I happen to agree with the State of Oregon Supreme Court ruling that said nudity is a right based on freedom of speech/expression.

Saying that the majority does not desire it, is like saying since the majority of people in the U.S. are Christians it shoudl be compulsory for people to attend church on Sunday, because they don't 'lolike other Penelope staying home.

As our cultural attitudes about nudity are primarily drawn from religion, the same argument of freedom of religious belief can be made for legal public nudity as can be made against the above paragraph.

In Oregon, even though it is technically legal to be nude, very few persons actually choose to go nude. However, the point is that they do have a choice. Wearing clothes is not compulsory. Then again, not too many are aware of the court ruling either.

@snytiger6 no, it is not the same, you are wrong. the right to religious freedom is in the first amendment, the right to nudity is not in any amendment. saying they are the same is ridiculous, it's bullshit.

@snytiger6, @Hercules3000 we do force nudists to wear clothes, Herc, your statement is just false. false statements are not arguments of reason, they are false statements. SOME people wear clothes when they want to, some do it because it is the law. facts matter.

"as our cultural standards come from religion" no, they don't. SOME of them do. some come from evolutionary impulses. acting like "oh, this thing is in a religion, so it must be because of religion" is complete ignorance of reality. I don't deal in ignorance.

@snytiger6 if you equate the completely, and I mean COMPLETELY harmless injunction of wearing clothes to the demonstrably harmful practice of indoctrination into superstitious beliefs, you are wrong. It isn't a question of reasonable debate when you do that.

"well, isn't not letting people be naked the same as not letting them murder other people when they want to" makes as much sense. there is no harm done to someone who is forced to wear clothes, and there is no harm to society done by everyone being clothed in public. NONE.

It is true that at clothing optional places it seesm that there are more older generations than yo9unhger. I attribute this to more younger persons are insecure about theri bodies, while as people get older, many mor ewill adopt an attitude of "who cares".

As for sun burns.... I recommend Nutragena sun screens tht come in the little plastic tubes (not the spray on,which doesn't work as well). It is fast drying, meaning you are not oily and greasy all day long. I only have to apply it once at the start of the day, can go in and out of the water without having to reapply it, and I have never been burned when wearign it (I use and SPF of 45 on my body and spf 85 on my genitals). It is more expensive than other sun screens, but it works, and it will let you tan too. Definitely worth the expense.

@snytiger6 Thanks! As a public service, though, I'll remain clothed in public places. You'd thank me...yes, you would!

@LucyLoohoo You'd be surprised. I've met a person who was over weight who also had severe skin disorders several at nudist events. He wasn't pretty to look at, but I did get over my initial reactions, and he seemed like a nice person. His condition wasn't contagious, and by comparison my initial emotional discomfort would never compare to his physical discomfort

I think it is just sad that as a society we want anyone who does not meet the advertisers ideal of physical beauty to feel guilt fear and hame about hwo they look, which in many instances cant' be helped.

@snytiger6 Men have been afflicted with ''snow blindness" having seen me nekkid! Just saying...

@Hercules3000 I would nto have fit into Woodstock. I don't liek mud, don't use drugs, and AIDS was already around by the time I was sexually active, so free love alwasy seemed to come at too high of a cost to me. Is your info really that dated?

Nudist culture predates the counter culture of hte 1960's. Nudists existed both before and after that time period. If you want to criticize, which you seem intent on doing, perhaps you shoudl do more reading to learn more, so you can do it properly. Nudists & Naturists have been a constant subculture for much longer than the last century.

Between that and just a general religious prude attitude....

Religions just associate nudity with sex. Most Americans have no experiences with nudity outside of sex or bathing.

Body image has a lot to do with it too. Unless a person feels insecure about how they look, advertisers won't be able to sell us a bunch of stuff that we really dont' need, which is supposed to make us look better, whether it be clothes cosmetics, skin care products, bogus weight loss products or whatever.

@Hercules3000 You can't get a sexual transmitted disease off a bar stool or a toilet!

@Hercules3000 nope, not forgetting. you know what? those people are attacking us even when we're fully clothed. i don't see nudity as a further problem.

g

@Hercules3000 i think people will get used to nudity and those erections will happen less and less, but if overcrowding is a problem that way, maybe more subways cars will be built to ease crowding. i don't see this as a huge problem, really, apart from the fact that the crowding itself is.

g

@Hercules3000 nope, not even remotely like that. complete false conflation. that's just silly. are you trying to imagine potential problems? is there something else on your mind you're not revealing, regarding public nudity?

g

@Hercules3000 pretty much everything, including breathing! my skin is particularly sensitive, as it happens. but one doesn't have to have a problem in order to benefit from nudity. but that's not the point. the point is whether or not people should be forced to cover up whether they want to or not, just because SOME people might be titillated.

