vision2020
RE: Who Are The Boobs?
Title: Message
Dear Mr.
Dickison,
I hope I'm not out of line
here. I am an intelligent person, I don't think I'm arrogant, but, not
having a legal background, I don't know that I really understand the language of
the ordinance. Perhaps you or one of the others here can translate it into
plain language for me? My reading of the language Ms. Palmer posted makes
it sound like the City Council went back to the first extremely repressive
proposal rather than the more reasonable second proposal? Tube tops are OK
but most bikini tops & many dance leotards aren't?
I suppose one of
my concerns is *not* that democracy supposedly worked in this case, but
that we've now got a law on the books that will be arbitrarily &
capriciously enforced. I'm concerned about the time & resources
already wasted on this issue, as well as the time & resources that will
likely continue to be wasted on a law that it seems inevitable will be
arbitrarily & capriciously enforced.
Perhaps I'm in the minority
here in wanting our community's children, male and female, to grow up
feeling that breasts are nothing to be ashamed of and to understand the real
intended purpose of breasts. That's OK . . . I'm often in the
minority ;-)
I'm concerned that the
current attitude seems to be moving backwards towards encouraging shame about
the human body rather than acceptance. I've read about the long past days
when piano legs were required to be draped, and it feels to me like we're moving
back in that direction.
I'm concerned about the
gender bias, and all that *really* means, inherent in a requirement that
women keep their chests covered while men are free to continue to go
shirtless.
And, I actually find it a
bit offensive that you are falling back on a "democracy in action" generic
argument to justify your support of this ordinance. I know this is a
reach, but would you be claiming "democracy in action" if the majority of Moscow
citizens decided that . . . oh, say . . . purple houses were objectionable
& there ought to be a local ordinance against them?
Silly me . . . I thought
reason was supposed to enter into democracy.
Saundra
Lund
Moscow, Idaho
The only thing necessary for the triumph of
evil is for good people to do nothing.
Edmund Burke
Dear Comrades:
From what I gather, over 80 per cent of the city
council members, and 90 per cent of the public which commented, was in favor
of the the new ordinance. The opposition apparently came from a very
small, yet very vocal, minority (which minority was upset that the council
would not "waste" more time on repetitive public comment).
I am puzzled as to why you are being so hard on
something that the vast majority believes is important, and is worth taking
time to accomplish. Why aren't you happy that the democratic process worked
the will of the people? Is it that you are more enlightened? Or just
arrogant?
Gregory C. Dickison
Lawyer & Counselor at
Law
Post Office Box 8846
312 South Main Street
Moscow, Idaho
83843
(208) 882-4009
Back to TOC