http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_309214046.html
DUNCANVILLE, TX - It's been a secret in the suburbs for years.
A house in Duncanville that holds large private parties for swingers is now gaining unwanted attention. Swingers are single people or couples who are open minded about their sexual partners.
"We have friends over for private parties," said the organizer, Jim Turlock.
The City of Duncanville wants to crack down on the parties. So far, the city has been powerless to stop the parties at the house on Cedar Ridge Drive. But Tuesday night, the city council will consider a different tactic.
People gather at the house every Friday and Saturday night. As many as 200 people showed up for a Halloween party. So many people attend the parties that the organizers have a man directing traffic and parking.
Organizers say the Cherry Pit is their own private club. Their Web site offers photos, giving a tour of where they meet.
The owner says the sex is consensual and optional. "They are people who are open-minded
DUNCANVILLE, TX - It's been a secret in the suburbs for years.
A house in Duncanville that holds large private parties for swingers is now gaining unwanted attention. Swingers are single people or couples who are open minded about their sexual partners.
"We have friends over for private parties," said the organizer, Jim Turlock.
The City of Duncanville wants to crack down on the parties. So far, the city has been powerless to stop the parties at the house on Cedar Ridge Drive. But Tuesday night, the city council will consider a different tactic.
People gather at the house every Friday and Saturday night. As many as 200 people showed up for a Halloween party. So many people attend the parties that the organizers have a man directing traffic and parking.
Organizers say the Cherry Pit is their own private club. Their Web site offers photos, giving a tour of where they meet.
The owner says the sex is consensual and optional. "They are people who are open-minded
I don't know what's worse LDS, Catholic or Baptist bullshit. This is just another example of religion influencing government. As I've said before, it's poison to the public.
-D-
-D-
Some people just have too much free time on their hands!
Some people need to get a fuckin life of their own.
-D-
-D-
I agree that what people do in their own private homes is their right. However, when you need traffic to be directed and a lot of these "private homes" have a cover charge or "donation", it becomes a different story. The private home is now a commercial building. OK so it is not a brothel, but if the residence has this kind of turnout, it needs to be in a more commercial place with adequate parking and traffic flow, not a residential area. It is a matter of common sense here.
I for one would not want this in my neighborhood being a homeowner. Not because of the goings on, but because this is a residential neighborhood, not I-95! A small gathering fine, 4 to 6 cars, not hundreds!
I hope you see my point here.
I for one would not want this in my neighborhood being a homeowner. Not because of the goings on, but because this is a residential neighborhood, not I-95! A small gathering fine, 4 to 6 cars, not hundreds!
I hope you see my point here.
To add to your comment, if someone had a party at their house on a regular basis and went through the local police department and got a permit for traffic control, would that satisfy you?
We have a neighbor in our small subdivision that does that. He entertains on a regular basis for business purposes. He has had numerous complaints from ONE neighbor. In order to appease this ONE neighbor, he contacted the local police department/traffic control and obtained a parking permit for his functions. That got the neighbor out of his face.
Having a party and receiving donations does not make that home a commerical entity. One must be running a commerical business, have a business license and be making money off that business and pay taxes, etc., in order to be considered a business/commercial entity. If that were the case, then the local officials would have a reason to arrest, or at the minimum, write a citation for this man. Since they are making and passing new ordinances, it seems they lack the proper foundation to run this man and his party-goers out of town.
However, I do see your point about a nuisance. Much like a barking dog. Much ado about nothing. Bark collars work!
We have a neighbor in our small subdivision that does that. He entertains on a regular basis for business purposes. He has had numerous complaints from ONE neighbor. In order to appease this ONE neighbor, he contacted the local police department/traffic control and obtained a parking permit for his functions. That got the neighbor out of his face.
Having a party and receiving donations does not make that home a commerical entity. One must be running a commerical business, have a business license and be making money off that business and pay taxes, etc., in order to be considered a business/commercial entity. If that were the case, then the local officials would have a reason to arrest, or at the minimum, write a citation for this man. Since they are making and passing new ordinances, it seems they lack the proper foundation to run this man and his party-goers out of town.
However, I do see your point about a nuisance. Much like a barking dog. Much ado about nothing. Bark collars work!
This is why you get a home with lots of acreage so the shitheads nextdoor can go piss up a fuckin rope. This just proves that some people make a life of being offended.
-D-
-D-
Would that satisfy me? NO Again this kind of turnout needs to be held in a place where the parking and traffic flow is adequate. Yes you can get permits and all that, but again just because the permit makes it legal, doesn't mean it is smart! It seems people on both sides of issues such as this have lost all common sense.
Once again I do not mind a small gathering on a regular basis. Have your fun. I do not want hundreds of vehicles running thru my neighborhood, disrupting the peace and tearing up my yard because some jerk couldn't find a place to park so I have unwanted cars parked on my lawn!
Once again I do not mind a small gathering on a regular basis. Have your fun. I do not want hundreds of vehicles running thru my neighborhood, disrupting the peace and tearing up my yard because some jerk couldn't find a place to park so I have unwanted cars parked on my lawn!
That's why you take those donation and buy two or three lots and turn them into parking area. They the neighbors can go piss up that rope I was talking about. If you get a proper house that's large with lots of acreage, you don't have that issue.
If you get a commercial building, you are under their thumbs. I say fuck those relgious nut bastards. Just take the donations and invest in a better private facility.
-D-
If you get a commercial building, you are under their thumbs. I say fuck those relgious nut bastards. Just take the donations and invest in a better private facility.
-D-
that is more or less my point TR! Adequate parking and traffic flow.
Yeah, but you are saying commercial lot, I say keep it private. That way John the Baptist can go urinate up that twine. Oh and here is a related story.
where in that letter did it say a baptist complained? i totally agree with rube.
I didn't read anywhere in that article that anyone had torn up any of the neighbors lawn. Or went tearing through others yards or done any harm other than having a group get together on a regular basis.
If you don't like it, then file a complaint. What goes on in a private home is their business. Period.
If you don't like it, then file a complaint. What goes on in a private home is their business. Period.
