Supreme court on freedom of expression for nudity


The U.S. Supreme Court has always ruled that the pictures in nudist magazines, naturist photos and video documentaries are not illegal or obscene. They are protected by the First Amendment and are not subject to local obscenity laws or ordinances. The depiction of adults and children nude in the visual media has enjoyed constitutional protection in the United States since 1958, when the Supreme Court vacated a Court of Appeals finding that Sunshine & Health magazine could be obscene (Sunshine Book Co. v. Summerfield, Postmaster General, 355 U.S. 372). The right to depict adults and children in innocent nude poses has been upheld without a pause for over 41 years.  In case after case, the Supreme Court and lower courts have always upheld the constitutionality of "nudity without more," specifically referring to the nudist depiction as a fully Constitutional form of expression.

It is contended by naturists that naturists of all ages have the right to enjoy the freedom of going bare without the restriction of clothing or the negative scrutiny of their society. Nudity is one of the simplest human rights. We are all born and die with nothing but our naked bodies carried proudly throughout our lifetimes.

Similarly we also have Freedom of Expression guaranteed in the Constitution, what does our Supreme Court says about expression of similar "nudity without more"?

 
Reply   
 
ADVOCATE

Its Strange


                    Why have LAWS IN THE FIRST PLACE

                   LAWS ARE MADE TO PROTECT CULTURE

                  What is   CULTURE


                IT CHANGES FROM PLACE TO PLACE

                IN INDIA   LOCAL DIALECT CHANGES AFTER SAY EVERY 100MILES

                ITS STRANGE

               A SINGLE GIRL WALKING ON A  MAIN ROAD  IN MUMBAI IS VERY  FAMILIAR AND DO NOT RAISE EYEBROWS

             BUT THE SAME GIRL WAKING ALONE NEAR A VILLAGE OR EVEN IN JAIPUR OR INDORE OR  GAUHATI OR ALLAHABAD OR VARANASI OR PATNA WILL DEFINITELY RAISE EYBROWS


            PEOPLE WILL ASK WHY

           YOU INTROSPECT AND FIND ANSWERS

            I feel its difference in Culture and Mindset

           But will you blame that culture or mindset

          Blaming is very EASY

          CHANGING IS DIFFICULT

          Mr Aamir Khan , the other day , was advocating why should we have caste mairraiges

          He was referring to Marraige ads which say Aggarwal , Bhramins etc


         He was asking SOLUTIONS

        SOLUTIONS ARE THERE

        HAVE ONLY NAMES FOR NEWLY BORN ,

        DO NOT ALLOW  ANY ONE TO NAME NEWLY BORN AS AGGARWAL, SHARMA , MEENA , PAWAR ETC

       ONLY AMIT,  VEENA, MADHURI, DILIP  WITHOUT AGGARWAL ., KHAN , JHUNJHUNWALA ETC


       FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION ALSO CANNOT BE UNRESTRICTED as DRIVING LEFT HAND IS THE RULE and not AS YOU WISH

       In AMERICA IT BECOMES RIGHT HAND DRIVE

      IF AN AMERICAN COMES HERE AND SAYS I WILL DRIVE RIGHT HAND , WILL HE BE ALLOWED

     EXPRESSION IN ANY FORM AS MANY ASPECTS

     IT SUBLIMES, IT GIVES ANXIETY, IT GIVES RISE TO HATRED,  TO REVOLUTIONIZE , TO ATTACK, TO RAPE, TO LOVE, TO TENDERNESS, TO BE ANGRY OR POLITE , TO ACHIEVE OR DESTROY  ____________and never ending list EVER CHANGING FROM PERSON TO PERSON

 

         WITH SUCH CONGL:OMERATE OF MIXED, DIVERSE CULTURES  FREEDOM OF NUDITY IN NAME OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION WILL BE A BURDEN ON INDIAN SOCEITY

        ITS DEVASTATING IMPACT MAY HAVE FAR REACHING EFFECTS LIKE DIVORCE  THE SAME DAY OF MARRAIGE AND SO ON AND SO FORTJH

        SUP COURT SHOULD BE CAREFUL AND APPLY FULL MIND

       I ALSO HOPE YOU WILL REVERT WITH YOUR RIGHTFUL ARGUMENTS WHICH I WILL TRY TO REBUT

 

      WITH REGARDS

 
Reply   
 



Please note that US Supreme Court has given very bold and honest judgment about "nudity without more". Why nudity without more? Because morality is not domain of State but of religion and Constitution is secular without religion. Therefore interpretation of fundamental rights has to be done without biased influence of morality or religion. Same is the case with Indian Constitution. It is also a secular Constitution. Constitution is the supreme law. Laws are enacted by legislature on behalf of the Constitution to implement the secular Constitution.


