Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsMonday, March 9, 2009
City State Smacks Down Seattle Semi-Pro Wrestling
Posted by Jonah Spangenthal-Lee on Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 4:43 PM
Seattle Semi-Pro (SSP) wrestling may be down for the count.
The SSP has been grappling with the Washington State Department of Licensing (WSDOL) over whether the group's goofy wrestling matches constitute sporting events—which are heavily regulated by the state—or, as SSP puts it, "fight cabaret."
Today, the WSDOL issued a final ruling, declaring that "Seattle Semi-Pro Wrestling promotes and engages in 'wrestling events' [and] is required to obtain a license...in order to legally [continue].”
These licenses—along with insurance and on-site medical staff required by the state—would come at great cost and the state's ruling will likely put an end to SSP.
In June 2008, the WSDOL began investigating SSP after a disgruntled former wrestler sent a letter to the department about the group’s shows, complaining about wrestlers' lack of training, security at shows and "several of the performers using…marijuana prior to bouts."
Over the next few months, the WSDOL, liquor control board and Seattle Police Department sent officers to observe and report on SSP's monthly shows.
While SPD officers wrote reports which make SSP out to be a dangerous menace to society, liquor board agents seemed to really get the show's goofball theatrical nature:
“There was a series of strikes exchanged by actors which were imitations of old Three Stooges routines" one liquor board officer wrote about a show last August. "About two thirds of the show was comprised of female burlesque dancers."
Indeed, SSP wasn't a serious wrestling league. Unfortunately, the state's definition of "wrestling" is fairly broad, but it's kind of unbelievable that SSP's defense of itself as a performing art group—or "fight cabaret"—didn't stand.
In 2006, Stranger theater critic Brendan Kiley wrote about a play about gay wrestlers in the 70s, which, as far as I know, wasn't shut down by the state: “The actors are capable and the wrestling is pretty badass, with the requisite kicking, choking, and slamming," Brendan wrote in his review of Piledriver! "The play is about the fakery and politics behind the wrestling[.]"
Huh. Sounds a lot like SSP.
The WSDOL has ordered SSP to cease and desist all performances. SSP members declined to comment, but said they'd be issuing a statement on the group's future sometime tomorrow.
2
I saw them (reluctantly) early on and it was, um, exactly like real wrestling. It was actually LESS ironic and theatrical and funny than watching WWF or RAW or WAR or whatever on TV.
See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SM1JXrp9n…
See for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SM1JXrp9n…
7
I don't know, I have been working with these guys for something like 3 years, THIS IS NOT A SPORT, Fuck! You want proof look at the hours of footage that shows you just how fake this is. the countless hours of near misses shit they were just about all misses (nothing but love for ya guys), fuckn people. Warning: adults having a good time, we must put a stop to this now!
ps. if they were smoking pot in the dresser room this furthers my point, real wrestlers use steroids in the locker room. POSERS
ps. if they were smoking pot in the dresser room this furthers my point, real wrestlers use steroids in the locker room. POSERS
9
Real wrestlers spend most of their time trying to maintain a constant weight and not appearing too gay, actually.
10
Wow. As a professional wrestler I've kept my comments about this case to a minimum. That is, until the WSDOL made "the ruling". I know quite a few of the participants at SSP and have kept an eye on their case since it's inception, even speaking directly with them. I'd been asked by a few of those cats in the past if I considered them pro-wrestlers. I could only grin and say, "hell no". For the WSDOL to consider getting on a bar room stage, and acting out some kind of wrestling fantasy by a couple of wrestling fanatics, and consider them "wrestlers" or "professional athletes", thus putting them on some kind of level such as the NWA or AWA, is about as big of an insult to me and my profession as you can get. I don't think any of my wrestling peers would disagree as to me stating that. I've been through years of training. Five figures in doctor and hospital visits. Poured countless gallons of blood all over the ring. Chair shots, baseball bats, staples, 15 foot spills to the concrete floor from the apron of the squared circle. Thousands of hours in the gym and all the travel. Huge sacrifices, such as at least making a "punk rock" life about it. So I can stand in the middle of the ring, give my body to the greatest fans on earth night after night. So I may call myself and be known as a PROFESSIONAL WRESTLER. Insulting, ridiculous, and absolutley disgraceful to professional wrestlers everywhere to consider any of those performers in SSP professional wrestlers. Thank you.
11
No more SSP? Really? WTF?!?!
I sincerely hoped, and honestly thought that eventually logic and reason would prevail, and that SSP would go back to putting on the most entertaining night of my month. This angers me to no end. Can they appeal? If they do, I have no problem donating to this cause. I'd like to know exactly how much of my tax dollars are being wasted on the revenge dreams of a talentless creepy 40 year old with no stage-presence.
Wake-up DOL!! You're wasting time, money, and resources so you can be a toady for a man who openly admits that it was a retaliatory gesture because he was scripted to lose a match. What a fucking baby.
No wonder we're in a recession.
I sincerely hoped, and honestly thought that eventually logic and reason would prevail, and that SSP would go back to putting on the most entertaining night of my month. This angers me to no end. Can they appeal? If they do, I have no problem donating to this cause. I'd like to know exactly how much of my tax dollars are being wasted on the revenge dreams of a talentless creepy 40 year old with no stage-presence.
Wake-up DOL!! You're wasting time, money, and resources so you can be a toady for a man who openly admits that it was a retaliatory gesture because he was scripted to lose a match. What a fucking baby.
No wonder we're in a recession.
12
For the record. I do applaud the WSDOL for investigating. Thats what we pay them for. However, I do not agree with "the ruling". All I wanted to do was voice an opinion that hasn't been heard in the press from someone who is "real" pro-wrestler. Which I must say, "GREAT FUCKING JOURNALISM"
14
This really stunts Seattle's unique entertainment growth. I am appalled by the ruling, as an entertainer.
15
Nanny State politics at it's finest. Congratulations WSDOT, you've just put another nail in your administration's coffins with these voters. You're the first to go when the revolution comes.
16
@ 2 Mel, When's the last time you actually saw an SSP show? They are exactly what they say they are: Fight Cabaret. I'm embarassed to admit, I've only been following them for a year, but I have been hooked ever since. Since then, I don't think I've seen a single show that didn't incorporate musical numbers, (Awful and hilarious as they are.) dance routines, burlesque, aerialism, drag queens, clown skits, and millions of other vaudeville stuff.
Y'know that video you put up? That was 3 minutes of an hour long episode. And it was a heart-breaking story. 3 minutes can't explain the portrayal of Draven Lawless showing the crowd he was willing to sell himself out to a bully so that he could have a chance at a title shot. It doesn't show the stirring speech Mr. Fitness gave afterwards saying how he sold himself out to win the title. When all 3 of them hugged at the end, I was crying, along with at least 30-40 others.
How was it not theatric art?
Here's a better short video.
One of the most hilarious moments in SSP history. Does the WWE do this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQhP3A6V1…
Here's one of the SSP characters. Are you saying that this person is an athlete?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW0hKMB4-…
If this isn't your kind of thing, then go away. There are hundreds of us, if not thousands that genuinely care about this issue. Passionately. This is some of the most messed up news I've heard this year! Fuck the DOL. Fuck people who don't get the most amazing joke ever made. Now it's ruined. How the fuck can I protest this?
Y'know that video you put up? That was 3 minutes of an hour long episode. And it was a heart-breaking story. 3 minutes can't explain the portrayal of Draven Lawless showing the crowd he was willing to sell himself out to a bully so that he could have a chance at a title shot. It doesn't show the stirring speech Mr. Fitness gave afterwards saying how he sold himself out to win the title. When all 3 of them hugged at the end, I was crying, along with at least 30-40 others.
How was it not theatric art?
Here's a better short video.
One of the most hilarious moments in SSP history. Does the WWE do this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQhP3A6V1…
Here's one of the SSP characters. Are you saying that this person is an athlete?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW0hKMB4-…
If this isn't your kind of thing, then go away. There are hundreds of us, if not thousands that genuinely care about this issue. Passionately. This is some of the most messed up news I've heard this year! Fuck the DOL. Fuck people who don't get the most amazing joke ever made. Now it's ruined. How the fuck can I protest this?
18
This is truly upsetting. I moved away from Seattle and continued to follow this case. I love the guys in the show, and it's truly heartbreaking that WSDOL is preventing them from performing - a loss not only for them, but for their massive fan community, as well.
Let's burn some shit.
xo.
Let's burn some shit.
xo.
19
16, I understand people like them... My point was that it's wrestling, and one of these non-athletes or someone in the audience could get hurt. Nobody's shutting them down, the DOL is just making them ensure the safety of their shows. Why is that bad?
20
This is outrageous! As an aspiring female fight caberet artist who has worked and rehearsed with ssp participants, I can say from behind the scenes that this is definitely NOT a "sporting event". I was in the doldrums in seattle... feeling at a loss.. like something was missing in my life. Then I discovered SSP. The combination of physical stunts combined with such creatively thought out humor was right up my rainy alley. I would like to thank SSP for turning on the sun and being such an inspiring and creative community force in Seattle. If anything were to bring me back to seattle other than my friends, it would be these guys.
Here's to KEEPIN IT REAL!!!!
Here's to KEEPIN IT REAL!!!!
21
Other events that need the same safety precautions as the dol is requiring for sspw: pro wrestling, amateur boxing, roller derby, monster truck shows, high school wrestling, middle school girls volleyball, boy scout soap box car racing... Why is semi-pro wrestling different?
22
This really sucks. My condolences to all you guys that got booted from your happy time. I've been to SSP, and it's amazing- you really don't deserve this. Good luck with your lawyers.
24
So, the end result of this ruling is that SSP and other groups are just going to have to go underground like everybody else who ever wanted to have some fun in Seattle. Seattle seems utterly incapable of understanding the difference between a professional organization and a bunch of people who want to get together to put on some performance art.
Seattle used to be an edgy, interesting place to live. Bravo, Seattle government for once again showing what a bunch of boring fuckers you are, and thanks for keeping a completely unrealistic vision of what a city is supposed to be like. Lame.
Seattle used to be an edgy, interesting place to live. Bravo, Seattle government for once again showing what a bunch of boring fuckers you are, and thanks for keeping a completely unrealistic vision of what a city is supposed to be like. Lame.
25
#21 - The reason is very simple, stage combat currently does not need the same licensing, but is the same thing. medieval re-enactments (like those at Renaissance festivals) do not need the same government precautions in place. Society for Creative Anachronism, do not need the same precautions. Foam-sword LARPing, do not need the same regulation. These are all self-regulated, with insurance policies with the venues.
It is a slippery slope. According to the definition of the law, with this ruling, all of the above can be considered a wrestling event. According to the ruling, anything with the word "wrestling" in it can fall under the same guidelines as professional wrestling. The definition of the law means that any physical struggle anywhere, whether scripted or not, in a ring, or on a floor, can be deemed as a wrestling event. West Side Story has dance fighting, where there is an enactment of a physical struggle between two participants. According to the letter of the law, this is a pro wrestling act and therefore can need the same regulations.
If this goes unanswered, then any play with any sort of fighting in it, would need to take place in a sanctioned 16x16 ring with 6 foot barriers, with an ambulance on call, a licensed DOL overseer, and UA's for all participants.
That's the issue. It could've been SSP, or the Seattle Knights, but the issue here is that we have a case where a vague definition set in law can be used to uphold a decision already set in place. The issue that if I put a bunch of fight scenes in my play, if someone complains to the state, then the burden of proof is on me to prove that it is not a pro-wrestling event, and according to the current law, there is no way to prove a difference between stage combat and professional wrestling.
#19 - I understand that safety is an issue. Again, the problem is that other fight choreography events do not need the same safety regulations as professional wrestling. Other fight choreography events are self-regulated through insurance policies and the venue. There are currently nothing set in place for stage-combat heavy theater, and since SSP is in a grey area (calling themselves both stage-combat and pro-wrestling sometimes), then by default it falls to be regulated. Am I saying that SSP should not be regulated? No. I think there should be checks in place. But they should be treated like the combat theater they are saying they are, and not the professional wrestling that they say they aren't.
I think that the state should figure out if all fight choreographed events should be regulated, and inform SSP what they can do to prove to the state that they are fight choreography and not pro wrestling.
More...
It is a slippery slope. According to the definition of the law, with this ruling, all of the above can be considered a wrestling event. According to the ruling, anything with the word "wrestling" in it can fall under the same guidelines as professional wrestling. The definition of the law means that any physical struggle anywhere, whether scripted or not, in a ring, or on a floor, can be deemed as a wrestling event. West Side Story has dance fighting, where there is an enactment of a physical struggle between two participants. According to the letter of the law, this is a pro wrestling act and therefore can need the same regulations.
If this goes unanswered, then any play with any sort of fighting in it, would need to take place in a sanctioned 16x16 ring with 6 foot barriers, with an ambulance on call, a licensed DOL overseer, and UA's for all participants.
That's the issue. It could've been SSP, or the Seattle Knights, but the issue here is that we have a case where a vague definition set in law can be used to uphold a decision already set in place. The issue that if I put a bunch of fight scenes in my play, if someone complains to the state, then the burden of proof is on me to prove that it is not a pro-wrestling event, and according to the current law, there is no way to prove a difference between stage combat and professional wrestling.
#19 - I understand that safety is an issue. Again, the problem is that other fight choreography events do not need the same safety regulations as professional wrestling. Other fight choreography events are self-regulated through insurance policies and the venue. There are currently nothing set in place for stage-combat heavy theater, and since SSP is in a grey area (calling themselves both stage-combat and pro-wrestling sometimes), then by default it falls to be regulated. Am I saying that SSP should not be regulated? No. I think there should be checks in place. But they should be treated like the combat theater they are saying they are, and not the professional wrestling that they say they aren't.
I think that the state should figure out if all fight choreographed events should be regulated, and inform SSP what they can do to prove to the state that they are fight choreography and not pro wrestling.
26
This is the biggest BS I have EVER heard! Clearly the WSDOL never went to these shows, or if they did then they seriously lack any sense of humor what so ever!!! I have not only gone to these shows, but I have also performed in them. I have seen how creative these guys are and just how much this is theatrical as opposed to sports related. They put their heart and soul into this and for them to not be able to perform their art is actually getting into censorship here is it not?
The WSDOL needs to grow a funny bone, pull the huge stick out of their ass, come to grips with this is art/cabaret/theater and NOT pro wrestling, and try finding money from other places rather than from local performing artists. These people aren't getting rich on this shit. They are having fun and entertaining. I can't believe that this is the "final" ruling. Isn't there someway for them to appeal this???
The WSDOL needs to grow a funny bone, pull the huge stick out of their ass, come to grips with this is art/cabaret/theater and NOT pro wrestling, and try finding money from other places rather than from local performing artists. These people aren't getting rich on this shit. They are having fun and entertaining. I can't believe that this is the "final" ruling. Isn't there someway for them to appeal this???
27
As I said at the other blog, this is an enormous strike against all of Seattle's performance art. I urge people to please continue support SSP as they ask for it. Please remain vocal and vigilant as other theatrical presentations are shut down by means of over regulation.
28
I'm not in favor of this ruling. I also have friends involved with SSP and this certainly sucks for them.
But I am amused in reading #25 who seems to be presenting the idea that SSP is different than professional wrestling because SSP isn't real.
Fight choreography or sports entertainment, reality has definitely left the building either way.
But I am amused in reading #25 who seems to be presenting the idea that SSP is different than professional wrestling because SSP isn't real.
Fight choreography or sports entertainment, reality has definitely left the building either way.
29
My point is NOT that SSP is different than professional wrestling because of reality.
My point is that according to the letter of the law, ALL fight choreography can be considered professional wrestling. Which is absurd.
Here is a question. What separates an SSP show from combat re-enactment according to Washington State law? Currently there is nothing. What separates combat re-enactment from dance fighting? Currently there is nothing according to law.
My point is that the issue with SSP shows that stage combat is not protected by law, and therefore theater has to censor its content because it has no protection in this state from being regulated under professional wrestling laws.
My point is that according to the letter of the law, ALL fight choreography can be considered professional wrestling. Which is absurd.
Here is a question. What separates an SSP show from combat re-enactment according to Washington State law? Currently there is nothing. What separates combat re-enactment from dance fighting? Currently there is nothing according to law.
My point is that the issue with SSP shows that stage combat is not protected by law, and therefore theater has to censor its content because it has no protection in this state from being regulated under professional wrestling laws.
30
@ 19, The most angering issue of this all is that a former member of SSP told the Slog comments, and the Seattle Times that this was motivated by nothing but pure revenge. There were no safety issues, it was just a whiney 40 year old baby that got angry that he didn't get the script/part that he wanted.
I watched him perform at SSP many times, and "win" every single one of his "matches". He was SSP for at least a year. So, any "safety concerns" are highly suspect. I used to cheer him, but he was such a lackluster performer, I eventually stopped. That's part of why I'm so aggravated by this.
He sold out the very people paying to see him and the others. What kind of performer does that? Someone who is very desperate for attention. He probably did it because he knows deep down that he wasn't talented enough to get press any other way.
Us true fans know the truth. We look for WHAT IS REAL. It's all real! ;)
Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame for being a sell-out, you talentless banana.
SSP! SSP! SSP!
I watched him perform at SSP many times, and "win" every single one of his "matches". He was SSP for at least a year. So, any "safety concerns" are highly suspect. I used to cheer him, but he was such a lackluster performer, I eventually stopped. That's part of why I'm so aggravated by this.
He sold out the very people paying to see him and the others. What kind of performer does that? Someone who is very desperate for attention. He probably did it because he knows deep down that he wasn't talented enough to get press any other way.
Us true fans know the truth. We look for WHAT IS REAL. It's all real! ;)
Enjoy your 15 minutes of fame for being a sell-out, you talentless banana.
SSP! SSP! SSP!
31
For those who actually want to make their voices heard...
Write Governor Gregoire a Letter:
Governor Chris Gregoire
Office of the Governor
PO Box 40002
Olympia, WA 98504-0002
Give Governor Gregoire's Office a Call:
Governor's Office 360-902-4111
For relay operators for the deaf or hard of hearing, please dial 7-1-1
Fax Governor Gregoire a Letter:
360-753-4110
OR
Director’s Office
Email: doldirector@dol.wa.gov
Call: (360) 902-3600
Fax: (360) 902-4042
TTY: (360) 664-8885
Write: Liz Luce, Agency Director
Department of Licensing
PO Box 9020
Olympia, WA 98507-9020
Write Governor Gregoire a Letter:
Governor Chris Gregoire
Office of the Governor
PO Box 40002
Olympia, WA 98504-0002
Give Governor Gregoire's Office a Call:
Governor's Office 360-902-4111
For relay operators for the deaf or hard of hearing, please dial 7-1-1
Fax Governor Gregoire a Letter:
360-753-4110
OR
Director’s Office
Email: doldirector@dol.wa.gov
Call: (360) 902-3600
Fax: (360) 902-4042
TTY: (360) 664-8885
Write: Liz Luce, Agency Director
Department of Licensing
PO Box 9020
Olympia, WA 98507-9020
32
C'mon "Jimmy Flame," 5 figures on hospital bills? I've seen you "wrestle" and it looked at least as bad as the SSP. And put a picture up of yourself, you ain't spent 1 cent on the gym. The only reason I agree with any of the licensing requirements is because the stuff I saw, that Jimmy Flame was a part of, was just as poorly acted as SSP. As for "The Banana," I took his non-athletic ability as just wanting to be "part of the show." And by that I mean "see guys undress in the back."
33
Aspiring Playwright (#25/#29), my amusement from your posts on this subject, which are otherwise well considered and helpful to this discussion, is in how you see a clear distinction between what SSP does and what we think of as "pro wrestling".
And the problem we're presented with boils down to a simple matter of definition.
You say that SSP should not be considered pro wrestling because it is stage combat or fight choreography. What is pro wrestling then?
Is pro wrestling not stage combat or fight choreography? Wasn't that the legal loophole that the WWE followed to become "sports entertainment", admit that everything was staged and avoid being judged as a sporting event in most states with rules governing legitimate sports in the process?
This whole matter comes down to this: What's a working definition that we could use to determine the difference between what SSP wants to do and what "pro wrestling" does? One that couldn't immediately be co-opted by pro wrestling?
What we typically think of as "pro wrestling" is just as pre-determined, just as theatrical, just as capable of self-satire and parody, just as filled with non-wrestling scenes, just as scripted and acted as SSP--so much so that the State can't see a difference.
Can that definition be "it's different because it says it is?" Legally, I don't think so.
It's disappointing, but I understand the State's dilemma in differentiating between SSP and "pro wrestling."
And the problem we're presented with boils down to a simple matter of definition.
You say that SSP should not be considered pro wrestling because it is stage combat or fight choreography. What is pro wrestling then?
Is pro wrestling not stage combat or fight choreography? Wasn't that the legal loophole that the WWE followed to become "sports entertainment", admit that everything was staged and avoid being judged as a sporting event in most states with rules governing legitimate sports in the process?
This whole matter comes down to this: What's a working definition that we could use to determine the difference between what SSP wants to do and what "pro wrestling" does? One that couldn't immediately be co-opted by pro wrestling?
What we typically think of as "pro wrestling" is just as pre-determined, just as theatrical, just as capable of self-satire and parody, just as filled with non-wrestling scenes, just as scripted and acted as SSP--so much so that the State can't see a difference.
Can that definition be "it's different because it says it is?" Legally, I don't think so.
It's disappointing, but I understand the State's dilemma in differentiating between SSP and "pro wrestling."
34
Props to aspiring play right and Jimmy Flame for spelling it out. These guys aren't professional athlites for one reason and one reason alone. They don't get payed. they make no money off of this. They aren't competing for anything with any monetary value of any kind. Even the belts in their "tournaments" are worth nothing. Te belts that WWE and the like use are at least plated in precious metals. this is all just really rather silly and could be dealt with simply by having a reasonable insurance fee and very small licensing fee for their event. As others have said, why don't college wrestlers have to have medics stationed at their events/ SSP is much closer to high school wrestling in terms of both their set up and their actual competitions, except they know damn well who's going to win the match, and half of them don't know a half nelson form a half ass politician.
i've said it before and i'll say it again. if i can burn things in doors and hang people from the ceiling by hooks pierced into their flesh without paying thousands of dollars in fees and purchasing expensive and complicated equipment, why the do these guys have to? This is just silly and reactionary and insanely over kill. It's stage combat pure and simple. If you can fight with broad swords on a public stage and do jousting, why can't you throw you friends around while wearing silly costumes? If I can race power tools and jump them in the middle of the street in Georgetown, why can't i throw plastic fun balls and a drunk guy dressed up as a hooters girl? What is this city coming to? What will they ban/over regulate next?
i've said it before and i'll say it again. if i can burn things in doors and hang people from the ceiling by hooks pierced into their flesh without paying thousands of dollars in fees and purchasing expensive and complicated equipment, why the do these guys have to? This is just silly and reactionary and insanely over kill. It's stage combat pure and simple. If you can fight with broad swords on a public stage and do jousting, why can't you throw you friends around while wearing silly costumes? If I can race power tools and jump them in the middle of the street in Georgetown, why can't i throw plastic fun balls and a drunk guy dressed up as a hooters girl? What is this city coming to? What will they ban/over regulate next?
35
DOL - All the correct attention to the wrong details. This is wrestling in name only - the DOL ruling is literalist, unimaginative and brought on by the most ridiculous means - petty whining by a little boy in a big body (wearing a banana suit).
The shows are a soap opera with mock fighting and an obvious lack of athleticism. The key distinction here is ATHLETICISM. This is pretty easy to determine with a pair of eyes and the ability to distinguish between body types.
Seriously - letters of mockery to the DOL might be the most awakening of all. I for one will enjoy drafting mine
The shows are a soap opera with mock fighting and an obvious lack of athleticism. The key distinction here is ATHLETICISM. This is pretty easy to determine with a pair of eyes and the ability to distinguish between body types.
Seriously - letters of mockery to the DOL might be the most awakening of all. I for one will enjoy drafting mine
36
Wow, I actually got inspired to do homework on this! PG, the issue being that the WSDOL has 2 completely different set of rules and regulations regarding staged combat, and professional wrestling. One option doesn't cost no where near as much money and paperwork, doesn't require 2 ambulances, insurance policies, or etc.
So the real question is "How does SSP qualify for the cheaper option?" because the parameters of both sets of rules fall square under the description of the super-expensive one. So if a group advertises as cabaret, why is it not theate? Because of the word of someone who openly says he did it for revenge?
How many people in the community have to call it an apple, before our government stops calling it a pear? The differences are little, but fundamental. Yes, this is all a debate about the definition of their art. But in this country, you are innocent before proven guilty, and the burden of proof falls on the DOL to explain how SSP is not what they advertise themselves as.
And how reliable is that evidence when the informant says he did it for revenge, and they never actually sent DOL agents to inspect their events?
So the real question is "How does SSP qualify for the cheaper option?" because the parameters of both sets of rules fall square under the description of the super-expensive one. So if a group advertises as cabaret, why is it not theate? Because of the word of someone who openly says he did it for revenge?
How many people in the community have to call it an apple, before our government stops calling it a pear? The differences are little, but fundamental. Yes, this is all a debate about the definition of their art. But in this country, you are innocent before proven guilty, and the burden of proof falls on the DOL to explain how SSP is not what they advertise themselves as.
And how reliable is that evidence when the informant says he did it for revenge, and they never actually sent DOL agents to inspect their events?
37
I have been pretty silent on this till now.I am a founding member, writer, and performer for SSP.I want to thank everybody for the support you've shown.I knew we were loved but this outpouring of support has blown me away.
It's not just an issue of getting licensed. It's that with that we would likely need to buy a ring, can't do shows in bars, no profanity, beer garden must be set far way from the ring, no throwing balls, etc. We would lose the essence of what SSP is.They are forcing us to be a wrestling company.That's not what we are or want to be.
We are theater, we want to perform our own unique brand of theater for adults with adult comedy in an adult setting.
This is only one aspect of why we are fighting this but it is one that has not been discussed in a public forum yet and I want it to be out there.
Also, I am concerned by the lack of support we are getting from the wrestling community itself.We are going to bat fighting the laws that make it impossible for anyone to have an actual wrestling company in this state.I can't think of one company in the entire state that does not do there show on the reservation where they do not need to answer to the DOL because they are unable to stay alive financially or have the freedom to run the show without being regulated and censored into mediocrity.
We are fighting to help define your sport as an athletic profession seperate from the fans like us just having fun with it or the backyard wrestlers you shy away from.I know a few guys who are pro wrestlers and they have to drive hours to ply their trade in a small venue in the middle of nowhere for little, if any pay.We are fighting your fight here too.You are the professionals they are saying we are.Yet we are fighting your fight for you.Please come forward and help us shine a light on the situation and the laws that are inhibiting your right to throw the show you want, where you want, by putting a financial strangle hold on your profession.
More...
It's not just an issue of getting licensed. It's that with that we would likely need to buy a ring, can't do shows in bars, no profanity, beer garden must be set far way from the ring, no throwing balls, etc. We would lose the essence of what SSP is.They are forcing us to be a wrestling company.That's not what we are or want to be.
We are theater, we want to perform our own unique brand of theater for adults with adult comedy in an adult setting.
This is only one aspect of why we are fighting this but it is one that has not been discussed in a public forum yet and I want it to be out there.
Also, I am concerned by the lack of support we are getting from the wrestling community itself.We are going to bat fighting the laws that make it impossible for anyone to have an actual wrestling company in this state.I can't think of one company in the entire state that does not do there show on the reservation where they do not need to answer to the DOL because they are unable to stay alive financially or have the freedom to run the show without being regulated and censored into mediocrity.
We are fighting to help define your sport as an athletic profession seperate from the fans like us just having fun with it or the backyard wrestlers you shy away from.I know a few guys who are pro wrestlers and they have to drive hours to ply their trade in a small venue in the middle of nowhere for little, if any pay.We are fighting your fight here too.You are the professionals they are saying we are.Yet we are fighting your fight for you.Please come forward and help us shine a light on the situation and the laws that are inhibiting your right to throw the show you want, where you want, by putting a financial strangle hold on your profession.
38
i just hope the powers that be will pull their heads out of their asses and let the SSP perform again soon! they just look like they are having so much fun...
39
Pg (#33) - From what I'm gathering, you agree with the state that fight choreography is pro wrestling, because pro wrestling is fight choreography.
It is definitely a question that needs to be answered. But what I'm looking at here boils down to unfair treatment. IF the state deems that fight choreography is pro wrestling, then EVERY instance of fight choreography should be treated as professional wrestling.
I think you can see why this is preposterous.
If SSP defines themselves as stage combat, then they should be treated the same as other groups who define themselves as stage combat. It is up to the state to prove that they are NOT stage combat and ARE wrestling, rather than for the organization to prove that they are NOT wrestling and ARE combat.
It's a basic tenet of innocent until proven guilty. What I'm seeing is the reverse, guilty until proven innocent.
I'm simply asking this. Why should SSP be treated differently than the Seattle Knights? Obviously if these two organizations are treated differently, then there must be some sort of differentiation towards the two. Currently it is not provided by law.
And the major question is - should every play with choreographed fighting be treated as professional wrestling?
IF the answer is yes, then I agree with the ruling. If the answer is no, then WHY is SSP treated as pro wrestling and not stage combat? That way the organization can at least legally pursue how to more closely fit with those set of legal standards than being forced to fit to pro wrestling regulation.
You bring up a good point, PG, and I'm not discounting that. But do you at least see why this can be concluded as unfair treatment, and a dangerous precedent to anyone who wants to perform stage combat?
More...
It is definitely a question that needs to be answered. But what I'm looking at here boils down to unfair treatment. IF the state deems that fight choreography is pro wrestling, then EVERY instance of fight choreography should be treated as professional wrestling.
I think you can see why this is preposterous.
If SSP defines themselves as stage combat, then they should be treated the same as other groups who define themselves as stage combat. It is up to the state to prove that they are NOT stage combat and ARE wrestling, rather than for the organization to prove that they are NOT wrestling and ARE combat.
It's a basic tenet of innocent until proven guilty. What I'm seeing is the reverse, guilty until proven innocent.
I'm simply asking this. Why should SSP be treated differently than the Seattle Knights? Obviously if these two organizations are treated differently, then there must be some sort of differentiation towards the two. Currently it is not provided by law.
And the major question is - should every play with choreographed fighting be treated as professional wrestling?
IF the answer is yes, then I agree with the ruling. If the answer is no, then WHY is SSP treated as pro wrestling and not stage combat? That way the organization can at least legally pursue how to more closely fit with those set of legal standards than being forced to fit to pro wrestling regulation.
You bring up a good point, PG, and I'm not discounting that. But do you at least see why this can be concluded as unfair treatment, and a dangerous precedent to anyone who wants to perform stage combat?
40
#39--You've gathered incorrectly, aspiring playwright.
I'm disappointed in the State's ruling (not the least of which because I know and like a couple of the SSP folks...this must totally suck for them) but I'm simply not surprised by the ruling.
I'm not surprised BECAUSE, try as I might, I can't come up with a distinct, testable definition that could clearly define SSP and what we know as "pro wrestling" to be legally different...something beyond just a "sniff" test, like for obscenity where "you know it when you see it"...something with definitional clarity. Something that would make the State's ruling as ludicrous as most on this board just "feel" that it is...
I think I COULD come up with a definition that sets aside most stage/theatrical combat... I think I COULD come up with one that clearly defines SCA/LARPing/war re-enactments as different than pro-wrestling. But SSP walks like a pro-wrestling duck, quacks like a pro-wrestling duck...how do we define it as "not a duck"? And then, could that definition of SSP's "non-duck-ness" stand-up to an attempt at co-option by pro-wrestling to say that they, too, aren't a duck?
What you're saying is that as long as SSP says that they're not a duck, that should be enough...but then what happens when the WWE says that they're also not a duck? What stops them?
I think you clearly see SSP as separate and distinct from pro-wrestling--so much so that the delineation is simply obvious to you on an instinctive level. How do you put that into words that those who don't share that instinctive separation can agree with?
I wish I knew.
As it stands however, that's immaterial. There is a regulation that the State feels applies in this circumstance and they are applying it. I've read the regulation and I've read the definition that the State uses and I can see how that it could be applied towards SSP.
It isn't unfair treatment, it isn't a case of being guilty unless proven innocent. For this regulation not to apply to SSP, then SSP can't be "sports entertainment", a "wrestling exhibition" or a "wrestling show"...because those things are what this regulation covers (as well as boxing, toughman, kickboxing and MMA events, in their own defined sections of the current regulation and the coming changes to that regulation.)
If I were a lawyer for SSP, I might have pointed out the "in the ring" specification in the current definition of "wrestling" in the regulation--but that'd probably be a quickly closed technicality, not a clear re-definition that would clearly protect SSP's rights to remain unregulated.
Disappointing as it may be to those who enjoy it, the State clearly doesn't want exactly what the SSP is... Seems like an unwinnable, uphill battle for SSP--but not the harbinger of imminent doom to theatre and LARPers that Aspiring Playwright is Chicken Little-ing about.
More...
I'm disappointed in the State's ruling (not the least of which because I know and like a couple of the SSP folks...this must totally suck for them) but I'm simply not surprised by the ruling.
I'm not surprised BECAUSE, try as I might, I can't come up with a distinct, testable definition that could clearly define SSP and what we know as "pro wrestling" to be legally different...something beyond just a "sniff" test, like for obscenity where "you know it when you see it"...something with definitional clarity. Something that would make the State's ruling as ludicrous as most on this board just "feel" that it is...
I think I COULD come up with a definition that sets aside most stage/theatrical combat... I think I COULD come up with one that clearly defines SCA/LARPing/war re-enactments as different than pro-wrestling. But SSP walks like a pro-wrestling duck, quacks like a pro-wrestling duck...how do we define it as "not a duck"? And then, could that definition of SSP's "non-duck-ness" stand-up to an attempt at co-option by pro-wrestling to say that they, too, aren't a duck?
What you're saying is that as long as SSP says that they're not a duck, that should be enough...but then what happens when the WWE says that they're also not a duck? What stops them?
I think you clearly see SSP as separate and distinct from pro-wrestling--so much so that the delineation is simply obvious to you on an instinctive level. How do you put that into words that those who don't share that instinctive separation can agree with?
I wish I knew.
As it stands however, that's immaterial. There is a regulation that the State feels applies in this circumstance and they are applying it. I've read the regulation and I've read the definition that the State uses and I can see how that it could be applied towards SSP.
It isn't unfair treatment, it isn't a case of being guilty unless proven innocent. For this regulation not to apply to SSP, then SSP can't be "sports entertainment", a "wrestling exhibition" or a "wrestling show"...because those things are what this regulation covers (as well as boxing, toughman, kickboxing and MMA events, in their own defined sections of the current regulation and the coming changes to that regulation.)
If I were a lawyer for SSP, I might have pointed out the "in the ring" specification in the current definition of "wrestling" in the regulation--but that'd probably be a quickly closed technicality, not a clear re-definition that would clearly protect SSP's rights to remain unregulated.
Disappointing as it may be to those who enjoy it, the State clearly doesn't want exactly what the SSP is... Seems like an unwinnable, uphill battle for SSP--but not the harbinger of imminent doom to theatre and LARPers that Aspiring Playwright is Chicken Little-ing about.
41
#40 - again, I ask the question. WHY is SSP "sports entertainment" and combat re-enactment NOT? If combat re-enactment falls under the definition of sports entertainment, but is NOT treated as such, if Pirates of Penzance falls under the definition of sports entertainment, but is NOT treated as such, then why does SSP fall under the definition of sports entertainment and IS treated as such.
If it's something like, "there must be contact between the individuals" (which does not protect LARPing or SCA), or "there can be no more than 3 bodyslams per event", then THESE distinctions should be written into the law. Otherwise, there is no way for a stage combat group to pre-empt fighting a legal battle to protect their show.
If YOU can come up with a definition that protects most stage/theatrical combat, why has not the state? I think it's a matter that this has never come up before. Every pro-wrestling organization that I have ever heard of takes pride in being considered pro-wrestling, not openly reject it like SSP does.
I applaud SSP for trying to innovate, but I firmly believe that the only reason that this legal battle is not a harbinger of doom, is because nobody in their right mind would call the Seattle Knights a wrestling promoter. But, according to what I read about this "Banana", there's no protection if someone NOT in their right mind does.
The outcome of this decision affects all those involved in stage combat. It affects anyone trying to stage a play or performance art because the outcome determines what they can and cannot do. Currently, the law is so vague, that in order to do things legally, there can never be a predetermined physical struggle between two actors.
If it's something like, "there must be contact between the individuals" (which does not protect LARPing or SCA), or "there can be no more than 3 bodyslams per event", then THESE distinctions should be written into the law. Otherwise, there is no way for a stage combat group to pre-empt fighting a legal battle to protect their show.
If YOU can come up with a definition that protects most stage/theatrical combat, why has not the state? I think it's a matter that this has never come up before. Every pro-wrestling organization that I have ever heard of takes pride in being considered pro-wrestling, not openly reject it like SSP does.
I applaud SSP for trying to innovate, but I firmly believe that the only reason that this legal battle is not a harbinger of doom, is because nobody in their right mind would call the Seattle Knights a wrestling promoter. But, according to what I read about this "Banana", there's no protection if someone NOT in their right mind does.
The outcome of this decision affects all those involved in stage combat. It affects anyone trying to stage a play or performance art because the outcome determines what they can and cannot do. Currently, the law is so vague, that in order to do things legally, there can never be a predetermined physical struggle between two actors.
43
it was just some good clean fun. one thing i could look forward to every month. they never hurt any on, except each other then the law took it away....why?
44
At the risk of merely continuing to bash my head against a wall for your amusement, Aspiring Playwright...
What we're talking about here is a ruling that the Washington State Department of Licensing regulations regarding boxing, martial arts and wrestling do apply to Seattle Semi Pro Wrestling events.
Seattle Semi Pro Wrestling events do, in fact, include wrestling (or, more precisely, wrestling as it is defined in the "sports entertainment" era). They do advertise themselves as "SSP Wrestling", they promote, including references to bouts, matches and championships. If you watch a video of SSP highlights (link below), you're going to see wrestling. The fans of SSP Wrestling expect wrestling and when they don't get wrestling, their fans complain.
Is there more to Seattle Semi Pro Wrestling than the wrestling? Certainly...but that's also true of WWE, ECW, TNA, etc. and other sports entertainment providers who are the intended targets of the state's regulations.
"Pirates of Penzance" would not be subject to consideration by the DOL because it is not a "wrestling show"...no one is going to confuse it with a "wrestling show." SCA, LARPing, Civil War re-enacting...again, not a "wrestling show", no one is going to confuse it with a wrestling show (...unless they're LARPing a Pro-Wrestling rpg, but I don't think White Wolf has come out with Wrestler: The Slamination.)
Based on what they do and how they present themselves, not only could someone confuse SSP Wrestling with a "wrestling show"--it IS a wrestling show, according to the State Department of Licensing.
That said...
DO I LIKE THIS RULING? No. AM I IN FAVOR OF THESE REGULATIONS OR THE COMING CHANGES TO THEM? No.
Am I completely unconcerned by the questions that these vague definitions present? No...
Someone earlier in these comments mentioned the play "Piledriver!" I didn't see that performance, but the lack of a definition of "sports entertainment" could present an academic/definitional dilemma to an overzealous regulator.
I doubt that it would actually meet the definition of a "wrestling show"...but considering it in a black/white definitional argument certainly gives me pause.
I also wonder about something as crazy as those Medieval Times restaurants--the jousting competitions and knight fights that they do there as part of their "dinner & a show"...could something like that, while certainly not being what one would automatically call "wrestling", actually fall under the category of "sports entertainment"?
Again...I doubt it would--but, I could see someone making the argument. (Not that we're in danger of getting a Medieval Times restaurant any time soon.)
I also wonder... Would SSP be safe if they all dressed up like Mech-Warriors? (Or, as Kaiju Big Battel does, like Japanese Movie Monsters?--which, I'm afraid to say, would probably fall under the WS-DOL licensing as wrestling/sports entertainment.)
How far can you bend the definitions of either "wrestling" or "sport" before those definitions simply fail? That's a reasonable question...and perhaps, a stronger definition is required.
HOWEVER...I remain convinced that it may be impossible to come up with a definition that would actually draw a clear distinction between what SSP does and what a(nother) wrestling event promotion does.
Based on what I know and what I've read, as much as it sucks for friends of mine involved with SSP, I don't see how the State could have ruled otherwise. The regulations regarding wrestling shows are being applied to a wrestling show.
That doesn't mean I think the local Gilbert & Sullivan society need be worried.
I don't think a precedent has been set, I don't think that the DOL is grossly overreaching, and I certainly don't think that this is the start of a witch-hunt that ruins everything for everyone everywhere forever.
(And I also don't think that witch-hunts are threatened by these regulations either.)
pg
*No offense to Aspiring Playwright or anyone else who has participated, but the melancholy truth is that this video is so much more entertaining than this thread: 6 Years of SSP Memories
And to #43: Blame the bastards who ran those shady Toughman competitions, blame the crazy kids who hurt themselves doing backyard wrestling, blame the mob bosses behind the corruption that is boxing and blame the Nanny State for believing that watching Raw turns you into a Superpredator...that's why there's State regulation of wrestling shows.
The law didn't take SSP away from you--but complying with the law has likely made it cost prohibitive for them to keep doing it...and a few of the things that you probably love about SSP turn out to be specifically against regulations.
What can I say? Parents just don't understand.
More...
What we're talking about here is a ruling that the Washington State Department of Licensing regulations regarding boxing, martial arts and wrestling do apply to Seattle Semi Pro Wrestling events.
Seattle Semi Pro Wrestling events do, in fact, include wrestling (or, more precisely, wrestling as it is defined in the "sports entertainment" era). They do advertise themselves as "SSP Wrestling", they promote, including references to bouts, matches and championships. If you watch a video of SSP highlights (link below), you're going to see wrestling. The fans of SSP Wrestling expect wrestling and when they don't get wrestling, their fans complain.
Is there more to Seattle Semi Pro Wrestling than the wrestling? Certainly...but that's also true of WWE, ECW, TNA, etc. and other sports entertainment providers who are the intended targets of the state's regulations.
"Pirates of Penzance" would not be subject to consideration by the DOL because it is not a "wrestling show"...no one is going to confuse it with a "wrestling show." SCA, LARPing, Civil War re-enacting...again, not a "wrestling show", no one is going to confuse it with a wrestling show (...unless they're LARPing a Pro-Wrestling rpg, but I don't think White Wolf has come out with Wrestler: The Slamination.)
Based on what they do and how they present themselves, not only could someone confuse SSP Wrestling with a "wrestling show"--it IS a wrestling show, according to the State Department of Licensing.
That said...
DO I LIKE THIS RULING? No. AM I IN FAVOR OF THESE REGULATIONS OR THE COMING CHANGES TO THEM? No.
Am I completely unconcerned by the questions that these vague definitions present? No...
Someone earlier in these comments mentioned the play "Piledriver!" I didn't see that performance, but the lack of a definition of "sports entertainment" could present an academic/definitional dilemma to an overzealous regulator.
I doubt that it would actually meet the definition of a "wrestling show"...but considering it in a black/white definitional argument certainly gives me pause.
I also wonder about something as crazy as those Medieval Times restaurants--the jousting competitions and knight fights that they do there as part of their "dinner & a show"...could something like that, while certainly not being what one would automatically call "wrestling", actually fall under the category of "sports entertainment"?
Again...I doubt it would--but, I could see someone making the argument. (Not that we're in danger of getting a Medieval Times restaurant any time soon.)
I also wonder... Would SSP be safe if they all dressed up like Mech-Warriors? (Or, as Kaiju Big Battel does, like Japanese Movie Monsters?--which, I'm afraid to say, would probably fall under the WS-DOL licensing as wrestling/sports entertainment.)
How far can you bend the definitions of either "wrestling" or "sport" before those definitions simply fail? That's a reasonable question...and perhaps, a stronger definition is required.
HOWEVER...I remain convinced that it may be impossible to come up with a definition that would actually draw a clear distinction between what SSP does and what a(nother) wrestling event promotion does.
Based on what I know and what I've read, as much as it sucks for friends of mine involved with SSP, I don't see how the State could have ruled otherwise. The regulations regarding wrestling shows are being applied to a wrestling show.
That doesn't mean I think the local Gilbert & Sullivan society need be worried.
I don't think a precedent has been set, I don't think that the DOL is grossly overreaching, and I certainly don't think that this is the start of a witch-hunt that ruins everything for everyone everywhere forever.
(And I also don't think that witch-hunts are threatened by these regulations either.)
pg
*No offense to Aspiring Playwright or anyone else who has participated, but the melancholy truth is that this video is so much more entertaining than this thread: 6 Years of SSP Memories
And to #43: Blame the bastards who ran those shady Toughman competitions, blame the crazy kids who hurt themselves doing backyard wrestling, blame the mob bosses behind the corruption that is boxing and blame the Nanny State for believing that watching Raw turns you into a Superpredator...that's why there's State regulation of wrestling shows.
The law didn't take SSP away from you--but complying with the law has likely made it cost prohibitive for them to keep doing it...and a few of the things that you probably love about SSP turn out to be specifically against regulations.
What can I say? Parents just don't understand.
45
The whole point of the ruling by the DOL is to make some new revenue for the state, not protect the performers or the public. It is a way to add licensing fees, insurance fees, permit fees, etc. The WSDOL is counting on enough people caring about SSP that somehow we will come up with money to pay them off... err, pay the fees. Our greedy, broke-ass state needs to find new and creative ways to tax and fee us to pay for our mismanaged state budget. I am surprised more people don't actually see that. If something is popular and government isn't making any money off it, they believe they should, so rulings like this get put in place.
Just like the proposed Bag Fee that was nothing more than a "Bag Tax". It was supposed to stop the use of plastic grocery bags by putting a fee on plastin AND paper bags, because of the environmental impact of the plastic bags. If that was the case, why not just make plastic grocery bags illegal? So they could collect the "fee" from each bag. It wasn't really about the bags, it was about the REVENUE. So is this case. They aren't worried about the danger, it is about State revenue from something that is popular. Which is one of the reasons I am leaving this fucked up state.
Just like the proposed Bag Fee that was nothing more than a "Bag Tax". It was supposed to stop the use of plastic grocery bags by putting a fee on plastin AND paper bags, because of the environmental impact of the plastic bags. If that was the case, why not just make plastic grocery bags illegal? So they could collect the "fee" from each bag. It wasn't really about the bags, it was about the REVENUE. So is this case. They aren't worried about the danger, it is about State revenue from something that is popular. Which is one of the reasons I am leaving this fucked up state.
46
it's another win for the big leagues and promoters! We all know the state of economy and the goals the main wrestling groups share. MONEY! as much as they can make from you at a show. No not the small independents co. The WWE Vince will spend the rest of his life milking money into the athletic commissions and the states that allow him to bring the same lame talent year after year. Half his crew couldn't beat their way out of a wet paperbag! Maybe it's because ones like NECRO BUTCHER, Brain Damage and toby klien are the real wrestling talents!
It goes back to football! College teams and players play to be discovered and for the love of the game. Once in a contract for millions what is he really doing for the game?
Same here lets all hate on the small independents and keep loving the same lame ass talent. who knows maybe the rest of WWE can be in a new movie. Maybe Cena, big show and Rated R can be in the new stooges movie? or sheldon can be in the Beverly Hills cop XX? But I can say this you wrestling sucks! As does your acting!
Support your local indy shows!!!!!! ECOW baby!!!!!!
It goes back to football! College teams and players play to be discovered and for the love of the game. Once in a contract for millions what is he really doing for the game?
Same here lets all hate on the small independents and keep loving the same lame ass talent. who knows maybe the rest of WWE can be in a new movie. Maybe Cena, big show and Rated R can be in the new stooges movie? or sheldon can be in the Beverly Hills cop XX? But I can say this you wrestling sucks! As does your acting!
Support your local indy shows!!!!!! ECOW baby!!!!!!
47
I guess every 14 year old has a dream to be like Roddy Piper or whatever. Wait. We're dealing with adults and not 14 year olds. SSP sucks balls. Old washed up drunks acting like teenagers. Maybe they should just try and sell their vidoes to MTV like Jackass? Nevermind, Wrestling Society X already exists and blows those douchebags away. I have a suggestion for you "guys". Since you have a known pedophile in your group, check into to some self help groups, or just drink your sorry ass' to death already. Fucking losers.
48
Live Professional Wrestling is alive in Washington State
check out www.tulalipchampionshipwrestling.com
check out www.tulalipchampionshipwrestling.com
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
Slog Bible Study: Deuteronomy 21:10-14 by Goldy
-
The AP Is Reporting That Whitney Houston Is Dead by Paul Constant
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (48) RSS