FLATLANDER, It was a generalized comment. Sorry, I should've been even more general and said it was "Christians".
-D-
-D-
The only difference is that in Utah........ Religion doesn't necessarily "influence" government..... it **IS** government.. I've always enjoyed being a home-grown native pariah in Utah... 
no, you should not have been more general-you should have said a neighbor complained which is what the letter said. 200 hundred cars at a private home in a residential area is a disaster let alone the lack of respect for your neighbors.
Put whatever face on it you like. What it boils down to is religious intolerance. They would have issues with it, regardless of parking. Parking is just an excuse.
-D-
-D-
SIN, you are right. Things that involve letting others live their lives and being free from dogmatic oppression do not originate with religion. However, things like this a born from religion. People making retarded excuses to butt their fuckin noses into others' private lives and try an enforce their fictional being's laws on everyone is everywhere here. I am quite sick of it.
RIDERZ, Exactly brutha.
-D-
RIDERZ, Exactly brutha.
-D-
rosey-im not religous but if 200 cars show up in my little corner of the world something worse than a complaint would happen-you are a child in a boys body and if you were half as smart as you think youare you wouldn't argue such an obvious over the line situation.
Um, that phrase, "religious intolerance" is starting to seem awfully, well--intolerant on your part. First off, you have no idea what they would/wouldn't have a problem with under any circumstances beyond those in the article...you don't even know who these people are. You've never met them. You can speculate all you want, but given your repeated, vehement insistence that we're looking at a case of horrible "religious intolerance", coupled with your adamant supposition regarding what your personal opinion dictates to be the best place/direction for religious believers/icons to urinate, I can't imagine that your speculation would be remotely unbiased or fair.
On the other hand, I'm going to make an educated guess based on your location that you've never been to the house in question or met anyone who frequents the parties thrown there, either. Of course, it's nothing more than a guess and I'm well aware of the very real possibility that I may in fact be quite wrong...after all, I was born in Logan, UT, and yet I HAVE been to the Cherry Pit--twice (which was all the times I needed to be certain that I never wanted to go back there again, already considering myself a glutton for punishment from the minute I--reluctantly--agreed to give it a second try). I guess it's OK--for some people. People who tend to be quite crass and disrespectful...and enough of whom are prone to self-righteous defiance and/or inebriated belligerence that displays/disruptions of such were a feature of both visits--multiple times--both inside and out. It is my opinion that multiple factors are clearly indicative of careless management within the way that such events there are handled on many levels (let's see here--parking might possibly be a good place to begin that particular laundry list, if anyone happened to attempt such, only to find themselves in need of a little boost to get started--which is highly unlikely...)
The matters about which some people choose to comment and the way the go about making themselves heard can be, at times, quite counterproductive. Initially, it would certainly appear that they've somehow mistakenly perceived the discourse and collective discussion/debate which is part of--and often plays a variously active role in--the mechanisms that are life for us here on this planet. It'd sure seem like they've gotten it confused with the Entertainment pages of the Sunday paper or the comments/customer reviews section at a website about movies...or at least some place where it is actually preferred that they speak up for no reason beyond the offering of their personal, private opinion (which of course is not only a product of their subject view of things, but is also rarely connected to anything of real gravity pertaining directly to the actual subject in question--meaning that while it has the potential for such, it nevertheless would not make the least bit of difference in the world if left unspoken by them. It is of no importance/utility or, often, even any truth, to anyone outside of their own mind. Which is in no way intended as an insult, but rather a universal fact that applies often enough to me, them, and everyone else. I'm actually walking a thin line at the edge of it by my very typing of this entire paragraph...)
Perhaps slightly more important/relevant to the Life that we collectively live/share as humans is what is indicated by a great deal of these views and the vehement and/or persistent manner in which they are offered. I speak of a wearing of blinders or a visual filter that offers only a stark, very contrasting view of the world, rarely showing any subject as anything other than a broiling duality wherein the two contrasting elements are at eternal odds from their core, their very foundations, on up. With this view it's very easy to see little or no middle ground or variation in the shades of people around them. They observe immediately, and as plainly as would seem possible, which of the two colors someone is. With no way of distinguishing a midnight blue from say, a dark forest green--only that they're both pretty equally "opposed" to a lemon yellow or a mother of pearl--they're not able to see anything but an enemy or an ally. And everything must necessarily be this way--vastly different and ever at odds. Black vs. white. Good vs. evil. Us vs. them. In this case, it would appear to me that such a stance is (if one puts their contrast glasses on, forfeiting their ability to make any distinction, that is) virtually identical to the sort of outlook which fueled and was used to justify all the actions on the parts of "Them" that inspired the animosity in "Us" to begin with. Which is something like an individual hating people confined to wheelchairs simply because the small handful of such folks they'd ever encountered were rude to them...AND furthermore deciding it's somehow appropriate to chop their own legs off, as a token gesture to show the world just how gravely serious they are about such a hate and committed to retaining the animosity in an intransigent life-long vigil. I suppose it's good, even necessary to have unwavering principles to stick to, but I'd also think it prudent to be logical about what they are. This way we don't put ourselves in situations we need not be in, only to worsen the whole thing once we're there, and furthermore choosing to handicap ourselves indefinitely on top of it all as a direct result of our blind commitment to our chosen stance.
I'm well aware that it takes all kinds of people to keep this silly world turning (that's actually a vast portion of my point here), but I would think that on the whole, people of the general "open-minded" swinging community would mostly be immune (dare I say, even somehow "opposed") to such a method of viewing the world and the absolutist animosity it inevitably causes. I'm strongly inclined to doubt that anyone who's a member of this site would give half a dead rat's ass why the loud fuckers down the street from their family's home were gathering in that house (and at very least clogging up/obstructing the street...in the quiet residential neighborhood where their children play). You'd be hard-pressed to convince me that it would ever have even entered your mind in any appreciable form to investigate with whom exactly they choose to engage in intimate activities--when they are making a hell of a lot of noise for a large chunk of the time that you and your children and most of your neighbors are audaciously inconsiderate enough to choose as your bedtime pretty much every Friday and Saturday night.
