Posted on 08/24/2010 1:41:28 PM PDT by citizenredstater9271
You know…. as I read all the insults and hatred that is directed at both myself and fellow Free Keene contributors, I can’t help but think the vast majority of you making these rude remarks haven’t the slightest clue as to what exactly this blog is about. I think this because I’m fairly sure that if people really knew the logic behind things here that we would be supported, joined, and encouraged.
I think this because at one time I vehemently disagreed with Ian Freeman’s (the owner of this website) view of how a society can function without institutionalized violence. Not only do I now agree with him, I volunteer to help him by writing for his blog.
I am a native New Hampshire-ite. I am also a former NH law enforcement officer with eleven years of service. Why am I here?
Why did I quit a decent paying job and walk away from an excellent retirement plan that people in the private sector could only dream of?
Why do I voluntarily subject myself to the vitriolic comments which this and my previous blogs attract?
(Excerpt) Read more at freekeene.com ...
No man committed any aggression on her "equal rights." The false sexual egalitarianism of the left that she is championing was not shared by Jefferson.
By the way, the actual sentence reads, "No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another; and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him; every man is under the natural duty of contributing to the necessities of the society; and this is all the laws should enforce on him; and, no man having a natural right to be the judge between himself and another, it is his natural duty to submit to the umpirage of an impartial third."
Yes, but has she committed an aggression on another person's "equal rights" by not wearing a shirt? That's the question here, not your reversal of the question.
As you previously noted, the members of that community equally enjoyed the legal right to be protected from acts of lewdness performed by someone "under circumstances which he or she should know will likely cause affront or alarm."
That was her intent for marching up and down Main Street deliberately exposing herself.
No problem Eyes, got to get and keep people talking.
Not just lewdness, remember, but “gross lewdness,” according to the law.
Does someone walking down the street minding their own business with no shirt on really rise to the level of public fornication? Is it “grossly” lewd, or merely lewd?
Repeatedly exposing herself in front of the town's middle school and on its Main Street seems to fit the term "gross lewdness" quite well. Intentional exposure, private parts, public place, likely to be observed by others...
Yup—let’s put these losers behind the wheel to “express themselves” and see how well that goes over.
In the words of one of my Chiefs, “Everyone has a right to be stupid now and then, but some people insist on abusing the privilege.”
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.