Court gives green light to "boobs on bikes" parade (1 Viewer)

[BradCube]

But - you just did the same thing, albeit unintentionally. Our issue with you is that you honestly believe that atheists are morally inferior to you, without any basis whatsoever.

Do you understand why we respond in the negative?

Well, I apologize if that's how it reads, but that's not what I meant at all. I don't regard atheists as morally inferior - how arrogant! The difference is that I find the atheistic view of morality so drastically different to my own that I have trouble accepting how it could be followed so vigorously.

 

[Kwayera]

Well, I apologize if that's how it reads, but that's not what I meant at all. I don't regard atheists as morally inferior - how arrogant! The difference is that I find the atheistic view of morality so drastically different to my own that I have trouble accepting how it could be followed so vigorously.

You mean that our view of morality is that it is biologically derived? Why is that so hard to accept?

And it's been hard to accept since the 1960s, when we humans discovered that we were not unique in the one thing we thought definitively separated us - the fact that we wage war. Chimps do. So do hyenas, gorillas, wolves, lions..

 

[Enteebee]

BRAD: Well because for the most part we don't think about the meta-ethical issues too much, neither do you really and if you do you just say 'god did it', I could equally flippantly say it's the 'human spirit' or something. BTW I'm sorry that people come off as abrasive, speaking for myself it's just because I care so much about truth.

 

[sam04u]

What are you talking about now?

No, don't tell me you're one of these frigid fools who cannot distinguish between anatomy and the purposes of organs, and their sexual use.

If my kid saw a naked person in public, I would hope I had brought him up well enough to realise it's a penis/vagina and it's no more offensive than seeing somebodys arm. I believe that the more we make nudity a big issue, the more people feel there needs to be a sense of shame when it comes to their reproductive organs.
Ovary is a reproductive organ and nobody gets offended when you say ovary in a conversation, yet penis and vagina elicit gasps of horror. And I think it's because we're a prude bunch of people who have hang ups with sex.

And why? Sex is sex?
You trying to link nudity with sexual acts is ridiculous. Establishments like that already exist, and I certainly wouldn't take a child to a brothel, but if he ever asked me what sex is and what his doodle for, I'm not going to make up some shit analogy about birds and bees.

Okay, so there is nothing wrong with nudity. It's perfectly natural.
So, would you be okay if the same was said about a young child?
Say I don't know. A 10 year old boy or girl naked in public? Don't tell me an arbitrary age defines whether that is right or wrong.

Soon enough you'll be saying "I don't believe there should be any age", and you'll probably be promoting Geoffrey Leonards new works.

 

[Enteebee]

tbh I think it'd be a better world if our little kids could play in the sprinklers naked again like i did when I was a young lad!

 

[katie tully]

Okay, so there is nothing wrong with nudity. It's perfectly natural.
So, would you be okay if the same was said about a young child?
Say I don't know. A 10 year old boy or girl naked in public? Don't tell me an arbitrary age defines whether that is right or wrong.

Soon enough you'll be saying "I don't believe there should be any age", and you'll probably be promoting Geoffrey Leonards new works.

Dude don't be a fuckstick and read all of the other responses in regards to children and morality.

 

[bigboyjames]

i cant believe some people's moral compass is pushed so far back behind their fucking ass that they are pushing for this sort of nudity, and still have their head high in defending this with arguments like "its a human body part, just like an arm."

i pity you fagots, yes pity.

 

[Riet]

Babies shouldn't be allowed to see breasts.

 

[katie tully]

i cant believe some people's moral compass is fucking pushed up back behind their ass that they are pushing for this sort of nudity, and still have their head high in defending this.

i pity you fagots, yes pity.

Now, you say we have fucked up morals, but referred to us as faggots?

Your homophobic bigotry disgusts me.

 

[sam04u]

Dude don't be a fuckstick and read all of the other responses in regards to children and morality.

No, I'm just saying. If nudity in public is okay, why should the age of the nude person matter?