Of course, if anyone wants to be confrontational about it and absolutely INSIST on there existing as much opposition and venom as we can possibly drum up, please allow me to be the one to cordially invite you down/over/whatever to the [otherwise] gorgeous, majestic state of Texas and the [again, otherwise] vastly fun and entertaining Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex--you'll likely fit right in and feel just as comfy as you would right at home, in your own recliner at the Cherry Pit--and you're more than welcome to it. You have my word you won't find me in your way.
P.S.: A) the vast majority of the entire Dallas area, including most of its suburbs (ESPECIALLY the ones to the south of downtown) are/have always been each run on their own form of the "Good ol' Boy" system, politically (and therefore, commercially/industrially/socially) speaking. B) You can bet your sweet ass without the slightest concern for how you'll rest your barkin' dogs or worry about having to dream up some new method for connecting your legs to the rest of your body next week that if the residents of Duncanville (or, in a few notable cases, any other of a few particularly influential areas around here) had ever, at any time decided that those folks were empirically just plain evil and simply must be shut down at all costs to save the innocent children from the fires of hell simply for having shared a county with the place, folks would have awakened the next morning and a couple of them might even venture to wonder where that Cherry Pit place had gone and where that shiny new Baptist church came from.
Oh, and just one last thing: there's an area at the place that they mustered the common sense to put a fence around which holds about 20-30-ish vehicles (which is anywhere from around 20 to as much as a hundred or so shy of being adequate). But I suppose someone here is to be commended for the sage advice, for the parking area is in fact an adjoining lot that they purchased, perhaps in wise anticipation of your idea...although, wouldn't you just know it--John the Baptist being the insolent fucker that he is, has yet to purchase any sort of cord goods whatsoever and continues to insist not only on pissing either in his toilet or, at times, behind the big oak tree out back, but furthermore, in what I can only guess is his way of twisting the dagger in our collective rib cage all that he can (and I mean REALLY good and torquing down on that awfully painful sucker), he also adamantly demands that his urine follow the law of gravity and flow downward, just like every other fucking thing on the planet! Boy, one day I'll get my hands on that headless, baptizin' sonofabitch and, whooo buddy--you don't even wanna know...!
...oh, and just to head anyone off at the pass, I am the furthest thing from a Christian you're likely to find just about anywhere--so what color do you see me as now...?
On the other hand, I'm going to make an educated guess based on your location that you've never been to the house in question or met anyone who frequents the parties thrown there, either. Of course, it's nothing more than a guess and I'm well aware of the very real possibility that I may in fact be quite wrong...after all, I was born in Logan, UT, and yet I HAVE been to the Cherry Pit--twice (which was all the times I needed to be certain that I never wanted to go back there again, already considering myself a glutton for punishment from the minute I--reluctantly--agreed to give it a second try). I guess it's OK--for some people. People who tend to be quite crass and disrespectful...and enough of whom are prone to self-righteous defiance and/or inebriated belligerence that displays/disruptions of such were a feature of both visits--multiple times--both inside and out. It is my opinion that multiple factors are clearly indicative of careless management within the way that such events there are handled on many levels (let's see here--parking might possibly be a good place to begin that particular laundry list, if anyone happened to attempt such, only to find themselves in need of a little boost to get started--which is highly unlikely...)
The matters about which some people choose to comment and the way the go about making themselves heard can be, at times, quite counterproductive. Initially, it would certainly appear that they've somehow mistakenly perceived the discourse and collective discussion/debate which is part of--and often plays a variously active role in--the mechanisms that are life for us here on this planet. It'd sure seem like they've gotten it confused with the Entertainment pages of the Sunday paper or the comments/customer reviews section at a website about movies...or at least some place where it is actually preferred that they speak up for no reason beyond the offering of their personal, private opinion (which of course is not only a product of their subject view of things, but is also rarely connected to anything of real gravity pertaining directly to the actual subject in question--meaning that while it has the potential for such, it nevertheless would not make the least bit of difference in the world if left unspoken by them. It is of no importance/utility or, often, even any truth, to anyone outside of their own mind. Which is in no way intended as an insult, but rather a universal fact that applies often enough to me, them, and everyone else. I'm actually walking a thin line at the edge of it by my very typing of this entire paragraph...)
Perhaps slightly more important/relevant to the Life that we collectively live/share as humans is what is indicated by a great deal of these views and the vehement and/or persistent manner in which they are offered. I speak of a wearing of blinders or a visual filter that offers only a stark, very contrasting view of the world, rarely showing any subject as anything other than a broiling duality wherein the two contrasting elements are at eternal odds from their core, their very foundations, on up. With this view it's very easy to see little or no middle ground or variation in the shades of people around them. They observe immediately, and as plainly as would seem possible, which of the two colors someone is. With no way of distinguishing a midnight blue from say, a dark forest green--only that they're both pretty equally "opposed" to a lemon yellow or a mother of pearl--they're not able to see anything but an enemy or an ally. And everything must necessarily be this way--vastly different and ever at odds. Black vs. white. Good vs. evil. Us vs. them. In this case, it would appear to me that such a stance is (if one puts their contrast glasses on, forfeiting their ability to make any distinction, that is) virtually identical to the sort of outlook which fueled and was used to justify all the actions on the parts of "Them" that inspired the animosity in "Us" to begin with. Which is something like an individual hating people confined to wheelchairs simply because the small handful of such folks they'd ever encountered were rude to them...AND furthermore deciding it's somehow appropriate to chop their own legs off, as a token gesture to show the world just how gravely serious they are about such a hate and committed to retaining the animosity in an intransigent life-long vigil. I suppose it's good, even necessary to have unwavering principles to stick to, but I'd also think it prudent to be logical about what they are. This way we don't put ourselves in situations we need not be in, only to worsen the whole thing once we're there, and furthermore choosing to handicap ourselves indefinitely on top of it all as a direct result of our blind commitment to our chosen stance.
