I’m a good bit more socially liberal than Clayton Cramer, but San Francisco still scares the crap out of me. Those links are not safe for work, or anywhere else really. I warned you! San Francisco was originally founded by the Spanish in 1776, so all the weirdos in the world could live in one place.
UPDATE: Kevin Baker’s comment on the whole thing is just wrong, but quite hilarious.
WTF!? Why is it that the people who want to run around naked in public are never people that other people would like to see naked?
The suburban areas in the San Francisco Bay Area tend to have more families and fewer nudists…
Regarding “SF Weird Time”… The people of SF don’t need or want Clayton Cramer around and anybody else who would get the crap scared out of them. But here’s why SF is not a threat to “normal” America. The city is on the far western edge of the U.S. The highways are limited and usually clogged with traffic. So it is really hard to get in and out of the place. Besides that, I’ve never heard of any fringe group going out on a junket or tour to try and spread their way of life. Believe me (I’ve lived there) just as they scare you, you and many other small minded people scare them. So there is no problem here. Leave SF alone and move on.
I don’t agree with Clayton on a lot of that stuff Vaughan. Personally, if people want to have a naked bike ride in San Francisco, I could care less. But I still get to call those folks weird :)
“Besides that, I’ve never heard of any fringe group going out on a junket or tour to try and spread their way of life.”
Except, of course, when they elect Nancy Pelosi to Congress. She’s more subtle, but you can be sure that that if Congress passes ENDA, the courts will eventually find it protects the right of employees to come to work naked, with breast implants on top, and a penis.
Yeah, I’m sure the courts can’t wait to entertain laws that say you can come to work naked. :) Sigh…
I don’t have any problem saying that “geeze, those people are pretty weird”. But “to each his own” is part and parcel of “pursuit of happiness”, and when gun rights activists–who have a very real stake in getting other people to leave our rights alone–start berating other people for living they way they want to live…it puts us in a tough spot.
Freedom is letting other people choose things that you wouldn’t choose for yourself. Period.
And while I really don’t have the time to waste having another 30 post argument with you about it Clayton…please don’t piss down our necks and call it rain. Your post is clearly suggesting that the dweebs walking around in that parade of exhibitionists represent homosexuals by and large. Don’t bother insulting our intelligence with a suggestion to the contrary.
I don’t begrudge you your distaste for homosexuality…you’re welcome to think whatever you like. But at least be honest about it–you are engaging in some rather negative stereotyping there.
I do wonder what you’d say to, say…a Jeff Soyer, who’s an invaluable ally in the RKBA fight? Or my half sister, who resembles those exhibitionist dweebs in no way, shape or form?
Do you not realize that looking at a small sample of a larger whole and drawing sweeping, negative conclusions is at the very least intellectually unsupportable? Nobody here thinks you can look at Malvo and Muhammed and Cho and extrapolate anything definitive about gun owners…so why would looking at an isolated group in one city in America be sufficient to make sweeping, negative, hateful suppositions about any other group?
There’s as much authortarianism on the right as there is on the left anymore. And people ask me why I don’t just become a Republican…
“There’s as much authortarianism on the right as there is on the left anymore. And people ask me why I don’t just become a Republican…” -PGP
No, there isn’t. Both are authoritarian, just with different goals. However, here ya go. I wouldn’t ask you why you don’t become a Republican, they don’t have a Hell of a lot to recommend them. Neither do the Dems. That’s the real problem with the parties.
As for SF and wierd. So what? I do think it might be a courtesy and/or decorum thing not to subject the unwilling viewers to your naked butt. I don’t think I would make it unlawful, but I certainly wouldn’t do it to others and I hate clothes, always have. But I wear them because not everybody loves my body as much as I do. (willful blindness & creative interpretation of beauty on my part or parts , if you like:)
I will say this while public nudity is not enumerated in the Constitution as a protected right, nowhere is it proscribed. Conversely, the right to bear arms is a specifically enumerated right guaranteed by the Constitution. Do you suppose all those naked bikers would be as accepting of my carrying my pistol on my hip as you say we should be in unwillingly viewing their naked hips?
I thought not! You say we should respect their pursuit of happiness, OK. No problem, I’ll trade, if they respect my pursuit of my guaranteed rights.
Fair?
More than fair! It’s really the core of what our agenda should be. We’ll respect your rights, you respect ours–and our tent gets bigger in the process.
Not that I’d expect Clayton to spend too much time perusing their site ;), but it turns out they’re hardly the fans of Nancy Pelosi that you’d expect. Heh.
http://www.zombietime.com/sympathy_for_pelosi/
Vermont has no law against public nudity. None. It hasn’t been a big problem for them, although Brattleboro is considering a city ordinance outlawing it because they are afraid some of their tourist dollars might be lost to overexposure. Not a morality based stance, but just about the money. That seems a poor reason to me to curtail freedom of action of an individual.
Same reason I think anyone who belongs to a homeowners association is an idiot. He exposes himself (pun intended) to the same amoral censure.
“Yeah, I’m sure the courts can’t wait to entertain laws that say you can come to work naked. :) Sigh…”
In 1970, would you have ever thought that the courts would require states to recognize same-sex marriage? A lot can change between 9 and 5.
“And while I really don’t have the time to waste having another 30 post argument with you about it Clayton…please don’t piss down our necks and call it rain. Your post is clearly suggesting that the dweebs walking around in that parade of exhibitionists represent homosexuals by and large. Don’t bother insulting our intelligence with a suggestion to the contrary.”
You are so right. Homosexuals would never form organizations or make common cause with these sickos, would they?
But that is exactly what homosexual activists (who are probably atypical in a number of ways of the average homosexual) have done: expanding “lgb” to “lgbitq” (and who knows what new initials will get added with time).
“I do wonder what you’d say to, say…a Jeff Soyer, who’s an invaluable ally in the RKBA fight? Or my half sister, who resembles those exhibitionist dweebs in no way, shape or form?”
I’d say, “If you want to be taken seriously, don’t ally yourself with these exhibitionist dweebs.” And I would guess that neither Soyer nor your half sister would do so. Unfortunately, homosexual activists have allied themselves with these exhibitionist dweebs, and the activists tend to define what the laws will be.
In 1970, would you have ever thought that the courts would require states to recognize same-sex marriage?
In 1970, I wasn’t even a gleam in my father’s eye. Wasn’t born until 1974 :) Actually, I think the other Sebastian, maybe I should call him The Real Sebastian, is about the same age as me.