Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Question: What's the difference between a guy who exposes his genitals to innocent children in public* and a guy who exposes his genitals to children at a 'gay' pride parade and homosexual festivals like the Folsom Street Fair?
Answer: The first guy would be charged with indecent exposure and after being convicted, have to register as a sex offender.
The 2nd guy is applauded by hundreds of thousands of people (including the media) for showing how "proud" he is of his moral degenerate lifestyle.
*Except in Sodomy and Gonorrhea North and South (Seattle and San Fransicko) where pubic nudity is tolerated.
As far as I'm concerned there is nothing inherently offensive about any part of the human body aCW.:chew:
Of course in our cultures there are rules governing public nudity based on how most people feel about it.
These rules are often relaxed depending on the context and whether anyone is actually offended enough to report it to the police.
In other cultures it can be quite normal to wear next to nothing, all the time without the sky falling down.
If nobody there at the time sees a problem nor is offended then I would suggest that it isn't the police's job to be offended on their behalf and to start arresting people.
What happens however is that media photographers (who presumably are not offended themselves) take pictures at events of which some will get belatedly pounced on by the likes of AFTAH as offending public decency if homosexuals happen to be involved.
Well they would wouldn't they.
Presumably if a photographer took pictures at a nudist camp with heterosexuals in it, yours and AFTAH's outrage would be rather less?
Or maybe for you aCW any exposure of certain parts of the body should never happen at any time, except under the strictest of circumstances? :sherlock:
Maybe you think that there is indeed much to be offended by if certain parts of the anatomy are not kept securely out of sight at all times?
Presumably then, your own genitalia is always kept securely covered up and out of sight at all times, only risking exposure when and where appropriate, as absolutely necessary and always under strictly controlled circumstances.
lain:
This particular topic was discussed early on in Part 3's thread Al, and you were involved in it.
Let's review what I had to say about nudity in general to TOL's "one living brain cell wonder", Libertarian shagter01:
Poor aCW thinks the bodies that God created are ugly and should be covered. He is ashamed of what God gave him.
If you don't want to see something, don't look at it. It's not my job to make sure you see only things you want.
And I could care less what old Jews wrote down 5000 years ago.
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
The queens, fairies and dykes of the lifestyle and movement that you defend sure don't have a problem displaying their genitalia in public. As I've shown throughout the thread, public nudism is very popular at pride parades and homosexual festivals. Public nudity was so bad in the libertine capital of the US (San Fransicko), that the degenerates running the city even passed legislation prohibiting public nudity.(Peter LaBarbera shows in this article how those that proudly partake in homosexual behavior are taking the law very seriously).
WARNING! Offensive pictures
So Much for San Francisco’s New Ban on Public Nudity
http://americansfortruth.com/2013/04/11/so-much-for-san-franciscos-public-nudity-ban/
I would ask you Doper why you think societies have public decency laws, but since you weren't even able to define what decency means to you, I figured that would be taxing that one live brain cell of yours again.
How about I just ask you a few personal questions and we can see how you feel about nudity.
Do you and the wifey run around in the nude around your children? (If the kids get offended, they shouldn't look at it. It's not your job to make sure they see only things that they want).
You know how when some people invite guests over to their house they ask them to take off their shoes? Do you ask them to take off their clothes? (hopefully your neighbors aren't ashamed of what God gave them).
Bathroom doors: they're for prudes. So what if the kids see you urinating or defecating, it's as natural as the naked human body, so what's the big deal?
I won't go into you showering with other members of the family, as people might think I'm talking about incest (I'm not, it's only two human beings that are closely related to each other showering in a close proximity of one another).
Bedroom doors. So what if the kids see you and the wifey getting intimate, it's natural.
I could go on and on with more examples, but I think those will keep that Libertarian brain of yours busy for a while...
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3937549#post3937549
