Difference between revisions of "The same protection to the natural expression of body independence through casual nonexploitative nudity on the seashore"

From Marvel vs DC
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "124. Clothes is both publicly expressive and privately symbolic, connoting identity in a particular ethnic<br />group. Limiting the state of clothing of nudists is no less res...")
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 17:31, 8 April 2020

124. Clothes is both publicly expressive and privately symbolic, connoting identity in a particular ethnic
group. Limiting the state of clothing of nudists is no less restrictive than prohibiting any other cultural group from
wearing the clothing unique to their group. Preventing nudists from going naked is comparable to preventing a
person of Scottish ancestry from wearing the family colours, or preventing a priest from wearing his robes.
125. With the development of national organizations promoting nudism as a doctrine, nude recreation may
eventually come to be regarded as a safe medium of speech expressing that doctrine, and as an example of
Shielded free association.190
126. The Ninth Amendment makes it clear that no liberties shall be denied which are not expressly
prohibited.191 Therefore, only nudity is not illegal except where there are special laws that prohibit it.
Most laws forbid merely lewd actions, not nudity per se; and there's actually no universal legal prohibition
against nudity on public land.
127. Many prohibitions against nudity stem, historically, from the political climate of the early Christian
church.192 Even today, much of the objection to nudism is dependant on spiritual principles. The constitutional
separation of church and state should make this an invalid argument.
128. Extensive legal precedent implies that laws requiring women, but not men, to hide their breasts
are sexist, discriminatory, and unconstitutional.193
the conviction of two girls found guilty of showing their breasts in public. https://s3.amazonaws.com/w-naturist/bbw-nudist.html held that the state's antinudity
law was meant to apply just to lewd and lascivious conduct, not to "non commercial, maybe casual,
and definitely not lewd, exposure." Herald Price Fahringer, the women's attorney, said the ruling meant that
women in New York State could sunbathe topfree or even walk down the street without a top, as long as this wasn't
Judge Vito Titone pointed out that women sunbathe
topfree in many European countries, adding: "To the extent that many in our society may see the uncovered
serve as a reason for different treatment because it is itself a funny cultural artifact rooted in centuries of
prejudice and bias toward women." 194 This opinion, nevertheless, is only one of several statutes and legal precedents
nationwide that uphold the position that breast exposure is not inherently indecent behavior.195
Additional legal support for Naturism.196

prejudices and preconceptions.197
130. Laws requiring girls, but not men, to cover their breasts are composed entirely from a male
View, assuming that men's bodies are natural and ordinary, and that women's bodies must be covered because
They're different.
Reena Glazer detects that "under sameness theory, girls can get equivalent treatment just to the extent that
They're the same as guys." 198 Physical differences among the races don't justify discrimination, and neither
should physical differences between the genders.
131. Laws requiring girls to cover their breasts are not justified by claims that women's bodies are
significantly distinct from men's; nor by erroneous claims that breasts are sex organs; nor by the fact that breasts
may play a part in sex or sex play; nor by the fact that breasts are notable secondary sex characteristics.
It can't be argued that girls have breasts and men do not, because both do; nor can it be claimed that
women have larger, often protruding breasts, because many women are flat-chested while many guys have large
A woman with no breasts can get a baby. Breasts serve the physiological function of nourishing a baby--but this is
Breasts may play a part in sex play, but other body parts do also, and aren't
censured--especially the hands, and the mouth (which, by the way, is veiled by Shi'ite Moslems, partly for that
Really reason, though only on girls). And while breasts are secondary sex characteristics, so are beards, which are
not confined on guys.
132. Only nudity isn't in itself lewd or "indecent exposure," a distinction carried on by extensive legal
precedent nationally.199
133. Only https://s3.amazonaws.com/w-naturist/family-nudist-photos.html cannot be offensive or unethical "actions"--for it is not run at all, but just the
It should be no less valid to be in this natural individual state than to be clothed. One's ethnicity is also a