Should public nudity and public sex be legal?

[greenforest32]

Discuss

[greenforest32]

I will add my view to start things off. I think they should both be legal.

You can't ban me from wearing certain clothes (note: I don't support the burqa ban in France) so why should you be able to ban me from wearing nothing? The justifications for these bans boil down to one thing: people don't want to see it.

Well guess what my friends? That's censorship. Nobody has a right not to be offended and even if you did, my right to free speech trumps that.

Certainly people will bring forth reasonable arguments for restricting these activities in certain areas such as prohibiting people from having sex on public buses/transit seats as it's not sanitary or prohibiting members of the national legislature from working in the nude (not saying I agree with these restrictions) but we should not have blanket bans.

Who is harmed by people walking down the street naked or by a couple openly having sex in the park? Nobody.

[greenforest32]

Well guess what my friends? That's censorship. Nobody has a right not to be offended and even if you did, my right to free speech trumps that.

The courts wouldn't agree with you on that. 

As if the courts are unanimous and the perfect arbiters of justice? There's plenty of things the courts should be striking down (laws banning prostitution, gay marriage, obscenity, etc) that they haven't done. Courts aren't perfect.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So that's a good enough justification? You don't want to see it so therefore you can ban it?

[greenforest32]

Wherever did you get the idea that censorship was inherently wrong?

Government censorship is pretty much only justified when it comes to things like child pornography or national security and even then you can go too far (thinking of military secrets that the public should know about like torture/secret prisons or stupid laws that define pictures of anybody under 18 as child pornography so somebody gets thrown in jail for years for having pictures of a 17 year-old).

[greenforest32]

Wherever did you get the idea that censorship was inherently wrong?

Government censorship is pretty much only justified when it comes to things like child pornography or national security and even then you can go too far (thinking of military secrets that the public should know about like torture/secret prisons or stupid laws that define pictures of anybody under 18 as child pornography so somebody gets thrown in jail for years for having pictures of a 17 year-old).

Yes, and letting children run around nude is somehow justified...

You understand the difference between nudity and sex right? Children can't consent to sex and that wouldn't change even if public nudity and public sex were legal. The justification for banning/censoring child pornography is that, if it's legal, people will have a financial incentive/market to create more.

[greenforest32]

Wherever did you get the idea that censorship was inherently wrong?

Government censorship is pretty much only justified when it comes to things like child pornography or national security and even then you can go too far (thinking of military secrets that the public should know about like torture/secret prisons or stupid laws that define pictures of anybody under 18 as child pornography so somebody gets thrown in jail for years for having pictures of a 17 year-old).

Yes, and letting children run around nude is somehow justified...

You understand the difference between nudity and sex right? Children can't consent to sex and that wouldn't change even if public nudity and public sex were legal. The justification for banning/censoring child pornography is that, if it's legal, people will have a financial incentive/market to create more.

Pornography doesn't consist of only sex.  I'd imagine a pedophile would have no problem walking out of his door to take a glimpse at Johnny across the street whose letting it hang out because public nudity is "Ok, and not the same as sex".

Well you know if public sex was legal, it wouldn't be a problem for people to masturbate in public.

[greenforest32]

Again, where does this right to nudity come from?  Why do you feel that this is something people should be permitted to do?

Free speech? Freedom?

Well you know if public sex was legal, it wouldn't be a problem for people to masturbate in public.

One time, about fifteen years ago, my bicycle was stolen in Central Square in Cambridge.  I was living in Somerville at the time and had left my bicycle at a friends door only for a minute while I went inside to get him.  So I called the Cambridge PD and reported the bicycle.  Anyway, a cop shows up and takes me around in her squad car to places where she thought it was likely to be.  Alleys where homeless thieves had been known to park stolen bicycles temporarily.  As we were making the rounds, I see her jerk her head over toward a park bench and say, "Sonofabitch!  I can't believe he's doing that."  And she drives quickly to the other side of the road, to the bench, where I could now make out this old, black dude frantically beating off.  He was going after it hard and angry and fast, with his face contorted in such a way as to make me think that his moment of arrival was nigh.  And she slams the car in park and leans out the window and barks at him.  "Hey man!  You can't do that here!  Get a room!"  Like that.  So he looks around and realizes that he better put mister happy away and pull his pants up.  And then she drives off, cursing under her breath, as we continue to look for my bicycle.

Never found it. 

I'm not seeing your point? What was so wrong about that dude jerking it in public?

By the way, did I mention that I like this greenforest guy?

The first post ever on this forum complimenting me! I am honored.

[greenforest32]

I'm not seeing your point?

um, that one time when a cop was giving me a ride I saw a dude masturbating in public.  I guess that was the point of the story.  Kinda hard to miss, if you ask me.

Maybe you're trying too hard.  This isn't meant to be an allegory. 

Well you quoted a specific sentence of mine and then gave an anecdote. I thought you were trying to justify banning masturbating in public with that anecdote.

[greenforest32]

Again, where does this right to nudity come from?  Why do you feel that this is something people should be permitted to do?

Free speech? Freedom?

That's rhetoric, not an answer.

Really I already answered this in my first post:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Are you saying it doesn't? So why can't you ban me from wearing certain clothes or protesting in public even if you don't want to see it?

Again, where does this right to nudity come from?  Why do you feel that this is something people should be permitted to do?

Free speech? Freedom?

And since when has Free Speech applied to obscenity (hint: never)?  You're up against a good 200 years of legal precedent here re: the Court upholding obscenity laws.

Funny you should mention that. In 1987 the Oregon Supreme Court struck down the state law (statute) criminalizing obscenity on the grounds that it violated the free speech provision of the Oregon constitution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_v._Henry

This is the political debate subforum and I'm trying to have a debate on why public nudity/sex should or should not be legal and so far the only argument from the pro-banning it side is that people's "right" to not want to see something trumps everyone elses' right to free speech. I don't agree with that.

[greenforest32]

States Right

Please tell me I'm not the only one who feels like this is a cop-out answer (to most political questions, really).

When it comes to civil rights and civil liberties, "states rights" is indeed a cop-out non-answer. It's basically an argument for states opting out of the bill of rights. Free speech? States rights! Trial by jury? States rights! Execute the innocent? States rights!