quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN move to a big fag country town jake.

I would but I just don't like Australian food. No but really I live in LA. It can't get any gayer than driving by giant signs with M4M dating telephone hotlines. Bleh. Who even uses phones for that anymore?

Last edited by Jake Benson on Mar-14-2007 at 07:59

quote:

Originally posted by spiflicated Smoking, within the limits of the law, is a protected activity because of the financial benefits to business (for which, you can send a letter of thanks to Phillip Morris, their lobbyists, and your member of Congress). It does not necessarily follow that public masturbation should be a protected activity. Per the US Supreme Court in Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc.: “…Public indecency statutes of this sort are of ancient origin, and presently exist in at least 47 States. Public indecency, including nudity, was a criminal offense at common law … “[P]ublic indecency statutes were designed to protect morals and public order. The traditional police power of the States is defined as the authority to provide for the public health, safety, and morals, and we have upheld such a basis for legislation… “[T]his Court implicitly accepted that a legislature could legitimately act on such a conclusion to protect "the social interest in order and morality"… “Thus, the public indecency statute furthers a substantial government interest in protecting order and morality…” So, I don’t see that public smoking is a persuasive argument to justify public masturbation.

I like your arguments. I think they're solid. But in my opinion they presume that what the law says is absolute. I don't necessarily view laws being absolute as they are created, modified, and sometimes nullified. What if "morals" were to include not-smoking in public? Would it suddenly be bad to smoke in public if the law said so? And if the law allowed public masturbation, what then would make it a bad idea?

quote:

Having said that, in places where smoking inside is banned, feel free to whip out your one-eyed snake and spit venom on any smokers lighting up indoors.

Oh I do all the time. They call me jake the snake.

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson I like your arguments. I think they're solid. But in my opinion they presume that what the law says is absolute. I don't necessarily view laws being absolute as they are created, modified, and sometimes nullified. What if "morals" were to include not-smoking in public? Would it suddenly be bad to smoke in public if the law said so? And if the law allowed public masturbation, what then would make it a bad idea?

Agreed, laws are not absolute. I was addressing the question of why public masturbation is illegal and public smoking not, without delving into right and wrong. Let me put on my thinking cap…

Even without government laws, there are natural laws and cultural norms, dictating the expectations of moral behavior, right and wrong, and regulating how we should act. If there wasn’t a law that specifically criminalized public masturbation, most people would still feel they just shouldn’t do it because it’s just a bad idea.

To be honest, I also think smoking is a bad idea. I have been trying to quit, but these nicotine patches aren’t working. Even so, I get angry when some stranger on the street yells at me for smoking in an outdoor public smoking area right next to the ashtray that was placed there by the property management for smokers.

It would be a lot easier to quit smoking if people could not buy a pack of cigarettes. Given that the government has a substantial interest in the health of its citizens and has the right to regulate smoking, as evidenced by the enactment of anti-smoking legislation, I can foresee a time when smoking is outlawed altogether. However, it is at this point that your argument becomes invalid, with no smoking, you wouldn’t have the right to masturbate in public.

Assuming you want to publicly masturbate right away, I think you’ll be hard-pressed to get your argument for legalizing it out of the realm of hypothetical. The only choice I see for you would be civil disobedience, but you definitely wouldn’t get the sympathy you need to change public opinion when the police turn a hose a you.

quote:

Originally posted by Theresa Dude, is there a need to be intolerant of his sexual preference? The thread isn't even about homosexuality.

come on. people here should know im a lovely liberal that doesnt have a problem with anybody's sexuality, ever. chill woman.

___________________