Tradition

[Darat]

"Many places?" Oh, you mean nude beaches. Not downtown.

No ogling? How do you explain the plethora of web sites dedicated to voyeuristic photos taken in these places?

I bet Genghis Pwn has 50 GB of young girls on his hard drive of such things.

So we should moderate our behaviour because of mentally ill people?

From a '' lst principle" argument can you support why nudity is ''wrong''?

 

[Luke T.]

So we should moderate our behaviour because of mentally ill people?

From a '' lst principle" argument can you support why nudity is ''wrong''?

Wrong? Well, if you ever figure out how to legislate hormones into behaving, I will submit your application for a Nobel prize.

Animals are used to being naked around each other. No big whup to them. So I suppose we could learn to, too. Sure. But if a stud decides he wants to mount a mare while the rest of the herd is eating lunch around them, he does so. I don't know how well that would go over at Burger King, though.

And someone who ogles a naked woman is mentally ill? Woooooooooo! Guess I better check myself into the hospital!

 

[Zero]

It is hard to get into something like nudity...it seems to work just fine for the nudists, but they have selected to be that way. It is impossible to say which came first for them, the nudity or the relaxed atmosphere around it. Therefore, you can't really use nude beaches, nudist colonies, etc., as examples to show that unrestricted public nudity would work.

 

[charley_bigtime]

"Many places?" Oh, you mean nude beaches. Not downtown.


Wrong? Well, if you ever figure out how to legislate hormones into behaving, I will submit your application for a Nobel prize.

Plenty of people around the world live their lives naked or in some form of nakedness (mostly away from beaches) without their hormones going bananas.

Or are you specifically referring to how you yourself would react??

 

[Darat]

Wrong? Well, if you ever figure out how to legislate hormones into behaving, I will submit your application for a Nobel prize.

I agree, but that’s got nothing to do with the tradition of making nudity illegal

Animals are used to being naked around each other. No big whup to them. So I suppose we could learn to, too. Sure. But if a stud decides he wants to mount a mare while the rest of the herd is eating lunch around them, he does so. I don't know how well that would go over at Burger King, though.

You're doing it again Luke, because you've grown up with the tradition that nudity=sex! Are you saying people don't find each other attractive with clothes on? Yet we don't see indiscriminate rutting do we?

If you think about it you are in fact using the same argument that Muslims who believe that women should always be dressed in a burkha (sp?) when in public use. e.g. the sight of a women will cause men to act on their "animalistic" nature.

And that just isn't a rational argument against nudity as the evidence doesn’t support it.

And someone who ogles a naked woman is mentally ill? Woooooooooo! Guess I better check myself into the hospital!

Cross wires here - I was referring to your comment about a paedophile having pictures taken in innocence (i.e. kids on a beach) and using that as a reason why we should continue with the tradition of nudity.

It is purely traditional in our societies to think nudity=sexuality.

I've wracked my mind but the only rational reason I can think of to wear clothes is for protection.

 

[Snapper]

Is tradition alone generally enough to justify a law?

Are the laws mentioned in this thread truly based solely on tradition?

Is tradition alone enough to justify a law that results in discrimination and a substantial infringement of the rights of a group of people?

Do the laws mentioned in this thread result in discrimination and substantial infringement of rights?

Is a law being based solely on tradition sufficient reason to repeal it?

Is a law being based solely on tradition and resulting in discrimination and substantial infringement of rights sufficient reason to repeal it?