Re: Don't make us call you chicken: take the public debate challenge!

["Muscovites for Equal Rights" <idahomer@hotmail.com>]

Gregory et al,
Have you read the ordinance 2002-13?
The fact is this ordinance does more than restrict women from walking 
downtown topfree.  It sweeps onto private property.  Women who enjoy 
sunbathing, gardening or whatever on their property now must cover their 
breasts if they are in public view.  Even if they are in their home, if 
someone can see in from a public space, they face a $500 or 6 months in jail 
if their breasts are exposed.
On top of that, certain bikinis and other apparel are now banned from public 
view.  As well as the infamous "plumber's butt."  If you bend over and 
expose the cleft of your buttocks, you are now breaking the law.

Perhaps Attorney Dickison does not think this law is extreme because he is 
exposed to extreme laws during his work, but for me and many others, this 
law represents another attempt to regulate women in order to prevent the 
corruption of men.  This is no different than the Taliban's motive for 
forcing women to cover themselves completely.  Most men, perhaps even 
Gregory, would admit that men can be turned on by legaly exposed parts of a 
woman.  Why not cover those parts as well?

I would assume that Attorny Dickison knows about the nudity ordinance Moscow 
had that was thrown out by the courts a few years ago.  I would assume he 
knows about the ordinance in Boise that was thrown out because it banned 
mainstream apparel.  I would assume he knows that New York state found all 
their topfree laws to be unconstitutional.

Perhaps Gregory doesn't think this law will be challenged in court.  The 
fact is, there are so many holes in it that our city will end up spending 
our money trying to defend it, when in the process we could have drafted 
something more acceptable and saved our money.

Our campaign is in the best interest for Moscow.  We want laws that don't 
test the constitution.  We want laws that are thoughtful.  We want to use 
our tax dollars for something more useful.

We do not feel this law is necessary.  We feel the city council could have 
addressed the issue more thoughtfully.  Thus our attempt to hold the city 
council accountable for passing this law.

As far as I know, there has not been a real public debate about this issue.  
We feel that if our city is going to pass laws that test the 14th amendment, 
we should at least debate about it.

Gregory's response still did not indicate why this ordinance is necessary.  
This points to the fact that no one can come up with a good reason.  If so, 
let us hear it.  Let us debate this.  This is what community is: being able 
to discuss controversial issues openly.

Perhaps people are bored with us.  That is your right.  There are people 
still concerned, however, and we would like to get all the facts out in the 
open.  Our challenge to debate is in the spirit of being honest about the 
issue.

If someone doesn't except our challenge, we can only assume that is because 
no one has a good response to our arguments.  If someone does, don't be 
chicken, come down to the park and debate this with us.  It'll be fun:)

We have no intent of oppressing Gregory Dickison with our "narrow and 
confining vision of equality."  Just as long as he gives a good reason why 
he feels this narrow and confining ordinance as written is necessary for 
Moscow.

At the very least, let's put this to a public vote so that the people of 
Moscow can decide if they want to restrict themselves with this law.

Garrett Clevenger

>From: "Gregory Dickison" <gdickison@moscow.com>
>To: "Muscovites for Equal Rights" <idahomer@hotmail.com>,   
><vision2020@moscow.com>
>Subject: Re: Don't make us call you chicken: take the public debate 
>challenge!
>Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 05:58:13 -0700
>
>Chicken? Maybe just bored. Your shallow and utilitarian notions of equality
>are getting tiresome. Saying that men and women are equal in the manner you
>do is like saying that the saprano and the tenor parts are equal. Of 
>course,
>there is always some fool who sees two different things and wants to say
>that one is better. But to respond by asserting that they are just the same
>is to answer the fool according to his folly and consequently be just like
>him.
>
>In the real world, men and women are free to be men and women, masculine 
>and
>feminine, interacting with each other in the harmonic and mutually 
>enriching
>way that God intended. Men and women are different, radically so. A real,
>rich culture recognizes, celebrates and protects the differences and the
>interaction. Saying that women should be able to do everything men do
>completely misses the point, and squishes both men and women into an
>amorphous mold that gives freedom, equality and justice to neither.
>
>Please, stop trying to oppress us with your narrow and confining vision of
>equality. We prefer the freedom of true sexual diversity.
>
>Gregory C. Dickison
>Lawyer & Counselor at Law
>Post Office Box 8846
>312 South Main Street
>Moscow, Idaho 83843
>(208) 882-4009






_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com