Posted on 08/26/2007 4:21:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
When liberals are given the choice between acting decently or choosing the riches of perversion - liberals prefer perversion. And if protecting the honor, privacy, and even nakedness of vulnerable women and children is juxtaposed to say the slightest possibility that someone's right to practice perversion might be curbed - liberals will come running to the aid of the pervert. In fact liberals will go so far to protect perversion that they will actually enlist the use of potential victims to make the case, consequences to the unsuspecting females be damned!
They will say it with a lawsuit. They will say it in print. They will even brag about it in mass media.
Liberals at their core have no sense of true north. They can't determine right from wrong, good from evil, and in this case even help from hurt. Worse yet - they don't care. The hardness of their hearts towards the victim is not only apparent in their actions, but the mockery of their words adds insult to injury.
Hence why Geraldo Rivera would defend the concealing of an illegal alien's identity from the feds - even though he had been indicted on 31 counts of child rape, before executing three college kids in Newark this summer.
It also explains the actions this week of the New York Civil Liberties Union.
If you have ever dreamed of taking that fabulous shopping trip to New York City, you'd be advised to stay away. Because right now, this very minute, today...there is no law protecting the women you cherish in the dressing rooms of New York City boutiques, shops, department stores or even their hotel showers or bathrooms.
See if the owner of the hotel, the proprietor of the lingerie boutique, or the manager of any of the major shopping hot spots in Manhattan decided he wanted to drill a hole that allowed prurient viewing of your wife, fiancé, mother, sister, daughter or niece - in a space they would otherwise have reasonable expectations of privacy in - then he could do it, just for kicks, and there is no legal recourse you can take in response.
As long as there is no camera involved they can spy on your lovely's lovelies and you can't say "boo" about it.
This is why one lone city councilman is desperately attempting to change the law.
Peter Vallone Jr. had been receiving complaints in his Queens district office for a number of weeks about a pervert who had been ordering a bagel and coffee every morning and then parking himself directly under the train platform vent for the N-line subway. This particular perve had a thing for looking up women's skirts and he found it amusing to calmly eat his breakfast while stretching his neck to peep. Vallone's own staffers even complained as the place the man like to do his viewing from was literally steps from the councilman's front door.
Vallone began to research the matter and discovered that the man was breaking no known law in New York. Incredulous at this dismaying fact the councilman drafted a resolution that would punish such behavior. As the New York Times put it:
The bill would make it illegal to look at a person’s “sexual or other intimate parts, in other than a casual or cursory manner, for the purpose of entertainment, sexual arousal or gratification, or for the purpose of degrading or abusing the person being viewed."
Pretty straight forward right?
Not according to liberals.
The New York Civil Liberties Union (directly associated with the ACLU) issued a statement on Thursday calling the proposed legislation, "creepy lawmaking."
Liberal radio talk show host Ron Kuby mocked Vallone for drafting the legislation. Kuby is also a slip-and-fall/criminal defense attorney. With great bravado Kuby bullied the councilman in the few minutes they had on-air together, and then went on to brag about all the money he would win from clients for the misapplication he potentially sees from such a law being passed.
Donna Liebermann the NYCLU's executive director (and reportedly a female) added her own sentiments saying, "The problem with this legislation is that it’s trying to get at this amorphous, vague behavior of looking, which is very imprecise. The language of the bill reflects how vague the activity that they’re trying to get at is, and the problem is that it’s an invitation to abuse, to selective enforcement based on the whims or prejudice of the individual police officer." Adding, "What kind of a look is degrading, and therefore unlawful, who's to say?"
Well Donna, any woman who's ever been the slightest bit attractive could tell you.
They get degrading looks, mental undressings, and even unwanted physical contact from creeps in society daily.
It's only "imprecise" if no one desires justice or decency for the privacy of women and children. And it is impossible for it to be an invitation to abuse if men have their heads faced forward, and would perhaps bother to look women in the eyes. (Maybe Donna shops in New Jersey.)
So while liberals pledge to get rich while killing this bill, and labeling it "creepy lawmaking," they have given us a supreme glimpse - a window to their soul if you will...
Liberals will profit mightily by giving aid to perverts, pandering to peeping toms, and giving sanctuary to 31 count indictees of child rape/executioners.
They will do this as opposed to protecting the privacy of their own girlfriend, fiancé, wife, mother, or daughters.
And when necessary they will even brainwash women to make the case for them.
So which is more "creepy" - banning the perverts or defending them?
Have we really arrived at the day in which we have to ask such questions?
Or, pervert can also refer to an "artist."
-PJ
Before writing a new law, did anyone try calling the cops to see what they could do about the perv? I can't imagine they'd just leave him there to eat his breakfast (and fantasize about lunch) in peace!
They will even come out from the gutters and post on Free Republic.
It is unfathomable to me that this guy considers himself a conservative. He now wants to legislate where people "look" while they're walking down the street.
There definitely needs to be a law against shop owners drilling holes or inserting cameras in dressing rooms. I would be very alarmed if I knew someone was looking at me while I got changed. I think the police ought to do something about this pervert because one day just looking might not be enough.
PING!
Gonna have to agree with you guys here. Thoughtcrimes bills are never the answer.
The answer is something closer to paying large men to do physical violence to these pervs, then looking the other way.
Coming out from the gutter are you?
Were you peeping again?
Violating the privacy of someone should be an egregious and overt act, not a passive one of opportunity.
Standing under an open staircase or platform ostensibly to peek is simply too far below a reasonable threshold of determination of a crime.
Instead, such laws threaten to infer and project motives that will violate our personal liberty, and can be used by malicious or reckless prosecutors or plaintiffs.
As an example, drilling a hole in a dressing room and installing a camera is likely an offense. There is a reasonable expectation of privacy in a dressing room.
Climbing a ladder to look in a window is far more difficult to assess. Any ostensible reason to be on the ladder would be reasonable doubt of a crime. On private property, such an act would be covered already as a trespass. On public property, or property owned by the peep, it would be far more difficult to proscute. My suggestion - close the blinds.
Liberals' fight is against God, Christianity, the rule of law, justice, freedom, democracy, common decency, and all that is good in society.
If it means they have to take sides with a few perverts, so be it.
I sympathize with the intent behind Vallone’s actions to craft a law, but this law was very poorly worded. If passed, it would be very dangerous. No proof would be needed, just the word of the person wronged.
Think ex-wife or girlfriend or co-worker. Think nightmare.
Reading the article always a Good Thing.
IOW, RTFABYP!
For one thing, it’s a he said, she said type of thing. And it punishes thought crimes. Men are gonna look.
On the other hand, a hole in a dressing room is a whole ‘nother kettle of fish. And should be punished pretty stiffly.
No one has an expectation of privacy on the streets. Everyone should have one is a closed room.
IRHA. NIRMI — TS! IWPWJRTAAAAWTWPO. ITD, TTTHW — AYDWTBAOFATS, DY?
the democrats are the party of minorities, gays, lesbians, and perverts.
there are all sorts of perversion. KNOWINGLY lying is ONE of those perversions.
free dixie,sw
LIOD.A.
free dixie,sw
that's why they are called: DIMocRATS!
free dixie,sw
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.