Pages

▼

Thursday, 8 September 2011

When tolerance becomes flat-out licence

The choice is Orwell or Huxley, I guess.
Not walking around starkers in the middle of town. When did this become a controversy?  I think I'm safe in saying that when a society can't tell a saggy old pervert to put his trousers on, there is something seriously amiss.

This is a city where there's a lobby for having sex in the city parks and public lavatories.  San Francisco now makes Sodom and Gomorrah look like an Amish village.
at

5 comments:

  1. AnonymousThursday, 8 September 2011 at 01:02:00 GMT-7

    Uh, you can read the subtitle on that sign; can't you?

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousThursday, 8 September 2011 at 05:07:00 GMT-7

    The sign isn't what he's commenting on. Click the link.

    ReplyDelete
  3. SergejThursday, 8 September 2011 at 05:12:00 GMT-7

    Ewww.

    ReplyDelete
  4. eonThursday, 8 September 2011 at 05:15:00 GMT-7

    Anonymous;

    Read the link. SF is having a debate about requiring people walking around naked in public to put a towel on the seat before they plop down on it on public transportation.

    The fact that people are running around bare-everything, in public, in front of not just adults but children, is not even being commented on. Just "please put something between your personal waste-disposal system and where somebody else is going to sit later on".

    And even that is considered a Draconian oppression of peoples' right to "personal expression" in 'Frisco. Everything there is relative, of course; I wonder how far I would get walking down a street in that town wearing a Colt Single Action Army .45 in a Trimble holster. Or just wearing an American flag pin on my lapel.

    My guess is that the councilman who proposed this "oppressive" measure will have to worry about naked people doing "sit-ins" in his office- unless of course they just decide to beat or stab him terminally. (Remember what happened to George Moscone.)

    After which, the perpetrator will no doubt claim that the act was "justified" in the defense of his or her personal right of "self-expression". Plus, of course, being excused because they were high on Twinkies at the time.

    SF's response, of course, will be to ban Twinkies. Processed sugar, you know.

    (I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not.)

    cheers

    eon

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousThursday, 8 September 2011 at 05:45:00 GMT-7

    Well, I just made a right fool of myself.

    ReplyDelete

Rules for submitting comments:

1. No profanity. I maintain the pretense that this is a family-friendly site.

2. Stay on topic. A bit of straying and off-hand commenting is okay, but hijacking the discussion is right out.

3. No ad hominem attacks. Attack the subject, not the other person on the thread and keep the discussion civil.

4. No spamming or commercial endorsements. These get deleted immediately.

Tip: Beware of putting hyperlinks in your comments–especially at the end. For some reason, Blogger interprets these as spam.

Note: Due to the recent spate of anonymous spamming, registration for comments is now required.