Topless Women Bare their Bare Breasts on Topless GoToplessDay founded apparently by religious weirdos

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Denver:
http://www.denverpost.com/2016/08/2...arade-through-central-denver-urging-equality/

Los Angeles (Venice):
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/latest-women-march-topless-rights-los-angeles-41706341
http://www.dailynews.com/general-ne...ess-march-pushes-for-above-the-waist-equality

New Hampshire:
http://www.nh1.com/news/nh-women-protest-by-going-topless-at-hampton-beach/

New Yok:
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2016/08/28/nyc-go-topless-day/

Arizona:
http://www.azfamily.com/story/32858...for-in-phoenix-to-highlight-gender-inequality

San Francisco:
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Go-Topless-Day-sf-nude-nudity-raelians-naked-9177555.php

From gotopless.org (NSFW):

We are a U.S.-based organization founded in 2007 by spiritual leader Rael and we claim that women have the same constitutional right that men have to go bare-chested in public.

"As long as men are allowed to be topless in public, women should have the same constitutional right. Or else, men should have to wear something to hide their chests" Rael, founder of GoTopless.org and spiritual leader of the Raelian Movement (rael.org)

FREE YOUR BREASTS! FREE YOUR MIND!

I oppose the religious part of this, but I am completely for the other part.

 

[thebeave]

Well, at least this time their going topless is related to the issue they're protesting. Unlike 99% of the time where their message is, like,"I'm taking my top off to protest the Iraq invasion, and I'm not going to put my shirt back on until there is peace in the Middle East!!". Um, OK. Whatever floats your boat.

 

[Deepak]

From gotopless.org (NSFW):

We are a U.S.-based organization founded in 2007 by spiritual leader Rael and we claim that women have the same constitutional right that men have to go bare-chested in public.

"As long as men are allowed to be topless in public, women should have the same constitutional right. Or else, men should have to wear something to hide their chests" Rael, founder of GoTopless.org and spiritual leader of the Raelian Movement (rael.org)

FREE YOUR BREASTS! FREE YOUR MIND!

I oppose the religious part of this, but I am completely for the other part.

What happened to the goofy turtleneck and shoulder pads? Consider me unimpressed by a messiah in a wife-beater.

 

[lpetrich]

I've found Rael's home page with an English-language home page. Rael is Claude Vorilhon, a race-car driver and a journalist who became a UFO contactee, someone who claimed to have had close encounters of the friendly kind with extraterrestrial visitors. You can download his book from the site and read about how the Bible describes the meddling of ET's, and about how his ET friends took him on rides through outer space.

 

[Valjean]

I doubt even one in a hundred of the participants were even aware of the tenets and goals of Raelism.
These demos had nothing to do with the founders' religious movement.

 

[Axulus]

Is men's ability to go bare chested in public really protected by constitution?

 

[ronburgundy]

Is men's ability to go bare chested in public really protected by constitution?

She mispoke. It isn't whether the constitution protects men's right to go bare chested, but whether it does (or should) protect women's right to be treated equally under the law, and thus have equal ability as men are allowed to choose whether or not to be bare chested in public. Breast are not genitals, thus current "decency" laws discriminate who can and who cannot show their breasts in public based solely upon gender.

Unfortunately for women, and contrary to what many people believe, the ERA was passed by Congress but never ratified (due to the predictable bigotry of most Southern states). So, women do not actually have equal rights as men under the US Constitution.

 

[dismal]

Is men's ability to go bare chested in public really protected by constitution?

She mispoke. It isn't whether the constitution protects men's right to go bare chested, but whether it does (or should) protect women's right to be treated equally under the law, and thus have equal ability as men are allowed to choose whether or not to be bare chested in public. Breast are not genitals, thus current "decency" laws discriminate who can and who cannot show their breasts in public based solely upon gender.

Unfortunately for women, and contrary to what many people believe, the ERA was passed by Congress but never ratified (due to the predictable bigotry of most Southern states). So, women do not actually have equal rights as men under the US Constitution.

