lottiecass   17 #25 Posted December 23, 2015 The problem is, the sight of a group of naked men walking about would frighten women, whereas the other way round!  Poppet,I know women who would scare you if they were naked,no kidding same applies to some men. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #26 Posted December 24, 2015 The law of the land says it's wrong for him to ramble naked . I don't want to see anyone naked if I am going for a walk . It would be anarchy if we all decided to just obey the laws we agreed with.  I think the point that everyone is trying to make is that the law is outdated and should be changed.  ---------- Post added 24-12-2015 at 09:31 ----------  Tell you what, I'll have a wander around the local primary school in the altogether and if challenged, I'll use that as an excuse. I'll let you know how I get on.  If we weren't so uptight about it then the kids would be totally uninterested. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
onewheeldave   22 #27 Posted December 24, 2015 For reasons of equality women may want to do the same - would they all be able to control themselves I wonder:D  Why must we associate the naked body with sex?  We don't. We associate the naked body as presented by the media in porn, underwear adverts etc, with sex.  Having spent some time in communities where nudity is the practice, I can assure you all that being surrounded by actual naked bodies of real everyday people, is totally unlike the media presentation, and, sex will not be foremost on your minds.  Actual nudity in that context, is far removed from the titillation approach of our culture and the media.  The immoral harrassment of this gentleman, who has done nothing wrong, is a disgrace, but, no surprise in this culture, which is growing sicker with each passing minute. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Gamston   10 #28 Posted December 24, 2015 I think the point that everyone is trying to make is that the law is outdated and should be changed. ---------- Post added 24-12-2015 at 09:31 ----------    Why is a law based on common decency and respect outdated ?  Should the naked rambler also be allowed to attend a midnight mass at his local church if he wishes to ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
999tigger   10 #29 Posted December 24, 2015 Why is a law based on common decency and respect outdated ? Should the naked rambler also be allowed to attend a midnight mass at his local church if he wishes to ?  Thats the whole point of the people who are supportive of his situation. They cant see the harm and feel that public morality has changed from the law he is currently being punished by.  The logic of it suggests they have no problem with him attending midnight mass (notwithstanding it is private property) as they see no problem in his nudity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #30 Posted December 24, 2015 Why is a law based on common decency and respect outdated ? Should the naked rambler also be allowed to attend a midnight mass at his local church if he wishes to ?  "Common" as judged by the majority of posters here doesn't seem to think that clothing is required to be decent or to demonstrate respect. That's kind of the point that is being made. Laws and taboo's about the naked body are outdated victorian morality. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Gamston   10 #31 Posted December 24, 2015 Thats the whole point of the people who are supportive of his situation. They cant see the harm and feel that public morality has changed from the law he is currently being punished by. The logic of it suggests they have no problem with him attending midnight mass (notwithstanding it is private property) as they see no problem in his nudity.  Common sense tells me other people attending midnight mass would see a problem with his nudity . You are correct there would be a private property issue . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
999tigger   10 #32 Posted December 24, 2015 Common sense tells me other people attending midnight mass would see a problem with his nudity . You are correct there would be a private property issue .  But the whole point is that people are suggesting morality has changed and the law should reflect that according to the people here. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Gamston   10 #33 Posted December 24, 2015 "Common" as judged by the majority of posters here doesn't seem to think that clothing is required to be decent or to demonstrate respect. That's kind of the point that is being made. Laws and taboo's about the naked body are outdated victorian morality.  Common sense tells me it is best to leave the existing laws in place to avoid any wannabe nudist intentions being misinterpreted .  ---------- Post added 24-12-2015 at 10:49 ----------  But the whole point is that people are suggesting morality has changed and the law should reflect that according to the people here. The changing of the law to accommodate one serial law breaker makes no common sense . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Mr Bloke   1,445 #34 Posted December 24, 2015 Common sense tells me other people attending midnight mass would see a problem with his nudity . You are correct there would be a private property issue . Ooo... err!  Well I suppose that's one way to swell the congregation! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #35 Posted December 24, 2015 Common sense tells me it is best to leave the existing laws in place to avoid any wannabe nudist intentions being misinterpreted . What do you mean? The changing of the law to accommodate one serial law breaker makes no common sense .  The law should be changed because it's outdated and ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
999tigger   10 #36 Posted December 24, 2015 Common sense tells me it is best to leave the existing laws in place to avoid any wannabe nudist intentions being misinterpreted . ---------- Post added 24-12-2015 at 10:49 ----------  The changing of the law to accommodate one serial law breaker makes no common sense .  But the people on this board are suggesting public morality has changed as a whole and the law doesnt reflect that. The issue was a morality one about public nudity and not a practicaity one. What's wrong with walking around nude? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...