Sex is part of human experience
Geoff Rands
Issue date: 10/17/05 Section: Opinion
Topeka, Kan. City Councilman Brett Blackburn recently proposed an ordinance to ban all imaginable forms of public nudity, even public indoor nudity.
This wasn't brought on by his aversion to nude bars or the younger generation getting too into its bump-and-grind on the dance floors. Instead, he thought this was necessary because of plays at the Topeka Performing Arts Center, presented by the Lake Edun Foundation, a nudist colony which promotes nudist lifestyles.
I never thought I'd say this, but I applaud the members of Topeka's City Council for their bravery and insight in this matter. This proposal was rejected without a vote, as Blackburn was the only one who supported his proposal.
Today's self-righteous ignorance calls for all reasonable people to stop those confused, uninformed souls seeking to make the world safer for the rest of us.
This was not an attempt to protect citizens from sexual deviants who expose themselves while jogging, nor was it an attempt to protect young children from seeing things they are not yet mature enough to understand. The ordinance was a blatant attempt to legislate morality.
Blackburn clearly sees nudists as immoral, and was offended by their message. Let's call a spade a spade. He was trying to censor their freedom of speech, so that the rest of us wouldn't have to listen to or see that filth. Never mind that anyone who attended these shows couldn't have had any confusion about what the performances would entail, Blackburn simply felt a burgeoning moral superiority against these nudists. Why? I'm not so sure. These guys aren't swingers or anything. This group, like most nudists, strictly separates nudity and sexuality. They promote things like nude gardening and have banned genital piercing. Thank goodness for the common sense shown by the Topeka City Council. If only our federal government had any of that.
The enormous "Children's Safety Act of 2005," allegedly is primarily concerned with protecting children from sex crimes and keeping track of sex offenders. If passed, it would require the same record keeping and associated stigma for movies and TV shows containing sex scenes, even simulated sex scenes, as is required and associated with hardcore pornography. If passed, the act will be directed to label "lascivious exhibition of the genitals," which apparently can occur while actors are clothed. Don't ask me how.
This wasn't brought on by his aversion to nude bars or the younger generation getting too into its bump-and-grind on the dance floors. Instead, he thought this was necessary because of plays at the Topeka Performing Arts Center, presented by the Lake Edun Foundation, a nudist colony which promotes nudist lifestyles.
I never thought I'd say this, but I applaud the members of Topeka's City Council for their bravery and insight in this matter. This proposal was rejected without a vote, as Blackburn was the only one who supported his proposal.
Today's self-righteous ignorance calls for all reasonable people to stop those confused, uninformed souls seeking to make the world safer for the rest of us.
This was not an attempt to protect citizens from sexual deviants who expose themselves while jogging, nor was it an attempt to protect young children from seeing things they are not yet mature enough to understand. The ordinance was a blatant attempt to legislate morality.
Blackburn clearly sees nudists as immoral, and was offended by their message. Let's call a spade a spade. He was trying to censor their freedom of speech, so that the rest of us wouldn't have to listen to or see that filth. Never mind that anyone who attended these shows couldn't have had any confusion about what the performances would entail, Blackburn simply felt a burgeoning moral superiority against these nudists. Why? I'm not so sure. These guys aren't swingers or anything. This group, like most nudists, strictly separates nudity and sexuality. They promote things like nude gardening and have banned genital piercing. Thank goodness for the common sense shown by the Topeka City Council. If only our federal government had any of that.
The enormous "Children's Safety Act of 2005," allegedly is primarily concerned with protecting children from sex crimes and keeping track of sex offenders. If passed, it would require the same record keeping and associated stigma for movies and TV shows containing sex scenes, even simulated sex scenes, as is required and associated with hardcore pornography. If passed, the act will be directed to label "lascivious exhibition of the genitals," which apparently can occur while actors are clothed. Don't ask me how.
Be the first to comment on this story