I'm well aware that it takes all kinds of people to keep this silly world turning (that's actually a vast portion of my point here), but I would think that on the whole, people of the general "open-minded" swinging community would mostly be immune (dare I say, even somehow "opposed") to such a method of viewing the world and the absolutist animosity it inevitably causes. I'm strongly inclined to doubt that anyone who's a member of this site would give half a dead rat's ass why the loud fuckers down the street from their family's home were gathering in that house (and at very least clogging up/obstructing the street...in the quiet residential neighborhood where their children play). You'd be hard-pressed to convince me that it would ever have even entered your mind in any appreciable form to investigate with whom exactly they choose to engage in intimate activities--when they are making a hell of a lot of noise for a large chunk of the time that you and your children and most of your neighbors are audaciously inconsiderate enough to choose as your bedtime pretty much every Friday and Saturday night.
Of course, if anyone wants to be confrontational about it and absolutely INSIST on there existing as much opposition and venom as we can possibly drum up, please allow me to be the one to cordially invite you down/over/whatever to the [otherwise] gorgeous, majestic state of Texas and the [again, otherwise] vastly fun and entertaining Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex--you'll likely fit right in and feel just as comfy as you would right at home, in your own recliner at the Cherry Pit--and you're more than welcome to it. You have my word you won't find me in your way.
P.S.: A) the vast majority of the entire Dallas area, including most of its suburbs (ESPECIALLY the ones to the south of downtown) are/have always been each run on their own form of the "Good ol' Boy" system, politically (and therefore, commercially/industrially/socially) speaking. B) You can bet your sweet ass without the slightest concern for how you'll rest your barkin' dogs or worry about having to dream up some new method for connecting your legs to the rest of your body next week that if the residents of Duncanville (or, in a few notable cases, any other of a few particularly influential areas around here) had ever, at any time decided that those folks were empirically just plain evil and simply must be shut down at all costs to save the innocent children from the fires of hell simply for having shared a county with the place, folks would have awakened the next morning and a couple of them might even venture to wonder where that Cherry Pit place had gone and where that shiny new Baptist church came from.
Oh, and just one last thing: there's an area at the place that they mustered the common sense to put a fence around which holds about 20-30-ish vehicles (which is anywhere from around 20 to as much as a hundred or so shy of being adequate). But I suppose someone here is to be commended for the sage advice, for the parking area is in fact an adjoining lot that they purchased, perhaps in wise anticipation of your idea...although, wouldn't you just know it--John the Baptist being the insolent fucker that he is, has yet to purchase any sort of cord goods whatsoever and continues to insist not only on pissing either in his toilet or, at times, behind the big oak tree out back, but furthermore, in what I can only guess is his way of twisting the dagger in our collective rib cage all that he can (and I mean REALLY good and torquing down on that awfully painful sucker), he also adamantly demands that his urine follow the law of gravity and flow downward, just like every other fucking thing on the planet! Boy, one day I'll get my hands on that headless, baptizin' sonofabitch and, whooo buddy--you don't even wanna know...!
...oh, and just to head anyone off at the pass, I am the furthest thing from a Christian you're likely to find just about anywhere--so what color do you see me as now...?
Um...Damn...someone with more to say than Don...
LOL
:*
LOL
:*
...and one other thing (I know, I know--does this Sensualist asshole ever shut up???)
That headline is not only misleading, but also (let's not allow ourselves the exciting luxury of an entertaining time-killer that would surely come of making too much of a conspiracy theory out of it, but one might suspect--with ample reason--that, at this point right along in here in the sentence I'm currently rudely interrupting, we might ought to place the word "intentionally"...go ahead--give it a try! It might feel good!) incendiary and subtly (well, I guess it would be to some) instigative. It would be a little tad more accurate (were it to feel so inclined) if it read: Parking, Noise Violations at Sex Parties Being Cracked Down Upon...or something more (uh, true...?) along these lines.
That headline is not only misleading, but also (let's not allow ourselves the exciting luxury of an entertaining time-killer that would surely come of making too much of a conspiracy theory out of it, but one might suspect--with ample reason--that, at this point right along in here in the sentence I'm currently rudely interrupting, we might ought to place the word "intentionally"...go ahead--give it a try! It might feel good!) incendiary and subtly (well, I guess it would be to some) instigative. It would be a little tad more accurate (were it to feel so inclined) if it read: Parking, Noise Violations at Sex Parties Being Cracked Down Upon...or something more (uh, true...?) along these lines.
Adam,
It's acceptable to be intolerant of bigotry and oppression. As for your lengthy rant, sorry dude you rambled too long. I lost interest. Try to stick to one idea at a time. I mean that with respect and no offense. It's just too difficult to reply to all of that, when it's so all over the place like that.
Flatlander,
I am not the one arguing. LOL! Spare me your personal remarks. You don't know me. Again, the article says that the city is trying to find anything they can to shut them down. That tells me that they are trying to find any excuse to shut them down. If parking were the only issue, the remedy would be simple. Park everyone remotely in a central location and VAN them in. I don't think it's the only issue. The only other issue is moral and where do morals come from???
Here's a little quote from the article:
"When I bought my house, I didn't think I'd be living next to a massage parlor and brothel."
What would it matter if there was a brothel or massage parlor in a neighborhood? Prostitution is wrong because Christians say it's wrong. In countries where Christianity isn't allowed to taint government, they have redlight districts. There is plenty of evidence in the article that points at the religious motivation.
Another quote for ya.
<hr>
<font color="#ff0000">"After Wood said he complained, the city put up no-parking signs in front of his house and the Cherry Pit. But that hasn't kept visitors away. </font>
The Duncanville City Council is set to vote on an ordinance that would declare the Cherry Pit and other clubs like it illegal and a public nuisance.
The city said the problem is the Cherry Pit promotes the activity on its Web site. If the new ordinance passes, when the city finds a sex club is advertised or promoted, then officials will have a system in place to shut it down."
<hr>
It appears no parking didn't stop the swingers, so they are trying to make the clubs illegal. In other words. Parking wasn't the problem. The swingers found ways to get there without parking. What else would the city's motive be? I'm a child for challenging your position??? What am I not allowed to disagree with you???
