Censorship by Idaho Alcohol Beverage Control Police Has Moviegoers Seeing Fifty Shades Of Red

fifty-shades-posterBy Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor

Idaho Liquor Licensees who show movies have been served with notice demanding that they not show the blockbuster Hollywood hit “Fifty Shades of Grey” while serving alcoholic beverages. The agency claims that doing so violates Idaho law prohibiting the display of sexually explicit movies while serving alcohol.

Many are wondering why the ABC singled out Fifty Shades of Grey and not various other R-Rated movies having sexual situations that dominate the movie industry.

We previously wrote of past prudishness by the Idaho ABC. In 2012 we covered how the ABC prohibited Utah based Ogden’s Own Distillery from selling their Five Wives Vodka in the state–alleging that it was “Offensive to Mormons” (Click HERE, HERE, and HERE. for further reading.) Note for full disclosure, in reaction to this censorship your author assisted Ogden’s Own move into Washington State and sold their products)

In an interview with the Idaho Statesman, Michele Williams stated:

I was not drinking or wanting to drink. I just found it odd that this movie was singled out. I just thought, ‘what year am I living in here? Women can’t control themselves when they drink during this movie’ I don’t know what the message was.

Last month the State Police’s Alcohol Beverage Control agency contacted the Village Cinema and informed them that if the theater shows Fifty Shades of Grey, they would be breaking state law if they also served alcohol.

Theresa Baker, the ABC’s spokeswoman said they began their investigation when they received a complaint of the showing of Fifty Shades by Village Cinema. Other theaters reportedly were then given notice to censor this movie if they intend to serve alcohol. One complaint and the entire state is affected. So much for discretion in the eyes of enforcement bureaucrats.

Here is the statute cited by the ABC:

TITLE 23
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES

CHAPTER 6
PENAL PROVISIONS

23-614. Prohibited acts — Misdemeanors — Penalties. (1) No person, partnership, association or corporation shall conduct, permit, or encourage any of the following acts or activities in or upon premises licensed pursuant to title 23, Idaho Code:
(a) Employment or use of any person, including allowing any person on the premises, while such person is unclothed or in such attire, costume or clothing as to expose to view any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola or of any portion of the pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva or genitals.

(b) Employment or use of any person who touches, caresses or fondles the breast, buttocks, anus or genitals of any other person, or who is so touched, caressed or fondled by another person.

(c) Employment or use of any person to wear or use any device or covering, exposed to view, which simulates the breast, genitals, anus, pubic hair or any portion thereof.

(d) Employment or use of any person to perform acts of or acts which simulate sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are prohibited by law.

(e) The showing of films, still pictures, electronic reproductions, or other visual reproductions depicting:

(i) Acts or simulated acts of sexual intercourse, masturbation, sodomy, bestiality, oral copulation, flagellation or any sexual acts which are prohibited by law.

(ii) Any person being touched, caressed or fondled on the breast, buttocks, anus or genitals.

(iii) Scenes wherein a person displays the vulva or the anus or the genitals.

(iv) Scenes wherein artificial devices or inanimate objects are employed to portray any of the prohibited activities described in this section.

(2) A violation of any of the provisions of this section by any agent, employee, or other person in any way acting on behalf of a licensee shall constitute a misdemeanor, and upon conviction such person shall be fined not less than the sum of one hundred dollars ($100) nor more than the sum of three hundred dollars ($300), or be imprisoned in the county jail for not less than thirty (30) days nor more than six (6) months, or both such fine and imprisonment. Any court in which a judgment of conviction is entered shall certify a copy thereof to the director, and the director shall thereupon commence administrative proceedings. The director shall review the circumstances and may take action he considers appropriate against the licensee including suspension of the license for not to exceed six (6) months, a fine, or both such suspension and fine or may revoke the license.

(3) In addition to misdemeanor violations or other criminal proceedings instituted under this section, upon sufficient proof to the director, the director shall take administrative action as provided in subsection (2) of this section against any licensee in the event any person is found to have committed any of the above proscribed acts. The proceedings shall be in accordance with provisions of the administrative procedure act.

One has to question why all PG-13 and above rated movies are not in violation of this statute or at least it is certainly odd that a seventeen-year-old may go into a theater and watch Fifty Shades of Grey but a senior citizen may not when shown this in a movie bar.

It probably goes that the state legislature wanted to curtail nude dancing and peep shows of XXX rated type of displays in furtherance of selling alcoholic beverages. British Columbia on Idaho’s northern border allows this and does not however seem to have descended into debauchery as a result. Nevertheless while the state can argue its ability to regulate explicit displays for commercial purposes. (as overseen by the courts) But, it could prove a difficult case to win in the case of Fifty Shades since this movie is ubiquitous in open society in general.

By Darren Smith

Sources:

Idaho Statesman

Idaho Statues 23-614

The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.

139 thoughts on “Censorship by Idaho Alcohol Beverage Control Police Has Moviegoers Seeing Fifty Shades Of Red”

    1. I was not even thinking of that – that is the sad thing – I was thinking of the nasty porn. I hate to say I told u so Inga 😉

      1. Are we talking about Bubba Clinton’s computer or something else?

        I’m confused.

        1. Ken

          “I’m Confused”
          first honest remark you have made.

          Good thing about the snappy pappy thing. You have seen the fierce snappiness

    2. Inga (Annie)

      Prurient Ken! 😱

      That’s not how you spell pedantic, Inga Hari. 🙂

  1. happy, As I’ve said, that server in their home was allegedly set up for Bubba. You know there is all kinds of porn on it. And, we now know he likes teenagers. Did you see Hillary’s presser? People hate the drama the Clintons bring. Well, not all people. We have a few drama queens here. But, most people don’t like soap operas. A few, love a live soap operas. It’s all they have.

    1. Nick

      I did not catch that but it will be loaded with spam if true and everyone will have a piece of Bill again. 😉

      1. @happypappies
        “Nick
        “I did not catch that but it will be loaded with spam if true and everyone will have a piece of Bill again.”

        That’s not how you spell sperm, happypaps.

        Just sayin’.

  2. One of the little publicized aspect of LBJ was his horn dog ways. He humiliated Lady Byrd many times. Damn shame, Lady Byrd was probably my favorite First Lady in my lifetime. She turned this country from a littering, ugly highway country to a country where littering is not cool.

    1. @Nick Spinelli
      “One of the little publicized aspect (sic) of LBJ was his horn dog ways. He humiliated Lady Byrd many times. Damn shame, Lady Byrd was probably my favorite First Lady in my lifetime. She turned this country from a littering, ugly highway country to a country where littering is not cool.”

      Yes, and then there’s that even less publicized aspect of LBJ, that little thing of his role in the assassination of JFK:

      “Dr. Corsi says that ‘…the Warren commission was corrupt,’ which he argues can be proven by a memo written by assistant attorney general Nicholas Katzenbach, saying that ‘the purpose of the commission was to make sure that the blame was put on Lee Harvey Oswald. The Warren Commission was constituted so the blame did not go to the Soviet Union, did not come back on the CIA, did not name Lyndon Johnson.’

      “ ‘The Warren Commission covered up that Lee Harvey Oswald had deep ties [to the] FBI and the intelligence agencies. In November 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald was on the payroll of the FBI. A CIA file had been opened on Lee Harvey Oswald going back to 1957. As part of the fake defectors program, we encouraged military to defect to the Soviet Union really as a double agent, and Lee Harvey Oswald participated in that program,’ Corsi explains.

      “The New York Times bestselling author says that the ballistic evidence from the assassination is evidence that there was more than one shooter when Kennedy was killed almost 50 years ago on Nov. 22, 1963, saying that there were two wounds, one from the front and one from the back.

      “So the ballistic evidence as I show in the book is very strong that the shooting included at least one shooter from the front.”
      http://usdailyreview.com/new-book-ponders-lbjs-role-in-jfks-assassination-50-years-later/

      As to one “shooter from the front,” we have the confession of Mafia hit man James Files and the shell casing he left on the fence from which he fired the bullet striking Kennedy’s right temple from a Remington Fireball, provided to him by his CIA handler:
      http://jfkmurderjamesfiles.weebly.com/

      1. Ken Rogers
        “The New York Times bestselling author says that the ballistic evidence from the assassination is evidence that there was more than one shooter when Kennedy was killed almost 50 years ago on Nov. 22, 1963, saying that there were two wounds, one from the front and one from the back.

        “So the ballistic evidence as I show in the book is very strong that the shooting included at least one shooter from the front.”

        I have never agreed with that theory as Joe had ties with the Mafia during the Prohibition and Ronnie Reagan and JFK were all good buddies with Frank Sinatra. You really don’t want to get me started on this the CIA and the drug labs that have sprung up with these Congressional Oversight “War on Drugs” campaigns. I get to be a snappy pappy when I do that ask anyone one here

        1. @happypappies
          “You really don’t want to get me started on this the CIA and the drug labs that have sprung up with these Congressional Oversight “War on Drugs” campaigns”

          OK, I won’t. 🙂

    1. Nick Spinelli

      I am sticking with the Republicans. God only knows what will come out on Poor Hilary’s emails

Comments are closed.