Posted on 05/05/2009 7:15:37 AM PDT by ellenbrewster
The ever-vigilant ACLU, notorious for defending indefensible fringe behaviors, has a new cause célèbre--public nudity.
Last time I checked, my common sense said public nudity is not normal or practical.
This latest ACLU lunacy stems from last year’s Halloween high jinks on the part of “Naked Pumpkin Runners,” 12 Boulder, Colo. pranksters running around nude with nothing but pumpkins on their heads. The pumpkin clad streakers were ticketed for indecent exposure. Due to the Colorado’s strict sex offender laws, these bare-bottom trotters could have landed on the state sex offender registry and been lumped together with bona-fide scumbags guilty of criminally obscene activity.
(Excerpt) Read more at ellenmakkai.com ...
I bet if these ‘pumpkin runners’ were all over 80 years old, it would be whole different story.
How so? Would the cops shoot them to put them out of their misery?
The draconian “sex-offender” laws have made a lot more reasonable people than the ACLU want to say “Who gives a hoot?” about naked idiots wearing pumpkins on their heads.
Ummmm... Me naked in public would be considered cruel and inhuman! ;-P
Naw. The cops couldn’t look long enough to draw a bead.
Gravity is not your friend.
no thanks. 99% of people who participate in public nudity are the ones you don’t want to see nude anyway.
No pictures of Helen Thomas please. Bad naked should only be used in times of last resort...
It should be a civil infraction at most. $20.00 fine and no record whatsoever.
I’ve got no problem with the ACLU’s position here - it is idiotic that a person should suffer life-long consequences due to a stupid prank like this.
The ACLU should spend more time fighting stupid laws like this, and less time trying to drive religion (specifically, Christianity) from the public square. Then I might be able to take them seriously as a “civil liberties” organization.
Good point, but what the ACLU is asking is too expansive for this wee silliness. To make public nudity a civil right is too broad an allowance. Just think, your Grammy sitting on her porch starkers on a hot day? Oh my.
You mean they would be laughing too hard, or covering their eyes due to the nastiness of some bods.
What is being requested is far too expansive a civil right. Just think of who would amble around starkers. I remember when a favorite Martha’s Vineyard family beach became a nude beach. Boy, did that ruin it for those of us with kids. Folks weren’t just sunbathing and swimming, which was embarrassing enough for our kiddies, they we gettin’ it on! Nope, no public nudity civil liberties, thanks.
I don’t have a problem with these people being put on a “Sexual Offender” list. They should however redefine it and make a special “did something stupid and lewd in public” for humilation purposes only.
I wish it were that easy. My husband had a client (a beloved jr, high school teacher) who made the mistake of shedding his clothes to toss them in a washing machine with other laundry he was doing. Unfortunately, there was a window in the laundry room of the apartment complex. A bored busybody tattled on him, he was arrested, charged and ultimately convicted of indecent exposure. He lost his job and is permanently on the Colorado sex-offender’s list. His life is close to ruined; he is practically unemployable. So this whole issue of “public nudity” is a puzzle. Who didn’t do something stupid as a kid? Solutions???
Several years ago, there was a fishing tournament on a lake in Texas. One of the fishermen had to take a leak, so he just wizzed into the water.
Some busybody saw him, got the TX boat number and called the fish & game dept. He also ended up on the sex offender’s list in Texas.
The cops use to hide in the alley that ran behind the bars and up to fraternity row and catch them wizzing in the bushes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.