southsider2k5 Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/30/nude.tee...t.ap/index.html ACLU to the rescue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UICJason Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 A lot of things "could attract pedophiles or child pornographers." We haven't made being an altar boy illegal yet, and that certainly has, so clearly this is a ridiculous law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mreye Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 A lot of things "could attract pedophiles or child pornographers." We haven't made being an altar boy illegal yet, and that certainly has, so clearly this is a ridiculous law. :headshake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JUGGERNAUT Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 Hopefully the VA DA will prosecute the case on strong merits & not something loose like "attracting pedophiles". This really is a challenge of rights to privacy vs indeceny laws. Unless the camp can provide reasonable assurance that the camp would not be accessible to the public's eyes the state should prosecute this under indeceny laws. The state has the right to protect the public from indecent exposure of both adults & minors. I do not believe this camp can provide this assurance since it is unlikely the air space would be restricted. All one needs to do is open a helicopter service to then provide indecent public exposure of the camp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Controlled Chaos Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 A lot of things "could attract pedophiles or child pornographers." We haven't made being an altar boy illegal yet, and that certainly has, so clearly this is a ridiculous law. You have a very twisted view on things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juddling Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 hehehe.....am i the only one who finds it funny that the camp is called White Tail??????? lol :fthecubs juddling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 This is just :puke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UICJason Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 You have a very twisted view on things. How so? I agree with the poster who discussed indecency laws...they have a decent case, but to challenge this based on "pedophiles and child pornographers" is ridiculous. Clearly the Catholic church has attracted pedophiles, and no one looks to shut them down...now rightfully so, but let's not make ridiculous statements about pedophiles where it doesn't apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wong & Owens Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 What's ridiculous is how anyone would consider a naked body "indecent." Bunch of repressed whiners with too much time on their hands. It's a penis(or vagina). If it were alabaster or on canvas, it would be considered world-class art. But live, it's indecent? What a stupid waste of court time and tax dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HuskyCaucasian Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 A lot of things "could attract pedophiles or child pornographers." Ban internet chat rooms and the entire intermet while they are at it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.