This article first appeared in the St. Louis Beacon, May 23, 2010 - Debating pornography is a late-night matter. At least that appears to be one reason the Missouri House was in session at 1 o'clock Thursday morning to discuss some of the more graphic aspects of a bill to impose more regulations on sex-oriented businesses.
Legislators were busy grappling with such subtleties as: What part of a woman's breast is OK to display in public, and what part is porn? (The decison: Showing the top -- known as cleavage -- is OK. Display of the middle and the bottom of the breast is pornographic.)
The House's formal approval came much later, around noon Thursday -- with language more suitable for the school children in the balcony.
The Senate took up the matter Thursday night, and overwhelming passed the restrictive measure by a vote of 27-4, prompting Senate Majority Leader Kevin Engler, R-Farmington, to announce wryly that the Legislature had finally passed "the anti-stimulus measure of 2010."
The guts of the final bill had been crafted by the Senate and the measure's chief sponsor, state Sen. Matt Bartle, R-Lee's Summit.
Among other things, the bill bars full nudity -- meaning, strippers cannot completely strip -- and alcohol sales. The businesses must close at midnight and not allow anyone under the age of 18. The measure also bars any sexually oriented business from being located within 1,000 feet of "any preexisting primary or secondary school, house of worship, state licensed day-care facility, public library, public park, residence, or other sexually oriented business."
Such businesses also can't be operated by anyone "who has been convicted of or imprisoned for certain crimes within the last eight years.."
The bill also stipulates, in detail, the permissable activities of a "semi-nude'' person who works or appears in such an establishment. Among other things, such a person cannot "knowingly or intentionally touch a patron or the clothing of a patron in a sexually oriented business."
The Senate noted in its announcement after the vote that the measure also "prohibits nude performances and restricts semi-nude activity within sexually oriented businesses."
“This is a hard-fought victory for family values,” said state Sen. Jack Goodman, R-Mt. Vernon and a co-sponsor. “We have crafted an effective, yet well-measured and responsible bill that will regulate sexually oriented businesses within the defined parameters of the U.S. Constitution.”
But one of the Senate opponents, Democrat Jolie Justus of Kansas City, said the bill will simply force adult businesses in her area to move across the state line into Kansas, which has fewer restrictions. "What we do here has consequences,'' Justus said. "This is an industry too, and people will lose their jobs."
Most of the St. Louis area senators voted in favor of the restrictions, with the exception of state Sens. Rita Days, D-Bel Nor, and Robin Wright Jones, D-St. Louis.
During the House debate late Wednesday night and on Thursday, many of the legislators were clearly uncomfortable with the topic, with a number of Republicans noticeably absent during the late-night session.
State Rep. Mike Colona, D-St. Louis, asserted during the late-night debate that if his colleagues could vote by secret ballot, most wouldn't support the restrictions at all -- or at least take issue with some of them -- but that they were afraid of being seen by the public as a supporter of pornography.
But several of the Democrats interjected that they weren't fans of sex-oriented businesses either. "I think they demean women," said state Rep. Mary Still, D-Columbia, shortly before the final vote today.
The House had split the bill into four parts, so separate votes were taken on each one. In the end, the chamber spent roughly five hours in debate and passed each part overwhelmingly.
The irony was that the House chamber is adorned with huge stained-glass windows that, in some cases, might be classified under the bill as pornographic. However, the bill does exempt art.