g

@Hercules3000 pretty much everything, not the special cases you named. as for children, they frequently ARE naked! what's the big deal?

g

@Hercules3000 neither are grownups. what's your point? we're not talking about whether nudity IS permissible in public. we're talking about whether it SHOULD be. if it were, then yes, children would be naked in shopping malls, and not getting erections either.

g

@Hercules3000 omg you're obsessed with danglies!

if everyone was nude, nobody would be looking all the time at the danglies! and if people were seated their danglies wouldn't really be dangling.

the hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy says: always know where your towel is.

g

I really appreciate it when people think out and explain their answers, and take the time to make thier answers worth reading. Thank you.

@Hercules3000 I don't think you understood my point. I've answered in a far broader sense than the context of your response. Ask yourself this: should an adultery be criminalized? In some countries they are. Should what is illegal in one society be illegal in all others? Or the other way around? My answer assumes the society in question can reach a consensus about "morality." We may or may not be able to. I was simply casting my vote on the perspective on morality. I won't forcibly impose my sense of morality on others.

@Hercules3000 If you had taken time to read the original post, you would know that the legality is exactly what we were discussing. More specifically what role should our sense of morality in criminalizing behavior. You want to skip the difficult question and go straight into what you believe to be moral or immoral. That's a different question. You have already formed your own subjective morality and you are shocked and scandalized when others disagree. That's a common response, but also an uninteresting one. But as atheist, we should learn to question whether our subjective sense of morality should be universally accepted.

@Hercules3000 exactly! Instead of pretty colors, interesting textures, matching or not shoes........interesting & fun stuff!

Or on your speach. Want to trade?

Yest another reason to oppose religion which indoctrinates and teaches people to feel guilt, fear and shame about their bodies. I think the purpose of their doing that is to lower self esteem and self worth, so that they won't dare question church authority.

Freedom has to get its start somewhere. Why not here and why not now?

It is true that people will be rude whether or mot other pe9o0le are clothed or not.

Persons who are older and/or over weight will be denigrated whether or not they are wearign any clothes. Those who have bodies which their culture thinks is beatiful will get unwanted attention and ti will brign out the immaturatity of others.

Culturally, at least in the U.lS., we have a long way to go in terms of equality and personal freedoms. I think that the freedom of choice of whether or not to wear clothing falls under freedom of expression or freedom of speech under the U.S. constitution an dlaws that prohibit nudity are unconstitutional, in part also because they are based on religious beliefs, and also infringe on freedom of religion.

Women are still getting harassed for discretely breastfeeding their kids in public so your idea is very appealing. Breasts really are there mainly to feed babies after all.. In some cultures they are, or were, not seen as sexual, making National Geographic magazines popular reading material for American boys back when I was young.

I don't want to see Trump naked either. However, even with him the above stated rules that a person can't be anything with the intent of sexually arousign either themselves or anyone else would still apply. If public nudity were legal, I can't see him participating as he is all about image and in his mind "clothes make the man". I can't see him voluntarily putting himself in a position where nobody would be cued in to his status via the clothes he wasn't wearing and people saw him as just "equal".

On the other hand, seeing Trump naked would help people trying to lose weight as one look and they would lose their appetites.

When I bought my bike, P paid extra for a few conveniences, such as a more comfortable seat, puncture proof tires (the fivers in the rires are supposedly stronger than kevlar) and puncture resistant tubes, so I am comfortable on the ride and don't experience flats when riding.

I am aware some peopel buy special set sovers for when they ride naked.

To see any human body as "disgusting" is something people are taught to do. People do nto have a natural abhorrence to th enuman body. It is a culturally learned stigma.

What is considering "disgusting" would vary a lot from one person to another. So who gets to decide what is disgusting? People raised with bad body image caused by religion?

@snytiger6 I don't find anything aesthetically pleasing about an old saggy or fat body (and I have one). This is not to say people shouldn't be naked at say the beach where the context is appropriate. Young fit people and children can look beautiful naked. Just look at all the art work dedicated to the naked form. When my boys were little, I thought them beautiful naked. But if I had thought that someone was sexually aroused by the sight of my naked sons, I would be revolted. As a parent I would want to protect my kids from the eyes of perverts so for this reason I'm not comfortable about kids (who aren't able to give legal consent) coerced into public nudity.

In the nudist villages of France, most everyone walks around with a towel that is used when sitting in public places as well as lounging on the beach. If you want to learn more about the nudist life style there are many free videos available online. Most are not designed to be erotic, but rather educational of the lifestyle.

@Barnie2years Thanks. I did not know that.

@CreativelyMe

It's not really about beign seen or seeing people, but more about just having the option (freedom).