Termyn8or
Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Which side of this would you prefer I take first ? I'll refrain from explaining how the existence of this case at all supports some of my assertions. I guess I will take the side of the fuddy duddies first.
The government (I think ?)
You live in a society. You want to go live in the woods fine, no problem. The law must reflect community standards because if not then we are not a representative government. In matters such as these, community standards vary, but that does not make them irrelevant. This is the same set of community standards that prevents someone from opening a rendering plant or oil refinery next to your house.
The defendant
My house was there before the bus stop, and before the other houses in fact (for arguments sake), at that time I was most of the community. I face the sunlight naked every morning, like a ritual. Someone else came along and effectively took most of my community away, and I have not been compensated. I have always done this, and if they cared to look then, they could simply have put the bus stop elsewhere. Preventing my morning ritual is tantamount to abridging freedom of religion, IN MY OWN HOME THAT I BUILT. (remember it's semi-hypothetical for illustrative purposes)
For the sake of argument, both arguments are good. Face it, you don't know this guy and none of us cares personally about him or the town in which he lives. What has spawned this as the issue de jure, and jure, and.... is that it is a deeper issue.
Now given the enhanced hypothetic I presented, as the judge would have to rule thus :
I am reluctant to jail or fine you under these circumstances. However Michealangelo's Davin is in a room and people have to desire to see it. It is not out on somebody's front lawn. Those who object to your ritual are also part of the community. As such I am issuing a temporary injuction against you practicing your ritual. If you violate the order you will be in contempt of court. However this order will be lifted once you satisfy one requirement. Find a way to make viewing your private parts impossible to the casual observer. You can use any means you like within reason. It doesn't have to be clothing, it could be landscaping or anything you can think up. As long as it is effective. Those who object are not voyeurs, they are members of the community. Cooperate and get along, and feel free to appeal.
Is it who was here first - - - - - - or who was here last ?
I worked for a guy had a sign up for around thirty years, all the sudden one day he has to take it down. I said to tell them to take that idea and make sure it does not get a sunburn. He was there first, that business was there paying taxes since before alot of the city cockroaches were born. Who is right ? That case has nothing to do with porn or anything like that.
I remember reading a story about a Man who had a farmhouse or whatever out in the stix, somebody up and put a billboard across the road (not a street LOL) which blocked his view of the sunset. He went over there with an axe and chopped it down. They threw him in jail and he always said he would do it again. I don't remember the end of the story. But that's a juxtaposition of the.....; whatever. This time he was the community.
T
|
Update on the man arrested for being naked in his own home - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread