My Amendment.

[Technosoul]

I do not have a political party but if I did a lot of changes would be made.
(as noted in my other posts on re-evolution and etc.)

If you could vote for me and if I had a party we would admend the Bill of Rights so that the government cannot tell you what to wear. For sanitary reasons you would still need to wear pants because everyone must use the same chairs, however women could be as topless and men. I cannot logically think of any reason for a law making them cover up their brests in public. How could seeing a topless woman cause a kid to grow up to become a sex freak like the adults? Who put Bin Laden and those anti-flesh fundamentalists in charge of our freedoms anyway?

This is not just a joke.

We could effectivly wipe out much of the pronographic industry if tits were not taboo in public. What's wrong with a little topless flip flopping?

I think I could even win the election with this idea, whatcha think.

[Dieval]

Personally, I'm glad you don't have a political party and you're not in charge. You should not be making your personal views of decency the new standard. What if I don't want my son exposed to basically naked women? Who are you to say that is the right thing to do??

[kharmajunkie]

I agree. That's why drugs and prostitution should be legal; legislating morality just demonizes an issue and makes any existing problems worse.
This may be sexist but I don't think that women would start to walk around topless all of a sudden. Strong fashion sense is so ingrained in American culture that I don't think they would want to give up all
that body space formally dedicated to Ralph Lauren or Halston.
Those "girls gone wild" guys would never sell another tape though.

[bishop]

i also agree.. the stuck up members of society can suck my ass for all i care.

censor *this*.

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by Dieval, Personally, I'm glad you don't have a political party and you're not in charge. You should not be making your personal views of decency the new standard. What if I don't want my son exposed to basically naked women? Who are you to say that is the right thing to do??

Well, you could move to Iran where they share your views, no one would force you to accept freedom.

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by kharmajunkie, I agree. That's why drugs and prostitution should be legal; legislating morality just demonizes an issue and makes any existing problems worse. This may be sexist but I don't think that women would start to walk around topless all of a sudden. Strong fashion sense is so ingrained in American culture that I don't think they would want to give up all that body space formally dedicated to Ralph Lauren or Halston. Those "girls gone wild" guys would never sell another tape though.

Of course, men did not give up shirts just because they have the option to do otherwise. But what if it was 103 F outside and hotter then heaven? Off comes the T shirt and thank goodness for that. If I made men wear some sort of covering because I did not want my daughter to know they look different, or because they might "turn on" some gay guy, everyone would be protesting.

Anyway, let us see what the others have to comment.

Technosoul.

[Samildanach]

I agree, people should have the freedom to wear what they like when they like if thats nothing its nothing. I think that is a much more basic freedom that the right to bear arms. Its not potentially dangerous to anyone else (apart from male drivers) for a start.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Technosoul, Well, you could move to Iran where they share your views, no one would force you to accept freedom.

Iran does not share my views. But your views don't apply to everyone in this country so applying them to such would be wrong.
Why don't you move somewhere where your views of decency are accepted?

[Samildanach]

I think you should start this political party techno. I reckon you would win purely on the votes of men alone. Just look at what old hefner did on the strength of a few exposed bodies. Its overdue that it should become part of the political process as well.
Human rights act favours you on it. You could make it legal body piece by body piece throughout the years and you would have great completely free campaign coverage due to all the male reporters. Imagine yourself surrounded by naked women saying this is what I can offer you if I get into power. Its a hands down winner. Thats often the exact problem with liberal parties, they only take things half way and then wonder why they don't win.

[bishop]

why don't the uptight pricks just look away?

[Samildanach]

Only people that had the evil thoughts would be the ones against it, everyone else would embrace their individuality....or their neighbors 'individuality'.

[bsmaurer]

Originally posted by Dieval, Personally, I'm glad you don't have a political party and you're not in charge. You should not be making your personal views of decency the new standard. What if I don't want my son exposed to basically naked women? Who are you to say that is the right thing to do??

What if I dont want my son exposed to the hipocrisies of Christianity? Who are you tsay that printing "In God We Trust" on money is the right thing to do?

Your rights end where mine begin. I should be allowed to do anything I want as long as your personal rights aren't being violated. If you don't like my views or fashion, look away or move on. This is America. We're supposed to be free, and yet everywhere our citizens are in chains because of hipocrites to the concept of Freedom and all that it entails.

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by Dieval,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Dieval,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Technosoul, Well, you could move to Iran where they share your views, no one would force you to accept freedom.

Iran does not share my views. But your views don't apply to everyone in this country so applying them to such would be wrong.
Why don't you move somewhere where your views of decency are accepted?[/b][/quote]

Decency in reality has little to do with this topic, because we are not talking about anything having to do with reproductive organs. A womans boobs should not be anymore of a sexual object then her smile, her legs, her neck, or her belly button. Of course men are attracted to women and visa versa, even when they have on fancy clothing they are attractive. It is not a decency problem to feel such attraction, it is normal. If you think women who are topless are evil it is only a problem in your won mind, and the woman is not to blame for YOUR thoughts, you got to set your own mind right and censorship will not do that for you. We should not have laws just to protect you from your own thoughts, just get control of your brain (not you personally, but anyone where the shoe fits).

If it was not taboo people would take it for granted and think little about it, new attitudes would form about it, and your kid would not think women are dirty because they got boobs. I am not talking about a free lunch, I am talking about freedom. (babies exemted).

And I am just getting started .... more later.

Technosoul.

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by Samildanach, I think you should start this political party techno. I reckon you would win purely on the votes of men alone. Just look at what old hefner did on the strength of a few exposed bodies. Its overdue that it should become part of the political process as well. Human rights act favours you on it. You could make it legal body piece by body piece throughout the years and you would have great completely free campaign coverage due to all the male reporters. Imagine yourself surrounded by naked women saying this is what I can offer you if I get into power. Its a hands down winner. Thats often the exact problem with liberal parties, they only take things half way and then wonder why they don't win.

Not all liberals come to the Amimal Party, hee hee.

Anyway, it is not only for men, millions of women would favor this law because they are sick and tired of people making a big deal out of the missguided concepts about making their boobs sexural objects for sale to the most lowdown people like Larry Flint. Time they can be respected instead. The famous "ban the Bra" movement of the 1960s was thought up by the women's liberation movement, not by a capitalist like Flint who gets rich marketing the idea that sin and women go hand and hand.

Why boast of being a free country if you cover it up with window dressing?

Total nudity is the symbol of freedom, the fig leaf is the symbol of fear of being punished by the Dictator.

And "dittos", this is the best plan for a 3rd party to win elections.

Hmmm, how does the "Technocrats" sound?

Technosoul.

[Dieval]

Originally posted by Technosoul, Decency in reality has little to do with this topic, because we are not talking about anything having to do with reproductive organs. A womans boobs should not be anymore of a sexual object then her smile, her legs, her neck, or her belly button. Of course men are attracted to women and visa versa, even when they have on fancy clothing they are attractive. It is not a decency problem to feel such attraction, it is normal. If you think women who are topless are evil it is only a problem in your won mind, and the woman is not to blame for YOUR thoughts, you got to set your own mind right and censorship will not do that for you. We should not have laws just to protect you from your own thoughts, just get control of your brain (not you personally, but anyone where the shoe fits). If it was not taboo people would take it for granted and think little about it, new attitudes would form about it, and your kid would not think women are dirty because they got boobs. I am not talking about a free lunch, I am talking about freedom. (babies exemted). And I am just getting started .... more later. Technosoul.

Look, I never said that "topless women are evil" and I don't think that is the case. Infact, I'd love to see women walking around topless, but I'm not going to go crusading for that cause or try to change what our society has already deemed to be decent and indecent. You can't just proclaim, one day, that what is considered indecent is now decent. Standards change over time, and our current standards say that women showing their breasts, in public, are not decent. I believe that eventually our standards will change and it will be acceptable, but not over night like you seem to want.

If it was only myself that had to deal with the consequences, it wouldn't be a big deal, but I have an 8 year old son who doesn't need to go to the beach(or where ever) and view women walking around topless. He is not old or mature enough to see such things.

If the bulk of you have no decency and want your women walking around topless infront of your children then by all means enjoy it - in the privacy of your own home.

[bishop]

just curious - what would happen to your son if he happened to see some bare tits?

[Technosoul]

If you want to wear cloths do it in the pravacy of your house. Dress up all you want, but why force that hang up with clothing on everyone else?

No one agreed with such laws you think are in effect. It is not unlawful to breast feed a child in public places. A few years ago it was unlawful but overnight one judge changed all that, now it is okay.

You guys always bring up "the children" as a shield of defense, but they would not think anything bad about it unless trained to think that way by our perverted society. A kid under 8 years of age would probally not even be interested, and if a kid is old enough to be interested and they think something is taboo then they will just find a sneaky way to find out. So we train them that sex should be sneaky, and that being honest with your parents must be avoided because "they would not understand".

And spend the rest of their life groping around in the dark for some imaginary lost rib that you took away from them.

Opps, that is not a rib, what is that bump?

It is really so silly, I am a little surprised to find one objector.

What is good for the Goose is good for the Gander, and the little duckies, let bring down that double standard that breeds hypocaracy.

Technosoul.

[Ken Carman]

When it comes to nudity, I've always thought that, after a period of adjustment (no pun intended "period" wise) there would be less sex crime, less sexual obsession and we might focus more on people rather than bodies. All meaningless specualation, of course, unless one of Robert Heinlein's old novels comes true and some really strange aliens invade and the only way we can know we're not infected/infested is to be naked. Society will never do this.

The next comment is going to be controversial, but BARE with me. I believe, in the long run, there would be less rape. I know that rape is not supposed to be a sexual crime but rather one of power, but I remain convinced that not ALL rape is. I don't know of any studies that actual look into statistics, or even if that is possible. I'm sure researchers probably focus in on the power aspects and miss the other aspects. Also, the idea that such crimes have one motivation is shallow, bad science, at best. Of course those seeking to humilate and denigrate will always find another way to do it, but it might take one weapon away from them. Of course a small guilliotine would too...

[Dieval]

Originally posted by bishop,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (bishop,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>just curious - what would happen to your son if he happened to see some bare tits?[/b]

What's going to him? Probably nothing....is it going to help him? probably not.
Do I and his mom want him exposed to topless women? No.

Originally posted by Technosoul,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Technosoul,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If you want to wear cloths do it in the pravacy of your house. Dress up all you want, but why force that hang up with clothing on everyone else?[/b]

Wear cloths in the privacy of my own house? Are you serious?? What kind of statement is that? Instead of changing everyones standards to meet yours, why don't you just walk around your house in what ever you want, thus not forcing society to bend to your will.

Originally posted by Technosoul, No one agreed with such laws you think are in effect.

What?? What laws do I think are in effect?

Originally posted by Technosoul, It is not unlawful to breast feed a child in public places. A few years ago it was unlawful but overnight one judge changed all that, now it is okay.

You're correct, but COMMON DECENCY dictates that the womans breast is still covered(i.e. a blanket or towel or something). Everytime I've observed a women breast feeding, that's what has occurred, in public.

Originally posted by Technosoul, You guys always bring up "the children" as a shield of defense, but they would not think anything bad about it unless trained to think that way by our perverted society.

Actually, when we think of perverts, it's the guys trying to look at womens boobs... It's best not to call the society that we the people have developed as being perverted. That's your idea, not societies. If it was societies, it would be part of society.

Originally posted by Technosoul, A kid under 8 years of age would probally not even be interested, and if a kid is old enough to be interested and they think something is taboo then they will just find a sneaky way to find out. So we train them that sex should be sneaky, and that being honest with your parents must be avoided because "they would not understand".

That's your take on the situation and I don't agree. Would he be interested at 8? probably not, but that doesn't mean he needs to be exposed to it. We are supposed to train our children that sex should be special, no sneaky, but private and special. If my wife walked around topless, how does that make her special for me, when everyone else can see what she has to offer?
<!--QuoteBegin-Technosoul,@


It is really so silly, I am a little surprised to find one objector.
[/quote]I said if I was the only one affected, I wouldn't mind, but it's not something children should be exposed to.
<!--QuoteBegin-Technosoul,

What is good for the Goose is good for the Gander, and the little duckies, let bring down that double standard that breeds hypocaracy.

Technosoul.[/quote]
What's good for the goose, isn't always good for the gander....

I'm just curious...what do you people with kids think about this?
Is it ok to expose young kids to topless women?

[Technosoul]

Originally posted by Ken Carman, When it comes to nudity, I've always thought that, after a period of adjustment (no pun intended "period" wise) there would be less sex crime, less sexual obsession and we might focus more on people rather than bodies. All meaningless specualation, of course, unless one of Robert Heinlein's old novels comes true and some really strange aliens invade and the only way we can know we're not infected/infested is to be naked. Society will never do this. The next comment is going to be controversial, but BARE with me. I believe, in the long run, there would be less rape. I know that rape is not supposed to be a sexual crime but rather one of power, but I remain convinced that not ALL rape is. I don't know of any studies that actual look into statistics, or even if that is possible. I'm sure researchers probably focus in on the power aspects and miss the other aspects. Also, the idea that such crimes have one motivation is shallow, bad science, at best. Of course those seeking to humilate and denigrate will always find another way to do it, but it might take one weapon away from them. Of course a small guilliotine would too...

Greetings Ken

I think if someone did a study they would find that women at a nudest camp or at one of our nude beaches experience less unwanted sexual aggression then they would at a disco or nightclub. If you could honestly check things out the children at the nude beach are less likely to get molested then at some religious churches I hear about. Someone did do a study based on police reports and less women get raped in Nevada where prositution is somewhat legal then in states where it is outlawed (I put that as a speculation so I don't have to research for a web link). However like you said, not "real science" but only a collection of data that could be manipulated.

But even if it has no effect in changing the crime stats that still would not mean freedom is a bad idea. Freedom of speech is not a right because it would lower crime, etc. You have rights to bear weapons, rights to sell prono under freedom of speech, and it would be hard to say if those rights encouage crime of if they prevent crime. For example if I printed a new history book and had a painting or photo of a early mission in the pioneering days, I would have to remove the cross from the images for public useage in schools, as they have a ban on religious symbals, because it is someone's right to enforce that.
I mean really, a old drawing of a California Mission not permitted in a history book about early America? Silly.

Well, got to drop down and check out the next message. Technosoul.