The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection to everyone under the laws.

What we are dealing with here is not that. It's laws that no one is allowed to show their naughty bits in public. Women's nipples happen to be considered naughty bits by many. You can argue this shouldn't be, but what is and isn't considered a naughty bit is somewhat arbitrary. Man's scrotum, penis, butthole and Woman's vagina, nipples, butthole.

 

[Jarhyn]

She mispoke. It isn't whether the constitution protects men's right to go bare chested, but whether it does (or should) protect women's right to be treated equally under the law, and thus have equal ability as men are allowed to choose whether or not to be bare chested in public. Breast are not genitals, thus current "decency" laws discriminate who can and who cannot show their breasts in public based solely upon gender.

Unfortunately for women, and contrary to what many people believe, the ERA was passed by Congress but never ratified (due to the predictable bigotry of most Southern states). So, women do not actually have equal rights as men under the US Constitution.

The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection to everyone under the laws.

What we are dealing with here is not that. It's laws that no one is allowed to show their naughty bits in public. Women's nipples happen to be considered naughty bits by many. You can argue this shouldn't be, but what is and isn't considered a naughty bit is somewhat arbitrary. Man's scrotum, penis, butthole and Woman's vagina, nipples, butthole.

And there it is. Provide the utility of this please or stop arguing that the law ought restrict it. I don't care what the law says here. We are not discussing the law but what ought be law. It says women cannot show nipples but men may. That is not equal protection, especially when a woman has a hot chest on a hot day and wishes to cool.off by removing her shirt and/or bra.

 

[dismal]

The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection to everyone under the laws.

What we are dealing with here is not that. It's laws that no one is allowed to show their naughty bits in public. Women's nipples happen to be considered naughty bits by many. You can argue this shouldn't be, but what is and isn't considered a naughty bit is somewhat arbitrary. Man's scrotum, penis, butthole and Woman's vagina, nipples, butthole.

And there it is. Provide the utility of this please or stop arguing that the law ought restrict it. I don't care what the law says here. We are not discussing the law but what ought be law. It says women cannot show nipples but men may. That is not equal protection, especially when a woman has a hot chest on a hot day and wishes to cool.off by removing her shirt and/or bra.

Sure, and when I'm hot I like to air out my scrotum.

 

[Jarhyn]

And there it is. Provide the utility of this please or stop arguing that the law ought restrict it. I don't care what the law says here. We are not discussing the law but what ought be law. It says women cannot show nipples but men may. That is not equal protection, especially when a woman has a hot chest on a hot day and wishes to cool.off by removing her shirt and/or bra.

Sure, and when I'm hot I like to air out my scrotum.

You have a scrotum on your nipples? That's... You should get that looked at.

A scrotum is close enough to the body's waste excretion areas that the smell alone would be a reason to keep yourself and most people's well hidden from free air flow.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Sure, and when I'm hot I like to air out my scrotum.

You have a scrotum on your nipples? That's... You should get that looked at.

A scrotum is close enough to the body's waste excretion areas that the smell alone would be a reason to keep yourself and most people's well hidden from free air flow.

but if it had free air flow, it wouldn't smell so bad...kind of like wearing sandals on your feet.

 

[ronburgundy]

She mispoke. It isn't whether the constitution protects men's right to go bare chested, but whether it does (or should) protect women's right to be treated equally under the law, and thus have equal ability as men are allowed to choose whether or not to be bare chested in public. Breast are not genitals, thus current "decency" laws discriminate who can and who cannot show their breasts in public based solely upon gender.

Unfortunately for women, and contrary to what many people believe, the ERA was passed by Congress but never ratified (due to the predictable bigotry of most Southern states). So, women do not actually have equal rights as men under the US Constitution.

The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection to everyone under the laws.

So, your theory is that US law has guaranteed that all people have been equal under the law since 1868?

