The heat didn’t deter a group of 45+ people from standing in opposition to the “family friendly” drag show held at the Johnson Art Center on Saturday afternoon. Members of the Sonrise congregation, under the leadership of Jeff Disney, organized the peaceful protest and members of other denominations and citizen groups such as Real Impact Cedar and the Iron Dixie Committee of Rights joined forces with them. Jeff Disney led the group in prayer and others also raised their voices to call on the blessings of God upon the children who would be in attendance at the drag show.
The Johnson Center has repeatedly claimed to be a private business, yet they take public funds in the form of government grants from the state and funds from the Cedar City RAP tax. While these funds did not specifically fund the drag show, the center is taking tax money to sustain itself, therefore in a round about way these funds are tied to the drag show. More investigation will take place into the specifics of how these funds are used. The fact is, tax dollars should never be given to private businesses. Once a private business accepts government funding that ends it’s private business status. It all comes down to the fact that our tax dollars are being used to push the anti family ideology and our city council has turned a blind eye to it by continuing to allocate funds to an organization that they are well aware of promoting this agenda. The Johnson Center may run some great programs, but you can’t mix maggots in with your ice cream and expect those who see to swallow it.
The drag event was sponsored by Derek Morton, who ran and lost in the 2021 Cedar City Council elections. The performers were part of the Southern Utah University’s Pride of Southern Utah club. The actual event is best compared to drag queen story hour at a public library, but without the gaudy makeup and over the top costumes. Nothing sexual or explicit took place in the presence of the 4 children who were in attendance. It does still amount to grooming as the intention of exposing children to the LGBT culture and confusing nature of seeing men dressed as women is meant to normalize the behavior and begin moving the Overton window in their minds. They can then be introduced to more shocking content over time until they are not phased by the graphically sexual nature of true drag and homosexual lifestyles. Having been inside and witnessed the event for myself, I wouldn’t have deemed it a drag show, as drag shows are sexual in nature. However, I would not deem it appropriate for children as it very obviously upheld and promoted the queer culture. The person dressed as an evil rabbit in the corner did not help to make it any more “family friendly”. Apparently this was supposed to be Mothman of West Virginia folklore.
In conclusion, the majority of attendees at this event were college aged kids, which begs the question as to why they felt inviting children in was necessary. This event may have seemed harmless enough, but don’t forget that there is a beginning to everything and that we have heard in other cities the chants “we’re here, we’re queer, we’re coming for your children.”
5 Responses
Absolutely the beginning or gateway to some real problems, young people aren’t emotionally mature enough to make decisions of the magnitude that they are being subjected to, that’s why we have to go and keep an eye on every move they make in public.
They aren’t capable themselves and their parents evidently aren’t responsible enough so it’s up to us to try and bring it to light. There were some good solid citizens in attendance and they/we aren’t going to relent ever.
We must save Cedar City from becoming Satan’s playground despite constitutional freedom of expression guarantees. https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/06/17/federal-judge-sides-with-southern/
That’s actually not necessary. The constitution must be held sacred. Everyone has the same rights. But you have to look through the game being played, the judge didn’t rule on the content, the judge ruled on the generic right. The content itself is illegal if there’s public lewdness and intentional grooming of children. This writeup explains: https://www.defendingutah.org/post/2023/06/19/feds-upholding-pedo-drag-its-a-trap-we-are-winning/
No court (even the one below) has found lewdness or intentional grooming (whatever that means) of children from one of the drag shows at issue. Can you even point to a witness that says they were “groomed” from a Utah drag performance? The judge can’t rule on content that is not presented to the court. Why has there been a resounding failure that shows this obscenity or grooming from the content do you suppose? Don’t you think this kind of content would be something the defendants would want to demonstrate right off the bat showing obscenity law has been violated according to existing law on the books? If so, case closed, no? As to the drag show content: “There is no question that obscenity is NOT protected by the First Amendment. But there is a difference between material that is ‘obscene’ in the vernacular, and material that is ‘obscene’ under the law,”
“Simply put, no majority of the Supreme Court has held that sexually explicit — but not obscene — speech receives less protection than political, artistic, or scientific speech.” https://www.npr.org/2023/06/03/1179990709/tennessee-drag-show-law-ruling
News admin, just finished reading your links. Again, if there was a case for grooming as sexual abuse or lewdness, in the BYU drag show, why wasn’t a complaint filed? Citations were not issued and law enforcement was even present! Doesn’t that seem to poor cold water on your arguments with all the parade of horribles that are being alleged? Why didn’t someone file a lewdness or obscenity complaint? Why not find a child to testify that they were groomed by watching the show and describe the effects of the show they personally experienced? Have just one of them point to the spot on the doll where they were specifically targeted and harmed from watching the drag show. Otherwise, kindly consider that what’s “wrong” or “obscene” to one person is another person’s free expression. When that back-and-forth exists, the First Amendment is designed to defer to free expression. Broadly speaking, someone dressing or presenting however they choose, regardless of modern norms, is protected free expression. In other words, no matter how you dress it up, drag and the First Amendment are a fabulous ensemble. History of drag provides perspective: https://www.freedomforum.org/drag-and-the-first-amendment/