-D-
It's acceptable to be intolerant of bigotry and oppression.
As for your lengthy rant, sorry dude you rambled too long. I lost interest. Try to stick to one idea at a time. I mean that with respect and no offense. It's just too difficult to reply to all of that, when it's so all over the place like that.Flatlander,
I am not the one arguing. LOL! Spare me your personal remarks. You don't know me. Again, the article says that the city is trying to find anything they can to shut them down. That tells me that they are trying to find any excuse to shut them down. If parking were the only issue, the remedy would be simple. Park everyone remotely in a central location and VAN them in. I don't think it's the only issue. The only other issue is moral and where do morals come from???
Here's a little quote from the article:
"When I bought my house, I didn't think I'd be living next to a massage parlor and brothel."
What would it matter if there was a brothel or massage parlor in a neighborhood? Prostitution is wrong because Christians say it's wrong. In countries where Christianity isn't allowed to taint government, they have redlight districts. There is plenty of evidence in the article that points at the religious motivation.
Another quote for ya.
<hr>
<font color="#ff0000">"After Wood said he complained, the city put up no-parking signs in front of his house and the Cherry Pit. But that hasn't kept visitors away. </font>
The Duncanville City Council is set to vote on an ordinance that would declare the Cherry Pit and other clubs like it illegal and a public nuisance.
The city said the problem is the Cherry Pit promotes the activity on its Web site. If the new ordinance passes, when the city finds a sex club is advertised or promoted, then officials will have a system in place to shut it down."
<hr>
It appears no parking didn't stop the swingers, so they are trying to make the clubs illegal. In other words. Parking wasn't the problem. The swingers found ways to get there without parking. What else would the city's motive be? I'm a child for challenging your position??? What am I not allowed to disagree with you???
-D-
After reading everyone input to all of this, once again it seems that it has to be one way or the other. No one can come to terms and meet in the middle. Everyone has valid points here. As far as the posts in a forum like this, can we please ease up on the insults. Free speech here folks. By throwing insults doesn't make it any better than the religious intolerance that we criticize.
For others like myself, If I have a hard time getting to my home after a hard days work because someone so inconsiderate has a gathering of hundreds of people resulting in clogging up my neighborhood so I cant get get home I am going to be angry! Affairs of this size need to be in a commercial location, even though it may be a private affair. That was my point about the whole thing being "Commercial". Small gatherings, say about maybe 10 cars at a particular house, fine. Have your fun and what goes on within that house is no one else's business.
TR is right though. Religious intolerance is the root of the article. Religious intolerance is a problem when it comes to these issues. Unfortunately this is what we have to deal with. A little common sense does go a long way, for BOTH SIDES of issues like these. What goes on within the realms of one private home is their business. At he same time, people throwing "swinger parties" should show respect for their neighbors by showing discretion so others aren't offended or having their affairs in another venue that can hold their accommodations. Mutual respect by both sides is what is lacking in this country.
For others like myself, If I have a hard time getting to my home after a hard days work because someone so inconsiderate has a gathering of hundreds of people resulting in clogging up my neighborhood so I cant get get home I am going to be angry! Affairs of this size need to be in a commercial location, even though it may be a private affair. That was my point about the whole thing being "Commercial". Small gatherings, say about maybe 10 cars at a particular house, fine. Have your fun and what goes on within that house is no one else's business.
TR is right though. Religious intolerance is the root of the article. Religious intolerance is a problem when it comes to these issues. Unfortunately this is what we have to deal with. A little common sense does go a long way, for BOTH SIDES of issues like these. What goes on within the realms of one private home is their business. At he same time, people throwing "swinger parties" should show respect for their neighbors by showing discretion so others aren't offended or having their affairs in another venue that can hold their accommodations. Mutual respect by both sides is what is lacking in this country.
RUBE, that's all I was saying. I can see the issue with the parking. I too would be pissed if my neighbor was blocking the streets. However, in this instance, the parking issue was resolved with the no parking signs and the city just advanced to the next level. The motivation is beyond parking. Now, they are misusing their power at the council level to make laws that prohibit the exercise our liberties within the confines of a private residence.
<hr>
Here is a related article.
http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_312000757.html
<b>Swingers Plan Party To Raise Money For Legal Fees </b>
(CBS 11 News) DUNCANVILLE Tuesday night the Duncanville City Council voted to shut down a swingers club known as the Cherry Pit.
Now they say they have an additional reason to party.
The organizers hope to attract big crowds on Friday and Saturday night. They say they'll use the donations to build a legal defense fund to fight the city's ordinance.
On their Web site's chat room Wednesday, the Cherry Pit's organizers said they need $10,000 to retain an attorney who will help them fight to stay open. They said it would take 1,000 supporters donating $10 each.
After the ordinance passed Tuesday, organizers Jim Trulock and Julie Norris vowed to take the city to court next week.
"They will not shut us down. It takes ten days. We'll file an injunction and prove that it's unconstitutional," said Norris.
All along, the couple has insisted if any of the swingers are having sex in the house, it's consensual and nothing that happens is illegal. Police couldn't prove any wrong-doing because they only ask for donations.
With the new ordinance though, the city will shut down any private sex clubs in residential neighborhoods if they advertise or promote themselves. The Cherry Pit promotes their parties on their Web site.
Duncanville's city manager said even if organizers shut down their Web site, it wouldn't solve the problem. "It's really the activity," said Kent Cagle. "I think we'll still have an issue if they bring the same amount of people and causing disruption."
After residents complained, the city put up no parking signs in front of the Cherry Pit to keep the crowds away. But the organizers insist visitors aren't the problem.
<font color="#ff0000">"At 12 o'clock on Sunday, church lets out. They all flood the streets. They have to have police officers out on the street to direct traffic. There's a hazard. That causes wrecks. We don't do anything like that. We're not a nuisance... That's a nuisance," said Trulock.</font>
City council members are expecting a legal fight and are awaiting to see what the club does next.
<hr>
Again, you can tell by the comments made, that religion is a factor here.