"Equal protection" refers to protection from having one's basic civil rights protected. It does not guarantee that all people are treated as the same by all laws, nor does it prohibit discrimination under the law at a general level.

Women couldn't even vote until a half century after the 14th amendment, and it required a whole separate amendment (the 19th) to accomplish this.

And not until 100 years after the 14th, was the Civil Rights Act passed prohibiting specific types of discrimination and unequal treatment under the law.

And even that was not a guarantee of non-discrimination under the law in general, only in relation to specific issues/contexts.

What we are dealing with here is not that. It's laws that no one is allowed to show their naughty bits in public.

Arbitrary declarations that women's nipples are naughty and men's are not don't change the fact that an objectively identical action is prohibited for women but not for men. That is merely a rationalization to justify inequality under the law, no different than if black people's skin was declared "obscene" and thus justifying a law making it illegal to be black. If the Constitution does not prohibit differential restrictions and rights based upon either race or sex or any feature inherently tied to this distinction, then it does not guarantee equal rights and protections in any meaningful sense, and it doesn't.

The ERA (or something even stronger) is still very much needed.

 

[dismal]

Sure, and when I'm hot I like to air out my scrotum.

You have a scrotum on your nipples? That's... You should get that looked at.

A scrotum is close enough to the body's waste excretion areas that the smell alone would be a reason to keep yourself and most people's well hidden from free air flow.

What a bunch of nonsense. After all, I have a Constitutional right to air out my scrotum.

 

[dismal]

The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection to everyone under the laws.

So, your theory is that US law has guaranteed that all people have been equal under the law since 1868?

It's not very long, you could read it yourself. Everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law.

Thus I am entitled to air out my scrotum in public.

 

[RVonse]

If the laws and ordinances were more correct in my eyes, it should be illegal for men to go topless but legal for the women. After all, who wants to see some guy's big fucking gut hanging out. OTOH big tits are a whole lot more attractive IMO.

 

[RVonse]

Thus I am entitled to air out my scrotum in public.

If you can pull out your dick then I think I am entitled to show my ass crack.

 

[Jarhyn]

So, your theory is that US law has guaranteed that all people have been equal under the law since 1868?

It's not very long, you could read it yourself. Everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law.

Thus I am entitled to air out my scrotum in public.

So, I'm going to call your bluff by the fact that I think you ought be afforded that right to be fully naked. Many societies work perfectly well without such Victorian prudishness as our culture clings to.

The requirement imposed by what is in reality a nanny-state in this context is arbitrary and absurd.

 

[dismal]

It's not very long, you could read it yourself. Everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law.

Thus I am entitled to air out my scrotum in public.

So, I'm going to call your bluff by the fact that I think you ought be afforded that right to be fully naked. Many societies work perfectly well without such Victorian prudishness as our culture clings to.

The requirement imposed by what is in reality a nanny-state in this context is arbitrary and absurd.

I agree what some consider a naughty bit may seem somewhat arbitrary to those who would disagree, and that one can have a logically consistent position that the state should just stay out the business of labeling certain body parts "naughty bits" and banning their display. Another logically consistent position might be that in spite of the fact that some consider it arbitrary, there is a fair amount of consensus about what these naughty bits are and our legislative process has captured that consensus.

The argument that seems silly is where someone tries to argue it's OK to outlaw the display naughty bit X, but outlawing naughty bit Y violates someone's Constitutional rights.

 

[ronburgundy]

So, your theory is that US law has guaranteed that all people have been equal under the law since 1868?

It's not very long, you could read it yourself. Everyone is entitled to equal protection under the law.

Thus I am entitled to air out my scrotum in public.

I have read it and I have also read the 19th Amendment, the Civil Rights Act of 1965, and the facts of History showing that the 14th Amendment did virtually nothing to guarantee equality under the law, and that all these things combined still fail to guarantee it, and that is why there is not in fact equality under the law and laws that blatantly discriminate by gender, such as indecency laws that apply only to women.