Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Madame Dufarge
What would you consider an inconsistency?

Most restrictions on minimally offensive, minimally harmful behaviors would count. Some easy examples would include:

-ordinances against panhandling (the non-agressive type)
-laws prohibiting exposed underpants (popular in the "hip-hop" culture)
-restrictions on public profanity
-prohibitions on nude dancing in enclosed, adults-only businesses
-prohibitions on the public consumption of alcohol (as opposed to PI which can be a danger to others)

From time to time a thread will pop up about these things. Usually, a number of Freepers will defend these local laws as an exercise of the "community's right to determine standards of behavior" or the "right to decide what kind of society in which we will live." To some people, Nanny-like regulations are fine as long as they are imposed by local governments instead of the Feds.

That's where an inconsistency would appear...if someone thinks it's acceptable for a city to ban Playboy magazine but not to ban smoking.

70 posted on 01/21/2008 3:58:55 PM PST by timm22 (Think critically)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies ]


To: timm22
That's where an inconsistency would appear...if someone thinks it's acceptable for a city to ban Playboy magazine but not to ban smoking.

I agree.

71 posted on 01/21/2008 5:19:58 PM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson