According to the world's most reliable news source, Gavin Newsom, the city of Murfreesboro has BANNED being gay in public!

I have to tell you, my first thought when I saw this was, "uh, based!" Then I thought, "Oh, I hope it's MY city in Tennessee!"

Then I had the more rational thought that there is absolutely NO WAY what Gavin Newsom is saying is true.

Here's how the story Gavin Newsom is referencing describes the "gay ban":

Murfreesboro passed an ordinance in June banning "indecent behavior," including "indecent exposure, public indecency, lewd behavior, nudity or sexual conduct." As journalist Erin Reed first reported, this ordinance specifically mentions Section 21-72 of the city code. The city code states that sexual conduct includes homosexuality.

Erin Reed, if you don't know, is a radical transgender activist who is engaged to another transgender activist, Zooey Zephy, who is a representative in Montana.

(Not exactly a hard-hitting journalist.)

But, according to BOTH Newson and Reed Murfreesboro's ordinance against indecent exposure and going naked in public is a ban on being gay.

So, does the city code actually say "sexual conduct" includes homosexuality?

Well, way back in 1949 the city code defined "sexual conduct" to include homosexuality. However, when this new ordinance was written, it was intended to ban pornography, nudity, and lewd behavior in public.

But, according to the code, homosexuality WAS included as sexual behavior. Now, was the plan ever to BAN being gay in public? Of course not!

How do I know?

(This is really important for the "AKSHUALLY" folks sharing screenshots of the city code in the comments)

The term "homosexuality" stopped being part of a city code prohibiting inappropriate "sexual conduct," the Murfreesboro City Council decided recently...

The council unanimously voted to eliminate the term, "homosexuality," from the code's definition prohibiting inappropriate sexual conduct.

Yeah, Newsom is sharing straight-up fake news.

The ordinance was passed. LGBT groups found this irrelevant and unenforced part of the code from the '40s, and the city council immediately amended the definition just so they'd shut up and not sue them.

The code dates back to 1949 in defining prohibited "sexual conduct" that includes "homosexuality," and the language remained in place with a 1977 code update, according to an Oct. 19 council agenda report from the city manager.

"The term homosexuality is an anachronism unenforceable under current law," Tindall's report said. "Therefore, it should be excluded from the definitions used in these ordinances."

And it was excluded.

The city never had any intention to "ban being gay" with its newest ordinance. And they bent over backward to make that clear.

But did that stop Gavin Newsom from sharing the fake news? Of course not.

I guess he still thinks being gay is lewd and indecent.

Again:

Newsom was, of course, appropriately roasted in the comments.

Gavin, stop the lying. Stop the outrage. Just stop. Get some help.

P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