Florida: Appeals Court Upholds Woman's Right To Protest While Topless

Local 6 (Florida) ^ | October 12, 2006

[Ciexyz]

Judicial activism run amock.

[Stoat]

Toplessness is not free speech. It is public indecency.

Yes, and it's also visual pollution in this particular context.

[Inge_CAV]

NOT GUILTY!

[elcid1970]

"I thank Thee, Lord, for granting me, Thy humble servant, this heavenly vision of some of the beautiful things which Thou hast made!"

(We love Belly Girl!)

Ah, so! Numbah One! Belly nice!

[Chena]

Sheesh! What a bunch of ninnys! BRAHAHAHAHA! ;)

[Terpin]

This sounds like a worthy cause the Miami Dolphin cheerleaders should get behind!

[Triggerhippie]

The good looking women will have no need or inclination to do this, as they understand the lure of suggestive concealment as opposed to glaring, unrestrained exposure..

And they also understand that they can make money doing this at the Doll House as opposed to giving it away...

[TWfromTEXAS]

What is it with you sick people?

[Stoat]

This sounds like a worthy cause the Miami Dolphin cheerleaders should get behind!

[Ole Okie]

"why cant the Hot 22 year olds get into the act? Ha Ha"

They don't need this to attract males.

I guess.

[DejaJude]

You and your Staff could draw up specifications for any exposed mammary elements involved, and provide consulting as well as engineering services, onsite, to rectify any documented violations.

LOL. I'm a woman (over 50) who would never bare it to the public. I wouldn't have done it at 20 either, which would have been much kinder to the male of the species. I'm just waiting for a court decision that demands cosmetic surgery so that all women have the right to upheld breasts.

[Stoat]

 

You and your Staff could draw up specifications for any exposed mammary elements involved, and provide consulting as well as engineering services, onsite, to rectify any documented violations.

LOL. I'm a woman (over 50) who would never bare it to the public. I wouldn't have done it at 20 either, which would have been much kinder to the male of the species. I'm just waiting for a court decision that demands cosmetic surgery so that all women have the right to upheld breasts.
 

I have no doubt that it is only a matter of time before the ACLU discovers this avenue of litigation, and demands that all women have a 'right' to achieve their own vision of beauty, at taxpayer expense, of course.

[SmoothTalker]

Up until the picture I was thinking that this was a great ruling. Now I want to vomit.

[SmoothTalker]

"It is public indecency."

When the women look like that it is.

[Stoat]

Up until the picture I was thinking that this was a great ruling. Now I want to vomit.

Rest assured that your sentiments are shared by thoughtful gents far and wide.....true Ladies as well, I would reckon.

[Keith in Iowa]

Why is it that those most likely to take 'advantage' of this ruling are those least likely to look good doin' it?

[DejaJude]

I have no doubt that it is only a matter of time before the ACLU discovers this avenue of litigation, and demands that all women have a 'right' to achieve their own vision of beauty, at taxpayer expense, of course.

Well, of course, it has to be at taxpayer expense. What's a poor woman to do if the ravages of time and a lack of funds keep her from her right to be beautiful? /sarc

[Stoat]

Why is it that those most likely to take 'advantage' of this ruling are those least likely to look good doin' it?

Because they have the most to gain and the least to lose.  Good-looking women don't NEED to flaunt in such a low-class way, as they understand the value and allure of seductive restraint and exciting understatement.  Drunks, skanks and Leftists can't wrap their minds around such advanced concepts.

[ladyinred]

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A woman, who was arrested when she exposed her breasts to protest laws that bar women from publicly going bare breasted, can demonstrate topless as part of a legitimate political protest, an appeals court has ruled.

Am I the only one who notices the ironic stupidity of this statement?

Not to mention the ruling?

[Stoat]

I have no doubt that it is only a matter of time before the ACLU discovers this avenue of litigation, and demands that all women have a 'right' to achieve their own vision of beauty, at taxpayer expense, of course.

Well, of course, it has to be at taxpayer expense. What's a poor woman to do if the ravages of time and a lack of funds keep her from her right to be beautiful? /sarc

It's completely in keeping with their previous litigious efforts, as it pertains to a historically discriminated group achieving their utmost potential, whether it is in the workplace, the public square or in their own self-esteem.

I have no doubt that it is only a matter of time before the ACLU discovers this avenue of litigation, and demands that all women have a 'right' to achieve their own vision of beauty, at taxpayer expense, of course.

Well, of course, it has to be at taxpayer expense. What's a poor woman to do if the ravages of time and a lack of funds keep her from her right to be beautiful? /sarc