pix of cheerleaders as well as the prerequisite winning plays! Since the "law" is attempting to control behavior of the subjects, it certainly would have an effect on what shots could be taken and printed. This DOES affect some sports photographers and freedom of the press. As cheerleading is a recognized collegiate and highschool sport in some venues, these areas would be affected as well. Please excuse me if I fail to make the case for relevance.

Not to be the one to throw this back into the political arena, but the author of the bill was a Democrat from Houston. I'm not sure where all the "right wing" labels came from. Since my teenage daughter isn't a cheerleader, I'll stay out of the substance of the debate.

I especially liked this part in the AP wire service version of the story:

 

"Democratic Rep. Al Edwards, who filed the legislation argued bawdy performances are a distraction for students resulting in pregnancies, drop-outs and the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. Ribald performances are not defined in the bill. "Any adult that's been involved with sex in their lives, they know it when they see it," he said."

 

Geeeez! He blames nearly all the ills of society on alleged cheerleader (mis)behaviour. Everything short of global warming. But do we hear anything 'bout them football heroes patting each other on the ass (as they do)? Noooooo!

 

LOL

 

Hunter

"And if the poor can't afford this capitalist utopia let 'em eat cake."

 

Must you make a strawman argument Beau? Can't reason without fallacies? Nobody has ever suggested that poor be left without assistance to choose the schools they want. In fact, most of the limited efforts to open up competition in the U.S. center around vouchers to low income parents so they can get their kids out of violent, drug and gang infested inner city schools and into private schools where they invariably do better. See, not having to worry about being raped or shanked tends to help students focus on their studies. Amazing, isn't it?

 

Ask any inner city parent, the public school system hurts the poor most of all.

 

"Liberals like Thomas Jefferson - a man who was all for public education? I wish someone had talked some sense into him."

 

If he could see what has become of the public school system, you wouldn't need to talk sense into him. One hour spent at an inner city school and he would abandon the idea out right.

 

"Daniel, most public schools are lucky to have their water fountains working much less offer digital photography classes, but I would be pissed."

 

Public schools on average have 2x the amount of money per pupil that private schools do, and in California it's approaching 3x. We're spending more money on schools than ever before in our history. Don't look at the Federal budget, look at the state budgets. The education expenditures are huge. If water fountains aren't working it's not for lack of money. It's because crooked administrators are skimming off the top and wasting funds.

 

Which is what happens in public funded monopolies. When you work for the private sector you are rewarded for saving money because that increases profits. When you work for the government you are rewarded for spending money, because that means your boss can cry he needs a larger budget next year. Basic econ 101.

 

"It is a continuous assault on personal freedoms and desires and the extreme conservative right along with the politicians think that this is just fine."

 

I live in a liberal state and believe me, they're no more friendly to personal freedoms and desires. They crave control just as much.

 

At any rate, nobody seems to have gotten the central point. If the public owns your school, then you have no basis to complain when the public demands that X be taught or Y behavior enforced. If you want your child to learn A or be taught C behavior, you must "own" the school, i.e. be a private customer who can go else where.

 

"But do we hear anything 'bout them football heroes patting each other on the ass (as they do)? Noooooo!"

 

Did we hear from anybody that the sponser of the legislation was a...gasp...DEMOCRAT? No, it was just assumed that eeeviiillll Republicans were behind the attempt. Not that I care for either party much, neither pays much more than lip service to freedom, bit it is funny how the truth gets glossed over by those with an agenda.

 

Any way, now that you've brought up the football player ass pat, I'm sure a Republican will join the Democrat in controlling this horrible behavior. And the liberals will cry, but still miss the point, and work ever harder to solidify the public school monopoly.

Republicans joining Democrats? Just joining the crowd, (remember Mau-Mauing the Flakcatchers?) Maybe you should watch out for the Democrats stampeding to the right.

 

http://www.xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=8132

 

BTW, this isn't a family news link, and my gut feel is they expect to spend more than $90 on the study.

perhaps a real good reason to homeshool your children. ( aka. invest your time,effort,wisdom and love)

 

That way they will have the proper values in place to begin with. So whether they become a cheerleader or a public representative, they will know what decision is the right one.

What do you expect from a State with some DRY counties & where a kid can get kicked off the team & a coach fired & prosecuted if they let their wrestlers compete against a girl.

 

What a bunch of morons.

Daniel, I do not live in a liberal state. I know what it is like. The only problem I have with the idea that the private sector knows what is best for all of us is just that. They do not know. I am not crazy about the government taking care of things. Their track record speaks for itself. I am also equally convinced that the private sector hasn't a clue either. Yeah, let's let big business run things. They always take care of the little man while lining their pockets. There is a reason for labor unions. And this is not about Democrat versus Republican. We have plenty of right wing dumb-ass Democrats in Texas. There are many socialist leaning governments in this world that seem to take care of their people just fine. For some reason this never seems to work in this country. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, etc, etc, etc....

You're foolish if you think the socialist countries are taking care of their people "just fine." Or you could investigate the quality of medical care in England and Canada to start, the collapsing economy in France where the unions are preparing to trash the country for a 35 hour work week.

What about dental care?

 

It so blooming expensive that people do not go to the dentist in the UK as often as they should.

 

How come the politicians never talk about this?

You reBLOODlicans and demoCRIPS are funny! For the record, this representative was interviewed on the Daily Show a couple of days back and was quoted as saying that among AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases, it could lead to getting, and I quote, "The Herpes." As a native born and raised Texan, it's quite comical to live in this bass ackwards state! I left once for Colorado for half a decade. I reckon it's time to do so again. :(

Excuse me but when did the UK become a socialist state ?

 

The politicians never talk about it in case their teeth fall out !

 

If you chaps feel the need of a referee give me a call (no cheerleaders though - they could upset my concentration).

An update: as of today, the word in the Texas legislature is that this bill is destined to fail. It's authors intend to wait for a more appropriate time and will introduce it again.

Just a thought for all fathers with daughters. Would you let your daughter do a

sexually suggestive routine in front of 500 teen age boys and be

photographed while doing the routine by a photographer for the local paper?

All women are someone's wife or daughter. I'm a conservative on this one.

God's light to all

Chris