Datinghairstyle M Escorts En W Index Php Title Kaliganj India Action Edit Section 4 Datinghair Style The Volokh Conspiracy - Should Public Sex and Nudity be Legalized?

Hans Bader (mail):

Wrong. Most people are ugly (fat, flabby, and out of shape). Seeing them copulate in public would be quite unpleasant.

And the number of people who would have sex in public (given the lack of self restraint and bad taste of many people) is far greater than the number who would ever burn a flag, resulting in a much greater amount of offense.

Not to mention that flag-burning is political expression, which occupies a higher rung on the First Amendment heirarchy than sexual acts.

5.4.2006 7:01pm

(link)

Porkchop (mail):

Wrong. Most people are ugly (fat, flabby, and out of shape). Seeing them copulate in public would be quite unpleasant.

If the objection is esthetic, then it seems to me that first amendment standards applicable to art would apply. Are you saying fat ugly people having sex is obscene, but thin attractive people having sex is not?

5.4.2006 7:08pm

(link)

Anderson (mail) (

5.4.2006 7:18pm

(link)

Ilya Somin:

A draft card is government property, and the Supreme Court specifically relied on that fact in O'Brien. Burning your own piece of paper would certainly be protected speech.

I note also that my original post specifically stated that most public nudity/sex is not "expressive" and therefore not subject to First Amendment protection. But the minority which is an exception to this generalization deserves protection for the same reasons as flag burning.

5.4.2006 7:21pm

iDatinghairstyle M Escorts En W Index Php Title Kaliganj India Action Edit Section 4 Datinghair Style The Volokh Conspiracy - Should Public Sex and Nudity be Legalized?u t Style Sex rDatinghairstyle M Escorts En W Index Php Title Kaliganj India Action Edit Section 4 Datinghair Style The Volokh Conspiracy - Should Public Sex and Nudity be Legalized?k k b b Datinghair Affair Sex Datinghair