Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Who Says Middle America is Puritanical?
Posted by: Dale Franks on Sunday, December 09, 2007

All good things must come to an end, apparently.
The most popular address on Cedar Ridge Drive is Jim Trulock's split-level home, which has a group sex room and attracts as many as 100 people to swinger parties featuring "Naked Twister" nights.

But the festivities could soon be over. In response to neighbors' complaints, the city has outlawed sex clubs in residential areas. Citations have been issued, and search warrants may be next.
So, no more weekend sex parties at the Trulock spread. And participants are miffed.
"It's crazy that they want to force their morality down our throats," said Dawn Burton, 45, a regular guest at the parties. "We're all frustrated."
Frustrated? That hardly seems likely.

Anyhoo, I wonder if the problem is all the hot sex that's going on, or if it could be something else...
So are those who complain of the noise, traffic and parking problems that occur in their otherwise quiet, upscale neighborhood every Friday and Saturday, when Trulock's home is transformed into "The Cherry Pit."

Duncanville, which proclaims itself "The Perfect Blend of Family, Community and Business," is an unlikely venue for a neighborhood swinger club. The city of 36,000 just southwest of Dallas has about 50 places of worship and not a single registered sexually oriented business.

Duncanville officials insist they are not just another prudish Texas town giving the boot to spouse-swappers. They say it all boils down to a matter of law: Trulock is operating a business featuring live sex acts.

"It's not trying to judge anyone or pass judgment on someone's lifestyle," city spokeswoman Tonya Lewis said.

To support its claim, the city notes that the Cherry Pit accepts money from guests and promotes the parties on its Web site.

"We're not about infringing on the rights of the Cherry Pit patrons or owners," Lewis said. "But now your right to have fun has infringed on everyone else's. And now you have to draw the line."
You see there are a couple of things. First, the Tuelocks are apparently operating this sex club as a business from home. So there's a zoning problem, if nothing else.

Second, If one of my neighbors was having 100 or so people over to his house every Friday and Saturday, I'd probably start getting a bit PO'd myself. And I wouldn't care if it was naked twister they were doing, or gathering to discuss Proust and Dickens over coffee. I don't want my neighborhood constantly congested with cars and traffic. Nor, I suspect, would most of my other neighbors.

And, before you get all stodgy about privacy rights, think about for a second:
Arthur Leonard, a New York Law School professor who studies sexuality law, said the size of the parties might be a legal obstacle.

"It seems to me when you have that number of people involved, it becomes more like a public event," Leonard said. "It seems unlikely that a court would find privacy protection for an event this large."
Once you start holding public events in a residential neighborhood, you're gonna have problems, no matter what the event is.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
How do they find the people who come to these events? Did they just happen to have 100 friends who said, "Hey! You know what would be a good idea? A weekly sex party at Bob’s!" Sure. That could happen. My guess is that there is money changing hands somewhere. Having said that, if they keep the streets clear and don’t ruin property values I couldn’t care less what they’re doing inside the house.
 
Written By: JorgXMcKie
URL: http://
I need to do some firsthand research before I can comment on this one ;)

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
"It’s crazy that they want to force their morality down our throats," said Dawn Burton, 45, a regular guest at the parties. "We’re all frustrated."
Dawn further stated: "There’s no room left in my throat."
 
Written By: tom scott
URL: http://
"traffic and parking problems that occur in their otherwise quiet, upscale neighborhood every Friday and Saturday, when Trulock’s home is transformed into "The Cherry Pit.""

The Cherry Pit??????......awe GROSS!.

"It’s crazy that they want to force their morality down our throats"

They don’t seem to have a problem with who knows what being forced anywhere else.
 
Written By: markm
URL: http://
You see there are a couple of things. First, the Tuelocks are apparently operating this sex club as a business from home. So there’s a zoning problem, if nothing else.

How do zoning laws fit into the libertarian universe to begin with? The mind reels. So... they’re running a business... on their own property... causing violence to no one... and the neighbors don’t like it!! Quick! Make it illegal!

I mean... man. This point of view could be used in libertarian agitprop as a classic case study, with you, Dale Franks, as the nanny state.

The neighbors should move the f*ck somewhere else, if they don’t like it.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
I mean... man. This point of view could be used in libertarian agitprop as a classic case study, with you, Dale Franks, as the nanny state.
You really have no idea what libertarian means do you?

Like most critics you only get the ’rights’ part. You always seem to consistently and conveniently forget the "reciprocal responsibility" part about respecting the rights of others.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
Here I thought neighbors wanted to be able to get in and out of their own driveways and street. How dare they try to use the street and get out of the neighborhood during the love-fest next door.

You know, it would be different if this were a one time party where they then apologized to their neighbors for to many people showing up. But this is a continuing disturbance of the publics right of way.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com
Shark - you need an forward observer? Duncanville is just down the road.

Never ceases to amaze me, I did a doubletake when I realized this was Duncanville Texas.

 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
How do zoning laws fit into the libertarian universe to begin with?
That’s kinda besides the point, since zoning laws do exist, and I don’t think the discussion is about whether zoning laws should exist.
The mind reels. So... they’re running a business... on their own property... causing violence to no one... and the neighbors don’t like it!! Quick! Make it illegal!
I’ll have to move in near glasnost, and then target shoot in the backyard, and then work on my jeep grinding and running air tools while playing Lynyrd Skynyrd.
The neighbors should move the f*ck somewhere else, if they don’t like it.
You seem to be testy since, well, the war started going well. The vision of American and Iraqi success is depressing, isn’t it?
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
while playing Lynyrd Skynyrd
Yea! I get to post the quote again!

"I like to think of Jesus like with giant eagles wings, and singin’ lead vocals for Lynyrd Skynyrd with like an angel band and I’m in the front row and I’m hammered drunk!"
— Cal Naughton, Jr.
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Like most critics you only get the ’rights’ part. You always seem to consistently and conveniently forget the "reciprocal responsibility" part about respecting the rights of others.

The ’others’ in this case don’t have any rights in relation to the activities of their neighbors. They have the right to own their property and use it in any way they see fit. Their neighbors, who they’ve called the law on, according to the only part of libertarianism I find attractive in the first place, own their own property and can do anything they want with it that doesn’t involve destruction of someone else’s property or violence against them.

You seem to be testy since, well, the war started going well. The vision of American and Iraqi success is depressing, isn’t it?

I’m laughing at you, Don. I’m sure you’ll be skeptical that it’s genuinely amusement I’m expressing here, rather than contempt or something, but you’ll have to trust me. It must really seem that absurd to me...

Sarcasm begins here. Yeah, Don, I’m just eaten up with depression about how half as many civilians are being wiped out per month as last summer. Because, back when it was twice as many, I was holding AQI tailgate parties where I would regularly cheer "More! More! More!" This has really killed my vicarious Sociopathy Sunday Entertainment. Sarcasm over.

Back on planet reality, I’m as emotionally glad as anyone that the relative level of horror is declining, Don. When I feel down, it’s because I’m afraid on behalf of Iraqis that continued American manipulation and masterminding of Iraqi processes will eventually re-escalate their casualties. And, incidentally, ours. Because GWB wants to make more political hay out of hanging around, rub his lucky break in some faces until it expires.
But I’m happy as happy to take the occasional votive candle of transient symptomatic alleviation, as most real Iraqis are. Except the ones who are still getting blown up, of course.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
They have the right to own their property and use it in any way they see fit. Their neighbors, who they’ve called the law on, according to the only part of libertarianism I find attractive in the first place, own their own property and can do anything they want with it that doesn’t involve destruction of someone else’s property or violence against them.
The only part of libertarianism you find attractive?

Heh ... no wonder you don’t understand much about it. You don’t even know its principles.

Nice dodge on the point about reciprocal responsibility - property ownership rights are much more involved than the "right to do anything you want with your property as long as it doesn’t involve destruction of someone else’s property or violence against them".
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.qando.net/blog
looker: You didn’t know about the Cherry Pit? I had a boss years ago who was a "regular" there. I got a little TMI during the drunken bull sessions he held some nights after office hours.
 
Written By: Random Numbers
URL: http://randomnumbers.us
Well, in the spirit of education, we should all go park our cars on the street where ever glasnot lives, and prevent him from being able to pull out his own vehicle.

We wouldn’t be harming his property what-so-ever, so it should be ok with him. Tough luck if he has to go anywhere during his education though.
 
Written By: Keith_Indy
URL: http://asecondhandconjecture.com

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider