
it's a strange image, I admit.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:07, Reply)

he'll have upset someone who wasn't wanting to see his bollocks
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:10, Reply)

it's just bollocks. Anyone who gets upset at the mere sight of a testicle needs to grow up. Unless he's doing some harm to someone he can dress as he likes, or not.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:13, Reply)

will I start finding the sight of bare ankles indecent as well?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:20, Reply)

would you really want to get the tube with a load of naked men with semis?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:27, Reply)

so it's all about social norms, is it. should the law uphold all social norms?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:30, Reply)

if not the current (well probably slightly out of date what with the slow pace of legislative change) social norms codified into a set of rules for people to follow?
hence men fucking one another in the bumhole being previously illegal but now legal. or a gentleman beating/raping ones wife being once legal but now illegal.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:36, Reply)

and those other things?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:37, Reply)

Or, let me put this another way, is this what you say, that if society at large is homophobic, that homophobia should be enshrined in law? And sexism, and misogyny and racism, all those other things that we're glad aren't tolerated anymore.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:43, Reply)

i've been socialised into THE CURRENT SOCIAL NORM so i would think that wouldn't i?
edit:ooft on my spelling.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:46, Reply)

Jeepers mister.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:14, Reply)

That is why we have laws with terms like "public indecency". The idea of what is indecent is constantly changing and this way a good judge can interpret the law in tune with current values.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:41, Reply)

as social norms do. possibly partly cos of activism of teh naked ramblers type of activism.
i'm not arguing that wearing clothes is right or wrong, just that it's a social norm and if you deviate from a social norm you will often be breaking the law and should expect the consequences. the naked rambler does expect it. i think he has a better handle on the situation than moon girl.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:42, Reply)

but I do not believe that the purpose of the law is to uphold conformity to social norms, it is to protect vulnerable people from harm.
I don't believe that wandering around naked is wrong or that it does anybody any harm and I fully support anyone's right to do it if they wish. If society has a problem with that, society has to justify it.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:47, Reply)

I think I agree with this man
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Dworkin
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:47, Reply)

( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:03, Reply)

I got the Wikipedia article on Law but I clicked through some links.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:08, Reply)

what a surprise.
look i'm not a super mainstream person and i think that a naked dude isn;t doing me any harm but i'm not everyone and it seems like the general consensus (in society rather than on b3ta) is that people ought to keep their clothes on. are you able to see that?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:14, Reply)

the definition is:
Law is a system of rules and guidelines which are enforced through social institutions to govern behavior.[3] Laws are made by governments, specifically by their legislatures. The formation of laws themselves may be influenced by a constitution (written or unwritten) and the rights encoded therein. The law shapes politics, economics and society in countless ways and serves as a social mediator of relations between people.
Nowhere is law defined as "social norms", do point me to the paragraph you are referring to. I hope you aren't misunderstanding the term "normative". If you look that up you will get back to Dworkin again.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:24, Reply)

with the law then they should just break it anyway, rather than campaign to change it?
There are plenty of naturist places to go if you want to walk around in the nip. This guy is just an attention seeking moron.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:59, Reply)

Well it depends on the law, I think. There are some things that the law, to my mind, simply has no right to forbid. I've spoken to plenty of people who take this line on recreational drugs, in fact I've had these conversations on B3ta.
Maybe there should be a campaign to change it, because it's a silly law, but it's also a fairly trivial issue that not many people care about, I guess.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:16, Reply)

On the tube he should probably wear clothes. On Bodmin Moor, I'd probably leave him to it.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:50, Reply)

if it was me i'd leave him to it on the tube too but i'm not everyone and i have to respect other people's views. anything for the quiet life.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:59, Reply)

Edit: "This" refers to HappyToast
Freedoms always have to be tempered with not infringing on the freedoms of others.
I could argue that I was born with the free-will and capacity to make my living by killing others and taking their food. It is only natural, but I don't think society would allow me my basic freedom. Poor me.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:15, Reply)

( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:23, Reply)

You're an idiot with stupid opinions.
EDIT: Thankyou to all those who have clicked this comment. I no longer feel alone.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:39, Reply)

...have you noticed that certain (well-loved) regular /linkers have stopped posting? About the same time this FUCKING IDIOT started clogging up the board?
Sadly, the two facts are related.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:53, Reply)

I shall willingly retire.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:06, Reply)

I would post whatever my opinion of you is. I've just been working hard, what with being on the game and working 9-5 and all...
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:23, Reply)

Therefore I shall be putting you on ignore for the sake of my mental health.
Please try not to start any interesting threads that people I like to talk with may be involved in.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:31, Reply)

but what have I done? I haven't swore, I haven't called people names, I'm not aware of even saying anything especially controversial. Seriously, I don't get it.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:36, Reply)

Plus you get the board's sympathy, what with the whole unfortunate size of your penis. As previously discovered.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:16, Reply)

but really?? Someone else has different opinions to you and abuse is the path you choose?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:24, Reply)

sorry i couldn't resist. i shouldn't post pissed.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:38, Reply)

she's clogging up the board with (to quote from others) nonsensical, contradictory, deliberately argumentative, sub-sixth form bollocks. She's not nearly as intelligent as she imagines herself to be, and people who actually have interesting & coherent opinions are avoiding /links 'cos they're sick of her shit.
...it's not "different opinions"- Coxxy & I disagree on virtually everything, but it's always a pleasure to read his posts, however MASSIVELY I may disagree.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 20:44, Reply)

To air one´s opinions, stupid or otherwise.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:05, Reply)

Needlessly provoking arguments based on logic worthy of a 6th form sociology student, is another.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:58, Reply)

that so many people here think that walking around outdoors with no clothes on shouldn't be tolerated, and if you can point me at whichever post explains why I'll be very grateful. All I've taken from this whole argument is that social nonconformity simply won't do.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:03, Reply)

It´s a device to prevent you from seeing other people´s point of view.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:26, Reply)

A law drawn up by an elected body that represents a majority of the population.
Why is it so hard to understand that an apparent majority of people have a different opinion than yours?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:24, Reply)

I just never expected this degree of authoritarianism from here, of all places.
I don't know how big a majority of people think that nudity is so bad it has to be illegal, but why is it so hard for you to understand that I think it shouldn't be until somebody tells me the reason why.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:30, Reply)

Are you really so deluded that you feel no law should be valid until *you* agree with it?
Maybe mrandrist has point.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:33, Reply)

no. Maybe I'm deluded enough to think that dissent was socially acceptable in this country. I don't have to agree with the law just because the majority do, do I?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:39, Reply)

There's a whole bunch of laws I disagree with but follow because they are the law, but I'd be deeply worried if disagreeing with them became against the law, or seeking to persuade others to disagree.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:42, Reply)

It's illegal in certain places. Like smoking.
Where would you personally draw the line? Is public sex acceptable? What about having an accidental boner?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:42, Reply)

I'm glad you're here.
It's illegal in public places, I should have specified. Is public sex acceptable? Well I'll have to go and think about that, because it's not obvious why it isn't.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:47, Reply)

We can't stand YOU. I am totally okay with public nudity, lived with a naturist, happy to wander around in the nip: PEOPLE CAN'T STAND YOU. PLEASE FUCK OFF. AND THEN, FUCK OFF SOME MORE.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 20:52, Reply)

sorry. couldn't resist being a prick. btw i'm leaving the nursing register for a different register. ;)
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 19:04, Reply)

The comparison is with the attitude that someone's right to do as they please has to fit in with the demands of society. This applies to both.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:25, Reply)

( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:31, Reply)

hygiene issues in restaurants would be the main issue I imagine, would you sit in the same chair as a massively fat naked woman had just vacated?
Especially if she had just been on a really long walk across the countryside in hot weather
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:33, Reply)

and is it worth making it illegal? Plenty of places have dress codes without having to get the police involved. For a restaurant to have a "no naked" policy is one thing, for someone to actually get arrested for being naked outdoors, minding their own business, isn't that a bit much?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:36, Reply)

he's never "minding his own business"
if he were, other people wouldn't be getting him arrested.
Anyway, I'm cooking dinner now, byee!
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:40, Reply)

( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:48, Reply)

( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:12, Reply)

but agreement based on dispassionate discussion, not on ancient prejudices. The onus should be on lawmakers to give some reason why the thing being legislated against should not happen.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:23, Reply)

there would be a lot of vomit to clear up
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:36, Reply)

soldiers are allowed to kill people. as are executioners in nation states that have the death penalty. and swiss doctors.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 17:37, Reply)

soldiers can kill people, as can armed police.
perhaps you mean murder?
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:11, Reply)

I feel you are splitting hairs here. I can also kill in self-defence if I get the angle just right. But you know, generally, I can't just go out and kill someone cos I feel like it.
( , Fri 20 Jul 2012, 18:25, Reply)