If we allow public nudity, we allow public nudity. Why should it discriminate based on age?

 

[bigboyjames]

Mr James; What is objectively WRONG with it, and what damage will it cause?

what the hell do you think is wrong with it? are you that close minded that you have absolutely no feeling or thought of this being wrong? in any sense? i mean, you never thought for a second this could be wrong?

either you are being very ignorant. or your just fucked up. id like to think its the former.

 

[Kwayera]

No, I'm just saying. If nudity in public is okay, why should the age of the nude person matter?

If we allow public nudity, we allow public nudity. Why should it discriminate based on age?

I am reasonably certain that pretty much anyone who has ever gone to the beach as a kid has ran around butt naked.

 

[sam04u]

I am reasonably certain that pretty much anyone who has ever gone to the beach as a kid has ran around butt naked.

So you're saying it's perfectly okay? So you would have no problem with young boys and girls, say 10 years old walking around in shopping centres naked would you?

 

[Graney]

A 10 year old boy or girl naked in public? Don't tell me an arbitrary age defines whether that is right or wrong.

Pre-pubescent kids are never prosecuted for nudity in public. They are practically free to be nude everywhere already. Living near the beach, I always used to see nude kids at the showers, and even at the corner store for real young kids.

 

[bigboyjames]

No I'm asking you why you objectively see it as wrong. I'm politely asking you to enunciate EXACTLY why you take this viewpoint.

miles, you have steeped the lowest of lows. seriously, get your fucking head checked up. i cannot believe i have to argue against this senile act. fuck.

but anyways, i don't want to drag religion into this but everybody should brace themselves for morality without religion regurgitation straight out of Richard Dawkins God delusion.

The truth is that the atheist like you have already started to look at the human body as pieces of dead matter arranged is a semi designed way, chemical reactions governing emotions. Just have a look at Richard dawkins argument for abortion.

We have already seen the consequences of the atheist views. Nudity, sexual liberation, gambling, prostitution, drugs abuse all have been legalized where Atheism has managed to spread it's fucked up tentacles.

and yet, you think its "O.K"

pfft

 

[Iron]

I think that the 'rude bits' are rightly covered. They form the parts of us involved in the creation of life. They are profound and sacred symbols of that power and love. Our aversion to their exposure without the context of love and life creation is, I believe, the best part of our conscience's insistance that life is to be revered.

 

[Kwayera]

I think that the 'rude bits' are rightly covered. They form the parts of us involved in the creation of life. They are profound and sacred symbols of that power and love. Our aversion to their exposure without the context of love and life creation is, I believe, the best part of our conscience's insistance that life is to be revered.

That's entirely inaccurate. It is totally based on social conditioning - look at extant primitive societies, who are quite happy to be as naked as the day they are born, adults and children both.

It's only the conditioning of a Christian religious society that has imbued this sense of the sacred - or is that shame? - into out reproductive organs.

 

[Kwayera]

miles, you have steeped the lowest of lows. seriously, get your fucking head checked up. i cannot believe i have to argue against this senile act. fuck.

but anyways, i don't want to drag religion into this but everybody should brace themselves for morality without religion regurgitation straight out of Richard Dawkins God delusion.

The truth is that the atheist like you have already started to look at the human body as pieces of dead matter arranged is a semi designed way, chemical reactions governing emotions. Just have a look at Richard dawkins argument for abortion.

We have already seen the consequences of the atheist views. Nudity, sexual liberation, gambling, prostitution, drugs abuse all have been legalized where Atheism has managed to spread it's fucked up tentacles.

and yet, you think its "O.K"

pfft

You must be a troll.

 

[bigboyjames]

You must be a troll.

either reply to the post with dignity or fuck off.

 

[Iron]

Lol knew youd say hi. /kwayer/
I dont understand the obsession with the "natural" and primitive - as if the lowest form of civilization discovered under some shit hole rock is some powerful blow against moral absolutes.
They are wrongly conditioned! Yes! Natives can be wrong too!