-D-
<hr>
Here is a related article.
http://cbs11tv.com/topstories/local_story_312000757.html
<b>Swingers Plan Party To Raise Money For Legal Fees </b>
(CBS 11 News) DUNCANVILLE Tuesday night the Duncanville City Council voted to shut down a swingers club known as the Cherry Pit.
Now they say they have an additional reason to party.
The organizers hope to attract big crowds on Friday and Saturday night. They say they'll use the donations to build a legal defense fund to fight the city's ordinance.
On their Web site's chat room Wednesday, the Cherry Pit's organizers said they need $10,000 to retain an attorney who will help them fight to stay open. They said it would take 1,000 supporters donating $10 each.
After the ordinance passed Tuesday, organizers Jim Trulock and Julie Norris vowed to take the city to court next week.
"They will not shut us down. It takes ten days. We'll file an injunction and prove that it's unconstitutional," said Norris.
All along, the couple has insisted if any of the swingers are having sex in the house, it's consensual and nothing that happens is illegal. Police couldn't prove any wrong-doing because they only ask for donations.
With the new ordinance though, the city will shut down any private sex clubs in residential neighborhoods if they advertise or promote themselves. The Cherry Pit promotes their parties on their Web site.
Duncanville's city manager said even if organizers shut down their Web site, it wouldn't solve the problem. "It's really the activity," said Kent Cagle. "I think we'll still have an issue if they bring the same amount of people and causing disruption."
After residents complained, the city put up no parking signs in front of the Cherry Pit to keep the crowds away. But the organizers insist visitors aren't the problem.
<font color="#ff0000">"At 12 o'clock on Sunday, church lets out. They all flood the streets. They have to have police officers out on the street to direct traffic. There's a hazard. That causes wrecks. We don't do anything like that. We're not a nuisance... That's a nuisance," said Trulock.</font>
City council members are expecting a legal fight and are awaiting to see what the club does next.
<hr>
Again, you can tell by the comments made, that religion is a factor here.
-D-
AH a key note here...."private parties that promote themselves or advertise". Once this comes into play, it is no longer private. It's Commercial!!! This to me is what is crossing the line here. Self promotion and advertising brings too many people in number one and number 2, in most cases there is a cover charge or "Donation". This has no place in a residential neighborhood and need to be held where it is zoned!
Now for example once it is held in the proper place, then the religious right has no reason to complain. but as stated by a few in the forum prior, the religious right still won't stop there. They need to know when to quit!
Now for example once it is held in the proper place, then the religious right has no reason to complain. but as stated by a few in the forum prior, the religious right still won't stop there. They need to know when to quit!
First: could "promote themselves and advertise" be any more vague? It's time we crack down on this stuff! Did you see the way that 3rd grader shamelessly promoted his birthday party? AND on state property no less! Scarcely a single child walked out of that classroom not holding a Barney advertisement! There're bound to be Big Wheels and Radio Flyers for blocks in every direction! There oughtta be a law...
Second: Wow, Rose. I have the attention span of a kitten on crack most of the time, but you may just have me beat there! I'm seriously not trying to be insulting, but were you unable to follow all the skipping around I did, or did you just get bored and give up? Either way, I could use a writing class and it might be a good thing for you to have a parent read with you at least like, every 2nd or 3rd night before bed. :z
*BTW: You CAN NOT offend me. It's not possible. No one can. That would require I care what you think and/or suppose it to have any bearing at all on the greater portion of my life...if my Mom's [former...thank god--"Hi Mom! Love you!"...she will so never receive that message) opinion never phased me, it simply won't happen. Besides, 99.999999999049% of the time, getting offended is something people invent out of perceived lack of personal attention or dream up to avoid admitting they're wrong (the rest just have a low self-opinion for some reason...usually because someone convinced them of it...but you'll rarely hear from THEM about it...the only ones who come anywhere near a legitimate reason--irony rules!!!) So do your worst and I'll argue logically and passionately--sometimes even bitingly--until I'm proven wrong or we otherwise decide to stop...then I'll go from "WTF you moron!" to "Hey, let's get a beer, I got round one! Here, let me shake your hand..." in a snap. If you start going all ad hom on me, I'll simply call you out on it. Discussion/debate is awesome--even when super-heated--as long as everyone can be adult about it and see the difference between me attacking your argument/calling you a friggin loon for having a silly/fallacious view and me attacking YOU personally or saying that you are a dumbass, period. Furr RILLZ, yo!
*
Lastly, what I said about Dallas still stands. If they really had become the victim of religious intolerance, believe me (BELIEVE ME): they would be VICTIMIZED and you never have read about it. I PROMISE. But there's one other way that they can be railroaded/generally screwed over--the most ubiquitous form of such in the history of the world: crucified by the state on the cross of conventional opinion. The state is the common thread. Because everyone willingly gives them the power to do all this. Even if a church/THE church/some preacher is the one whining (NOT the case here!), they're passing laws and using other official state mechanisms to carry out their intolerance. How much of this bullshit does anyone honestly think would occur without a group of people (who LIVE to be bought--why the hell do you think 98% of them ran for office in the 1st place???) in a position to make it all happen (and don't forget for a second that the ONLY reason they have that power is because we are either too stupid, lazy or scared not to allow them to have it.) Sure, churches are about as Christian as money changers in the temple in their social policies all the time...but they are nothing NOTHING in the broad scheme without the state power, which they either buy with money, votes, or threats.
