Canada Supreme Court Ruling on Swingers Clubs

[intuition897]

All you fellow Canucks, check this out:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20051.../scoc_swingers

I'll be trying to follow this story and keep this thread updated with new links or tid-bits that I find.

This is one of those times that I wish we could just charge out of the damn closet. It's frustrating as hell to not be able to make our voices officially heard as tax-paying Canadian citizens. And we do pay a helluva lot of taxes. 'Indecency' is determined by "community standards, what ordinary Canadian citizens will tolerate." What? Swingers don't count as ordinary Canadian citizens? I guess they must see us as aliens or something, our ideas are so "unnatural" and threatening.

Let me know what you all think.

[BorisNatasha]

I think it's a shame that people who don't even go into those clubs feel the need to shut them down or harass them. But of course everybody here feels the same.

Here's a chance for Canada to prove that they are more enlightened than their southern neighbor. Hope they do just that.

Boris

[intuition897]

Originally Posted by BorisNatasha

Here's a chance for Canada to prove that they are more enlightened than their southern neighbor. Hope they do just that.

Boris

lol...yeah right. I'm afraid that the practice of blindly following the Monogamy god has crossed our borders, too. Who knows, maybe it originated here? Anyway, it wouldn't affect Mr. and I much anyhow; we like clubs, but we've only ever gone to off-premises establishments. I don't think on-premises clubs would be our dish.

I like to think of Canada as somewhat unconventional and forward-thinking...we're just not very complicated. Let's hope common sense and fairness prevail. We shall soon see just how conservative we are, I guess.

[intravox]

I'm a neophite in laws, but to my understanding the case goes to the Canada's Supreme Court because lower courts took different ways to judge similar cases, so they have to find a common way to deal with this cases in the future.

A bawdy house, hum... I had to look for a definition:

" A term used to describe coarse, low, sexual humour or dialogue. Bawdy is usually the preserve of lower-class characters, but this can serve to make it even more startling when it comes from noble characters. Hamlet is obsessed with corruption, sexuality, and the 'rank sweat' of copulation. He is frequently bawdy, as when he says to Ophelia 'That's a fair thought to lie between maid's legs' and makes other suggestive remarks to her. ..."

Now according to that, I wouldn't mind a bit the Supreme Court of Canada aproving a law to take them down.... after all, I wouldn't take my partner to a "bawdy house"

Vancouver, BC

[djjwp]

Isn't nice for “them” to decide our morality, CA, like the US is supposed to be free and is as long as you conform and you will conform comrade!
Everywhere you turn you have a hypocrite trying to save your soul. Just once, I would love for them to save their own and let us find our own way.

Good luck northern neighbors!

[Fred&Wilma]

It is interesting that 35 years ago, that Pierre Trudeau (Prime Minister of Canada) stated that the government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation, which was in reference to some members of parliment wanting to impose their morality of the public.

Now one of the issues of the current federal election is making law the legal rights of same sex couples and marriages. My how times have changed.

Took a look at the Canadian newspapers and nothing published about the supreme court decision as of this morning.

Fred

[montresor]

What's most interesting about this is not whether Canadian swingers will be able to continue swinging, but the immense confusion issuing from the two rulings from Quebecois courts of appeal. As the law professor Mariana Valverde points out, "It's not at all clear how the community standards test is supposed to work." I can imagine that the justices are not thrilled to have to deal with this.

These places certainly don't sound like any kind of swing club I've attended; rather they sound like night clubs that are trying to introduce sexual behaviour into their mix of offerings. I wonder how "traditional" swing clubs are faring in Canada, as well as topless or nude bars. I realize that any rulings in the cases can affect the trad clubs, but I don't think this will have any conclusion that forces swingers into any kind of closet. On the face of it, the rulings under appeal are so incongruent with each other that any Supreme Court ruling will likely not settle the matter, though it could trickle back down into the lower court as zealous (read: politically ambitious) prosecutors on the local level seek to corral votes by appearing to uphold puritanistic "community standards" when they try to bust clubs. These shameless hypocrites are usually the ones caught with their own pants down sooner or later.

So they shut down the clubs? Swing at home! If it's a party, just make sure there's no money involved, even a token "share expenses" fee; it's the appearance of a commercial aspect that gives these prurient crusaders their toehold.

[Mephisto]

What gets me is this is in Quebec -- Where the " Sex Trade " is actually thriving --
Most of the Canadian Adult film industry is based out of Montreal -- and Quebecer's (sic) tend to be more open to their own sexuality -

Not that they are loose, just more (in my experaince) comfortable with themselves.

[graygo98]

I don't know about the bar that was mentioned in the article, but I recall that L'Orage was a pretty high-profile on premises club. Perhaps our Montreal members can clarify but I seem to recall that they relied on tourists and curiousity seekers for some part of their clientele.

