Nudity vs. Clothing

[Violet]

---

I am in no way saying that being naked in public is "wrong".

I am merely saying that 1. A lot of people don't like it. 2. This country is democracy. 3. Go figure.

I personally think that being "offended" is the crappiest excuse ever. It completely lacks argument and is no way to defend your position. As Stephen Fry has said "So you're offended. So fucking what?".

But, all I'm saying, is that since majority rules in democracy, and since we live in a democracy, and since the majority don't like people being naked in public, then that's what's going to happen. By what logic do we make it an exception to the ways of democracy, when we live in a democracy?

And if we ignore the democracy and "offense" part, then by what reasoning should we change anything anyway? If we indeed think "So what if people are offended by nudity?", then why don't we also think "So what if you, Sae (and others who think like you), are offended by those who are offended by nudity?", in which case... by what reasoning should we change the way things are, and go against democracy?

And also, even if it was agreed upon by the majority: It's certainly a big change to make, and may not be something to just be rushed into, lol (especially naked, lol ).

EvF

---

Majority does not rule in democracy... the side with the best presented arguments wins in democracy (If you try debate that point, might I draw your mind to racial slavery and woman rights laws in the history of the USA?).

So we live in a democracy. The majority of the people think that homosexuals shouldn't be allowed to marry. Should they be barred from marriage just because most of the morons think so?

Is a blasphemy law logical? Of course not. Making a law simply because someone is offended is a type of blasphemy law.

Edit: Actually, correction to this point. We live in a republic (in america)... though one might actually declare it Oligarchy. We are actually very lucky to not be a democracy.