Second: Wow, Rose. I have the attention span of a kitten on crack most of the time, but you may just have me beat there! I'm seriously not trying to be insulting, but were you unable to follow all the skipping around I did, or did you just get bored and give up? Either way, I could use a writing class and it might be a good thing for you to have a parent read with you at least like, every 2nd or 3rd night before bed. :z
*BTW: You CAN NOT offend me. It's not possible. No one can. That would require I care what you think and/or suppose it to have any bearing at all on the greater portion of my life...if my Mom's [former...thank god--"Hi Mom! Love you!"...she will so never receive that message) opinion never phased me, it simply won't happen. Besides, 99.999999999049% of the time, getting offended is something people invent out of perceived lack of personal attention or dream up to avoid admitting they're wrong (the rest just have a low self-opinion for some reason...usually because someone convinced them of it...but you'll rarely hear from THEM about it...the only ones who come anywhere near a legitimate reason--irony rules!!!) So do your worst and I'll argue logically and passionately--sometimes even bitingly--until I'm proven wrong or we otherwise decide to stop...then I'll go from "WTF you moron!" to "Hey, let's get a beer, I got round one! Here, let me shake your hand..." in a snap. If you start going all ad hom on me, I'll simply call you out on it. Discussion/debate is awesome--even when super-heated--as long as everyone can be adult about it and see the difference between me attacking your argument/calling you a friggin loon for having a silly/fallacious view and me attacking YOU personally or saying that you are a dumbass, period. Furr RILLZ, yo!
*Lastly, what I said about Dallas still stands. If they really had become the victim of religious intolerance, believe me (BELIEVE ME): they would be VICTIMIZED and you never have read about it. I PROMISE. But there's one other way that they can be railroaded/generally screwed over--the most ubiquitous form of such in the history of the world: crucified by the state on the cross of conventional opinion. The state is the common thread. Because everyone willingly gives them the power to do all this. Even if a church/THE church/some preacher is the one whining (NOT the case here!), they're passing laws and using other official state mechanisms to carry out their intolerance. How much of this bullshit does anyone honestly think would occur without a group of people (who LIVE to be bought--why the hell do you think 98% of them ran for office in the 1st place???) in a position to make it all happen (and don't forget for a second that the ONLY reason they have that power is because we are either too stupid, lazy or scared not to allow them to have it.) Sure, churches are about as Christian as money changers in the temple in their social policies all the time...but they are nothing NOTHING in the broad scheme without the state power, which they either buy with money, votes, or threats.
Rube,
<b><u>All</u></b> parties advertise and/or promote or no one would show up. You have to put out word. They want to apply this to only sex parties. Again further proof of this being religiously motivated.
UT_Swing,
<b>PARKING WASN'T THE ISSUE!</b> LOL! Read the article again. Regarding your comment about bigotry... When religion is interfering with my life and people are trying to force their dogma on others which violates the 1st Ammendment, It's our duty to complain. Again, if you reread the article, it is quite obvious the motive behind the city trying to pass a law that is unconstitutional.
Adam,
I must have the attention span of a gnat. lol. I guess 20 paragraphs (slight exageration), full of 2 to 3 subject changes each, was enough to break me. LOL! Hell even you wrote:
<i>"...and one other thing (I know, I know--does this Sensualist asshole ever shut up???) "</i>
following that lengthy post of yours LOL!
-D-
<b><u>All</u></b> parties advertise and/or promote or no one would show up. You have to put out word. They want to apply this to only sex parties. Again further proof of this being religiously motivated.
UT_Swing,
<b>PARKING WASN'T THE ISSUE!</b> LOL! Read the article again. Regarding your comment about bigotry... When religion is interfering with my life and people are trying to force their dogma on others which violates the 1st Ammendment, It's our duty to complain. Again, if you reread the article, it is quite obvious the motive behind the city trying to pass a law that is unconstitutional.
Adam,
I must have the attention span of a gnat. lol. I guess 20 paragraphs (slight exageration), full of 2 to 3 subject changes each, was enough to break me. LOL! Hell even you wrote:
<i>"...and one other thing (I know, I know--does this Sensualist asshole ever shut up???) "</i>
following that lengthy post of yours LOL!
-D-
OK all parties advertise I will give you that... But in this case the advertisement is for parties that are on a regular basis. Again a some common sense here!!! There is a huge difference between a birthday party for a third grader that hands out invitations to his classmates for something that happens once a year and swinger parties that advertise on the internet for weekly or monthly parties and generate funds! Gimme a break!
What's the difference??? Asking for donations for clean up and to cover the cost of booze, food and supplies is standard proceedure at a party. I see absolutely nothing wrong with someone having weekly parties at their house, if the parking isn't an issue. What beef would you have with it?
Granted, they should abide by all the other laws that other parties have to, but to target only sex parties is bullshit. What does that have to do with anything? Like the guy in the related article said, they aren't trying to enforce their logic on churches that cause traffic congestion and accidents, when their congregations let out. It's a double standard and they made it clear that they're only trying to target sex parties. It doesn't matter how you paint it, they are singling out swinger parties. If their intent was trully just to prevent parking violations and other "nuisances", it would apply to <u>all</u> parties. What the fuck does swinging have to do with the equation?
-D-
Granted, they should abide by all the other laws that other parties have to, but to target only sex parties is bullshit. What does that have to do with anything? Like the guy in the related article said, they aren't trying to enforce their logic on churches that cause traffic congestion and accidents, when their congregations let out. It's a double standard and they made it clear that they're only trying to target sex parties. It doesn't matter how you paint it, they are singling out swinger parties. If their intent was trully just to prevent parking violations and other "nuisances", it would apply to <u>all</u> parties. What the fuck does swinging have to do with the equation?
-D-
this ordinance probably wont pass constitutional muster because of the phrase
"private parties that promote themselves or advertise"
the reason being is that any law (state, federal and even local ordinances) cannot create a situation where by in strict interpretation a normally legal act becomes illegal as a result of the law.
for example. lets say that my daughter wanted to have all of her classmates over for a party under the proposed ordinance merely passing out invitations could fall under the "private parties that promote themselves or advertise" element of the ordinance.
R
"private parties that promote themselves or advertise"
the reason being is that any law (state, federal and even local ordinances) cannot create a situation where by in strict interpretation a normally legal act becomes illegal as a result of the law.
for example. lets say that my daughter wanted to have all of her classmates over for a party under the proposed ordinance merely passing out invitations could fall under the "private parties that promote themselves or advertise" element of the ordinance.
