In response to:

What's Wrong with Public Nudity?

Cletster Wrote: Dec 04, 2012 9:31 AM
Mr. Prager presents a noble and moral argument, framing it within the historical Judeo-Christian context. However, there can be equally valid arguments from different perspectives. One, a more mystical perception of the divine where it is up to humans to diligently seek out the sacred and being clothed or not is irrelevant to such a grand quest. But many cultures find genitals ugly and an affront, whether that exposure is seen to be obscene or experienced as and intrusion of unwanted titillation. However, eventually the usual “progressive” subversives may turn this into another phoney “human rights” issue. Afterall, politically correct society is neither religious nor moral. (www.numinousrationality.com)
If you want to understand Leftism -- and everyone needs to because it has been the most dynamic religion of the last one hundred years -- one good place to start is with San Francisco.

Or perhaps more precisely -- with nudity.

And even more precisely -- with public nudity.

Last month, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted by the barest (pun not intended) margin -- 6 to 5 -- to ban public nudity. By public nudity, the law refers only to displaying one's genitals in public. San Francisco women are still free to walk around topless. But that is not unique...

Related Tags: San Francisco Nudity