Tennessee's Republican State Leg. Abstinence Guidelines warns Schools/Students about Hand Holding!

[stevenleser]

The Tennessee state legislature, which is overwhelmingly Republican, is coming out with abstinence guidelines for schools that tell teachers to warn students against 'gateway sexual activity' like HAND HOLDING!!! See this article http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/12/1082261/-Tennessee-senate-warns-hand-holding-is-a-gateway-sexual-activity- Yes, gotta watch out for that hand holding. To which I dedicate this song and video...

#!

[hifiguy]

1. It has become so bad that even breathtaking idiocy

isn't all that breathtaking anymore. This may set the bar for future reichwing imbecility. Hard to see how it can be topped, but rest assured it will be.

[Uncle Joe]

2. I have a gut feeling,

they're going to get a major whomping in the next election.

[stevenleser]

3. Yes, if the GOP were only so creative in their efforts to help people as they are with their ways

of pushing the idiocy envelope, I am sure we would all have living wage jobs and world peace by now.

[peabody]

4. What's next?

Will talking to the opposite sex be a "gateway sexual activity" too?

[yellowcanine]

8. Rock music and Dancing? Life imitates art. (Footloose)

[KamaAina]

10. Who knew Footloose was a futuristic dystopia like Blade Runner?

All this time I thought it was just a fun Kevin Bacon vehicle.

[mainer]

5. just looking at a girl is a gateway to sex.

so cover all those girls' faces. Sounds an awful lot like ... Afghanistan.

[Aerows]

6. Hand holding is suddenly sinful

and wrong? What the hell century did I just wake up in?

[stevenleser]

7. If you live in Tennessee, I'd say you just woke up in the 11th century

i.e. the early middle ages.

[Aerows]

11. Almost as bad

I'm in MS. They haven't gone THAT crazy here...yet.

[KamaAina]

9. Why is premarital sex banned in Tennessee?

Because it might lead to hand-holding!

(adapted from an old chestnut about Baylor and dancing)

[pansypoo53219]

12. separate the sexes and burkhas are next.

evangelical law.

[Ms. Toad]

13. Nothing I can find supports this interpretation - anyone find any direct citations?

More complete explanation here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=560021

I was just about to go on an outrage-fest about the idiocy of this bill, and went to the bill to find the exact link so I could include it in my tweet. Couldn't find it.

If it is there, all this outrage is justified. If not, it is still generally justified, since the concept of prohibiting healthy discussions about sex and sexuality is stupid - but we will be in a better position if we are rock solid on the facts.

[stevenleser]

14. Here is the report from a local Tennessee news service

http://www.wmctv.com/story/17353757/bill-would-define-holding-hands-kissing-as-gateway-sexual-activity

[Ms. Toad]

15. I've seen that - and a dozen or so more or less similar reports.

Some of which says the bill defines kissing and hand holding as gateway sexual activities, and others which don't quite go that far.

But none of the articles have pointed to a particular provision in the bill, and when I read the bills (House Bill 3621 and Senate Bill 3310, and the amendments to the bills) the definition of "gateway sexual activity" doesn't mention hand holding or kissing at all.

I think someone got carried away with an exercise in thought (what might be considered gateway activities; where could this ultimately lead to), and because it is such a deliciously outrageous concept it got perpetuated across the internet before anyone did any fact checking.

[stevenleser]

16. I rather think if thats the case that the latest amendment hasnt been posted.

We'll see.

[Ms. Toad]

17. It was passed out of the senate on 4/5

(29-1) with the three amendments I reviewed (none of which include hand holding or kissing in the definition of "gateway sexual activity" and is now awaiting action from the house, where the companion bill is in the education committee. (The house bill does not include hand holding or kissing in the definition of "gateway sexual activity, there have been no amendments to the house bill).

The legislative history is here:
http://wapp.capitol.tn.gov/Apps/BillInfo/Default.aspx?BillNumber=SB3310

[Bolo Boffin]

18. It's definitely not in the amendments.

And the text of the bill doesn't define "gateway sexual activity" with hand-holding or kissing.

In the definitions, the closest it comes to that is not defining what the term "sexual contact" is. I think that's where the bill's interpreters are working hand-holding and kissing into the bill.

[Ms. Toad]

20. And as I posted in the thread where I first raised the question -

"sexual contact" isn't defined in the existing statutes or the bill in the context of sex education.

It is only defined in a criminal context (in Tennessee - different states define it differently). In a criminal context "sexual contact" is limited to a power differential between offender and victim in three situations (adult/child, agent of a correctional facility/inmate, or state agent/parolee or probationer. In that context (defined in the abuse of a minor section), it means "intentionally touches or kisses the minor's lips with the defendant's lips if such touching can be reasonably construed as being for the purpose of sexual arousal or gratification." The other two statutory references just refer to the definition in the first statute. (TCA 39-13-501, 39-16-408, and 39-16-409)

The speculation about how far the bill could extend is relatively harmless (and may get people interested enough to make sure the lines are clearer). What concerned me is the articles which flat out state that the bill defines hand-holding and kissing as gateway sexual activities. When we say that, and the bill doesn't actually say that, we just look silly. Since I had a tweet halfway composed and was just looking for a link to the text of the bill to support it when the stories started to unravel for me (while at the same time I was finding more and more stories/discussions quoting the "bill defines it to include handholding&quot I started to get concerned about the stories ridiculing the bill (and those promoting it) based on things that are not in the bill.

[Bolo Boffin]

21. So "sexual contact" is defined elsewhere in the code. Good to know.

That was my last remaining question about that bill. That was the only place I could see the hand-holding or kissing coming into the picture.

I was looking at that part of the bill as being descriptive of what a teacher could not recommend, and that a teacher might refrain from even saying something like "kissing doesn't get you pregnant." Later, some pregnant girl's dad might come looking for the teacher who said that, etc. But with the power differential included in the "sexual contact" definition, even that doesn't apply.

This is, of course, assuming that the bill's authors were completely aware of the criminal context definition of the bill and intended it. I found at least one ungrammatical statement in the bill as passed. It would be a sad thing to think that in their piety, Tennessee lawmakers were just sloppy bill writers and that they were unaware of the "sexual contact" definition. It doesn't make a lot of sense, if you think about it, for "sexual contact" to include the power differential, since the lawmakers were concerned primarily about Jack and Diane sucking on a chili dog behind the Tasty Freeze. None of the three specified power relationships apply there.

[Ms. Toad]

22. From a legal perspective,

It is a pretty far stretch to use the criminal definition in a statute on education. The farther up in the code the definition is, the more generally applicable - it typically applies to everything farther down. This is pretty far down the tree - after the split into three or more branches (administrative, civil, and criminal), and into the split in criminal among the various crimes. The definition should only be applicable to at most "sibling" level provisions of the criminal code (similar criminal statutes), and not extend upward to parents (all criminal law) - or in this case up to the aunts and uncles (civil or administrative law), then back down to the nieces and nephews (the individual civil provisions).

But interpreting terms that aren't defined is like making sausages. It isn't necessarily a pretty process. Who knows where they will end up, or what they will drag in for guidance. Perhaps the noise this has generated will encourage them to include a specific definition (which could be more or less reasonable than what people are imagining).

[SwampG8r]

19. back in my youth

i spent many many months in east tennessee
in the athens suburbs of mcminn county
by the time i was 10 i had brought the bull out to "refresh" the milkers every year i can remember
the mares needed tending and the hens all had a rooster
i am going to imagine the average east tennessee youth by age 10 has a full knowledge of at least the doggy style positions
so hand holding is silly