R
I know of a 21+ membership club that:
* In a <b>private building has it's own parking lot</b>
* In a <b>non-residential zoning for noise complaints</b>
* It's a <b>non-profit organization.</b>
* Here's the hilarious part, it's a <b>church. A Hedonist church.</b>
And I betcha the city once it finds out it exists, would do everything they can hope to shut it down (and crossing their ingorant fingers that it sticks).
Parking is not the problem, noise is not the problem, it's non-profit so it's defiinitely <i>not a brothel.</i> So why would they try to use those <b>"reasons?"</b>
Could the cause be something so simple as religion? It seems too --- easy to blame it on that, like an political catch phrase.
If you dont know what hedonism is, look it up. It's a sweet concept. Applying that concept as an religion is <b>genius!</b>
* In a <b>private building has it's own parking lot</b>
* In a <b>non-residential zoning for noise complaints</b>
* It's a <b>non-profit organization.</b>
* Here's the hilarious part, it's a <b>church. A Hedonist church.</b>
And I betcha the city once it finds out it exists, would do everything they can hope to shut it down (and crossing their ingorant fingers that it sticks).
Parking is not the problem, noise is not the problem, it's non-profit so it's defiinitely <i>not a brothel.</i> So why would they try to use those <b>"reasons?"</b>
Could the cause be something so simple as religion? It seems too --- easy to blame it on that, like an political catch phrase.
If you dont know what hedonism is, look it up. It's a sweet concept. Applying that concept as an religion is <b>genius!</b>
The People who run the Cheery Pit might be wise to have a free party/social with no sexual activity and invite the constabulary as well. The when acomplaint is made... If the constabulary do not see any negative activity then the Cheery Pit could be on safe grounds. It's a hell of a lot cheaper than $10,000 to start to defend and a hell of a lot easier to prove that the law is unconstitutional.
There was a case in NC about 3 yrs ago where a couple had a house in a remote area used the donation dodge(I know it helps to defer expenses for clean up and food and mixers etc but it's still a "fee of sorts".. They were shut down because they were allowing people to put their alsohol in the frig and in a bar where the mixers were kept. The sheriff elect was trying to make points and did illegal things to get the club shut down. It was an on premise club where no alsohol was served but alcohol was present. Since the alcohol was technically under the care of the owners and they had no license and they advertised on the internet the state said it was technically a business and dispensing alcohol without a licence ar a business license. Ultimately the couple fought and won but had to sell the club to make expenses.... More than $100,0.oo was spent. They ultimately won the main part of the case but the business and alcohol charges were found guilty and it cost mucho fines and now the club is up again under new people and under a new name and a new sheriff. That club was in operation for some 10 years without any complaints of any kind until this sheriff and a zellot DA made an issue to boost their stand in the community.. Remember TX as well as NC are in the BIBLE belt and good old boy politics are in effect....this includes churches, polititians, and a guided community by the churches. Our city has no liquor available, not county, not state but simply the city voters being led by their pastors. Kids get killed with alcohol related incidents... So lets not sell alcohol in our city. Let the kids go 8 miles to buy and drink their alsohol and have accidents on the way. Then there is the revenue that is lost from the state and the local taxes that are gleened by thetown 8 miles away and in the same county... You're not going to win ultimately but I applaud the fight.
Sorry for the examples but instead of sying that religion does it without backup is not clear.. and sounds like you are against religion.. I'm not for reigion just their dogma and their self ritgheous preachers.. Religion is not bad just religion as an organism. Believe what you will but keep it to yourself... Is my motto....
TR you sounded like you were talking about, not only the particular situation but that there was a little twinge toward the current government whether it be TX or DC... Oh, did I forget the admin in DC came from TX....
There was a case in NC about 3 yrs ago where a couple had a house in a remote area used the donation dodge(I know it helps to defer expenses for clean up and food and mixers etc but it's still a "fee of sorts".. They were shut down because they were allowing people to put their alsohol in the frig and in a bar where the mixers were kept. The sheriff elect was trying to make points and did illegal things to get the club shut down. It was an on premise club where no alsohol was served but alcohol was present. Since the alcohol was technically under the care of the owners and they had no license and they advertised on the internet the state said it was technically a business and dispensing alcohol without a licence ar a business license. Ultimately the couple fought and won but had to sell the club to make expenses.... More than $100,0.oo was spent. They ultimately won the main part of the case but the business and alcohol charges were found guilty and it cost mucho fines and now the club is up again under new people and under a new name and a new sheriff. That club was in operation for some 10 years without any complaints of any kind until this sheriff and a zellot DA made an issue to boost their stand in the community.. Remember TX as well as NC are in the BIBLE belt and good old boy politics are in effect....this includes churches, polititians, and a guided community by the churches. Our city has no liquor available, not county, not state but simply the city voters being led by their pastors. Kids get killed with alcohol related incidents... So lets not sell alcohol in our city. Let the kids go 8 miles to buy and drink their alsohol and have accidents on the way. Then there is the revenue that is lost from the state and the local taxes that are gleened by thetown 8 miles away and in the same county... You're not going to win ultimately but I applaud the fight.
Sorry for the examples but instead of sying that religion does it without backup is not clear.. and sounds like you are against religion.. I'm not for reigion just their dogma and their self ritgheous preachers.. Religion is not bad just religion as an organism. Believe what you will but keep it to yourself... Is my motto....
TR you sounded like you were talking about, not only the particular situation but that there was a little twinge toward the current government whether it be TX or DC... Oh, did I forget the admin in DC came from TX....
XPLORR94248,
I believe organized religion having influence in our government is poisonous. Religion has no place in te public. PERIOD! That's what I am saying.
WILD,
I wanna join that church!!! LOL!
I believe organized religion having influence in our government is poisonous. Religion has no place in te public. PERIOD! That's what I am saying.
WILD,
I wanna join that church!!! LOL!
Don,
I think Wild was referring to the Universal Eden House. Its the only religion or belief structure that I will ever follow.
You can join the "Church" anytime you wish. See you at the meetings some time.
I think Wild was referring to the Universal Eden House. Its the only religion or belief structure that I will ever follow.
You can join the "Church" anytime you wish. See you at the meetings some time.
oh, shhhhhh!!!