In Canada the courts have sort of hammered out a deal on consensual sexual activites that has allowed our governments to avoid having to deal with the issue of a Criminal Code that contains such quaint notions as being "a found in" in a "common bawdy house." The deal is that non-commercial consensual sex acts between consenting adults are ok as long as they don't offend "public decency" or "community standards." Public decency is generally not offended as long as the activities are completely private and closed to the public.

Smart clubs run on a members only basis. You just can't walk in off the street, or so the theory goes. Its been a long time since I read the original case, but I seem to recall that L'Orage was set up that way, i.e. members only. But the judge found that their practice of selling memberships at the door to tourists for relatively minor amounts made a sham of the private club notion. Therefore in his view the club was really a place to which the public was allowed. The fact that anyone who went there should have know what to expect and shouldn't have been offended was not considered relevant.

From looking at the Club Listings on this board I get the sense that on-premise clubs are quite common in the US of A. Here in Canada they are much less common. Although Montreal is pretty relaxed about the sex-trade, I think that L'Orage was just a bit too out there... sort of a sore thumb that was a little too obvious and so the police raided them and laid charges against the owner.

At the end of the day I doubt the Supremes will do anything too earth shattering here. The two cases don't seem too contradictory in law: the issue appears to have been "was this a public place" in each instance. The two judges came to different conclusions based on their interpretaton of the facts before them. We might get a bit better guidance on what constitutes a public place, but higher courts are usually reluctant to overturn the conclusions of the original court based on the evidence that was presented.

[WesternSwing]

Originally Posted by BorisNatasha

I think it's a shame that people who don't even go into those clubs feel the need to shut them down or harass them.

Same here in Utah. The State government is run by a Mormon majority that doesn't drink, yet they decide our drinking laws. Go figure. Same with strip clubs. Those that don't enjoy sex much make decisions about how others should view, and have sex.

That is society though. What people fear most they try to change. To make everybody think as they do so that they are not threatened. These people are almost always misguided and generally out of touch with reality as it is today.

It looks like they made the right decision, though.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...tory/National/

Mr. WS

[Fred&Wilma]

What ya know! Oh Canada!!!! Sex Clubs are legal.

To answer a few of your questions:
- Montreal is a very sexually open city, think New Orleans but with a European ambiance and snow and strip clubs on the main street, with huge neon signs with names like "L'Source de Sex".
- I have seen the one club from the outside while there on business and there is no doubt about what it is. It is downtown, on a main street about 50 yards off the main shopping district.
- Have done plenty of business entertaining in adult clubs and the only place in North America on the same level is San Francisco.
- Wilma and I have vacationed there many times and the ambiance brings out a different Wilma.
- I guess now we will see clubs starting to develop openly in Canada instead of hidden away in a corner. Should be interesting.

Fred facelick

[Pinmonkey]

Another article from the same source as the one originally posted.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20051...NqBHNlYwM3Mzc-

[graygo98]

Wow... common sense wins! This is great news and a lot more courageous and clear-sighted than I was expecting.

[Hapycmpr]

To quote the following article... (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/n...b1184&k=46743-)

"The threshold is high,'' McLachlin wrote. "It proclaims that, as members of a diverse society, we must be prepared to tolerate conduct of which we disapprove, short of conduct that can be objectively shown beyond a reasonable doubt to interfere with the proper functioning of society.''

"Bad taste, violation of religious or moral standards or even public disgust aren't by themselves enough to make something indecent."

It's about time a government realized that they can't legislate morality.

Maybe now there will be more clubs opening in Canada....like in Windsor...Hint Hint somebody....so we won't have as far to go from Detroit anymore!

[WesternSwing]

This is interesting. The CSS shot it down with a 7-2 vote, the brief being written by a woman! Those Canadians are progressive!!! Woohoo!

I especially liked the part about:

Defining indecency has always been difficult, McLachlin wrote.

"Over time, courts increasingly came to recognize that morals and taste were subjective, arbitrary and unworkable in the criminal context and that a diverse society would function only with a generous measure of tolerance for minority mores and practices.''

The courts have gradually moved from subjective considerations to objective standards, focused on the harm caused by the acts.

"The threshold is high,'' McLachlin wrote. "It proclaims that, as members of a diverse society, we must be prepared to tolerate conduct of which we disapprove, short of conduct that can be objectively shown beyond a reasonable doubt to interfere with the proper functioning of society.''

Bad taste, violation of religious or moral standards or even public disgust aren't by themselves enough to make something indecent.

Conduct that confronts the public, which predisposes others to anti-social behaviour or actually harms those taking part, would meet the test, McLachlin wrote.

That is classic. The only thing I would have changed is "Bad taste, violation of some's religious or moral standards..." Not everybody is disgusted by what somebody else does. We have many friends that are not in the lifestyle that know what we do and even attend mixed swinger/vanilla parties. They may not choose to participate in anything except the sexy dancing and maybe some flashing here and there, but they have a great time, and I'm sure makes for some great foreplay before they go home.

An Ye Harm None, Do As Ye Will.

Mr. WS