flushing liberals

["ben merkle" <benmerkle@moscow.com>]

    Of course the question regarding full nudity is a foolish question. Some
things we ought to be able to dismiss with a laugh. Just like the topless
question. But in recent vision 2020 messages and particularly in the
testimony at the City Council meeting, the charge has continually been
leveled that conservatives must be ashamed of breasts because they want them
covered in public. That sort of charge is so ridiculous that we ought to all
laugh away as we hit the delete key. But for some reason we find a
significant portion of the public actually echoing the refrain, all the
while insisting that the southern hemisphere be covered. So I want to know
why the inconsistency? Saundra Lund gives the most compelling defense that
genitals are waste oriented and breasts are for nourishment. But what does
waste have to do with it? If someone is only walking down the street
pantless, how does that force a hygiene problem on anyone? And any hygiene
problem that there might be, the city obviously must be able to deal with
since we have public restrooms where genitals are regularly exposed. Not
only that, but if we want to play physiological Marxism, what's so bad about
waste?
    State ordinances do currently prohibit full nudity. But my question was
simply do local liberals hope do eventually have full nudity? And if not,
why not? I also agree that having a law against bare breasts is really
silly. I feel bad for the City Council members who now have to waste their
time trying to compose an ordinance that will stick. But laws are usually
for the immoral who seem to always walk hand in hand with the fools.

Ben Merkle