Fundamental rights are to be enjoyed to the widest possible manner. Moreover the fundamental rights cannot be made the scapegoat of culture or some restricted mindset. You are already agreeing that culture is ever changing and dynamic. Sati was part of culture. Untouchability was part of culture. Child marriage was part of culture. Dowry is part of culture. There are so many things that are part of culture. We cannot blindly accept all this just because it is our culture. Also our Constitution does not stand by all this so called culture, whose sole aim is to infringe upon the freedom and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Instead Constitution guarantees freedoms and liberties to everyone so that an indivdual can be ultimately free and liberated from the shackles of the so called culture created by some corrupted and vested interests.


If fundamental rights are to be decided on yardstick of culture then the very purpose of Constitutional guarantee will become shallow and hollow. Partly because of spineless behaviour of courts in this country, we are already facing problems of moral brigade/ moral policing who impose their own culture over the freedom and liberties of people guaranteed by Constitution,  by doing violence in various parts of the country.


There is another example of bold and honest judgment of US Supreme Court about freedom of Expression in City of Charleston v. The Kanawha Players. I had mentioned about it in this thread http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Everyday-violation-of-right-to-free-speech-57084.asp Our Supreme Court should also behave in a courageous manner and start giving bold and honest judgments like these to put a firm check on unlawful self styled moral/ cultral brigade of this country.

 
Reply   
 
ADVOCATE

NO

I totally disagree


Fundamental Rights are THOSE RIGHTS WHICH DO NOT IMPUNGE ON OTHERS AND HAVE DEVASTATING EFFECT.


Any  INDIAN CITIZEN  expressing views which are ANTI NATIONAL CANNOT BE SAID TO BE FREEDOM OF SPEECH

 

To discuss on your examples


SATI  was playing with life of an INNOCENT  LIFE OF A WIFE  WHICH WAS DONE  FORCIBLY BY THE SOCEITY

THE SAME JOHAR PERFORMED TO AVOID PERSECUTION AT THE HANDS OF INVADERS IS BEING STILL REVERRED IN HISTORY

 

TODAY IF A WIFE OF HER OWN VOLITION ENDS HER LIFE IF THE HUSBAND DIES BECAUSE OF THE LOVE  BY RESORTING TO SOME KIND OF YOGA OR JUST  CONSUMING ANYTHING IN WHAT CATEGORY YOU WILL PUT THIS DEATH

BUT THE SAME WIFE , IF SHE GOES TO  A COURT OF LAW TO TAKE PERMISSION TO END HER LIFE OUR CONSTITUTION MAY NOT AGREE  , OR EVEN  US SUP COURT MAY NOT AGREE

THE DEMAND TO END ONES LIFE WILL COME UNDER FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OR NOT

IF RIGHT TO EXPRESS AND RIGHT TO LIFE CAN BE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS WHY NOT RIGHT TO END ONES LIFE

AND YOU ARE GIVING SATI EXAMPLE AS IF WHENEVER A HUSBAND USED TO DIE IN INDIA HIS WIFE USED TO DIE WITH HIM


IT WAS FORCED SATI WHICH WAS BAD AND IT INFRINGED ON THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO LIVE

UNTOUCHABILITY WAS NEVER A PART OF ARYAN CULTURE AND I CAN PROVE IT WITH INNUMERABLE INSTANCES FROM OUR KNOWN SCRIPTURES


BUT AS TIMES WENT BY IT BECAME A WAY OF LIFE


BHAGWAT GITA STANDS AS A SINGLE SCRIPTURE WHICH TRIED TO REVOLUTIONIZE THIS SYSTEM AND BRINGING ALL THE CASTES AT EVEN KEEL

IF YOU GO THROUGH CHAPTER 18 , THE LORD SAYS I HAVE CREATED ALL VARNAS (NOT CASTE) ON THE BASIS OF SWABHAVA  (HIS THOUGHTS AND  WHAT HE WIL:L NATURALLY DO)  AND KARMA  (HIS DAILY ACTS)

IF WE GO BY WHAT HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED BY THE LORD FOR A BHRAMIN , I AM AFRAID ,  RARELY WE MAY FIND A FEW IN WORLD WHO WILL PASS THE TEST


SO WHEN UNTOUCHABILITY INFRINGED ON THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO LIVE THIS WAS TO BE BANNED

AND TO THIS EXTENT OUR CONSTITUTIONAL WRITERS ARE TO BE PRAISED TO GIVE THEM THIS RIGHT TO LIVE BY DECLARING UNTOCHABILITY AS A PENAL OFFENCE

BUT EVEN SO HAS IT BEEN ERADICATED FULLY

ASK YOURSELF AND YOU WILL KNOW THE ANSWERS

CHILD MARRAIGE CAME INTO PLAY TO AVOID FORCIBLE CARRYING OF UNMARRIED DAUGHTERS BY THE THEN RULERS

WE HAVE BEEN RULED BY INVADERS FOR 1000 YRS

STILL OUR CULTURE IS VIBRANT

TO GIVE YOU A FEW EXAMPLES TO NEGATE THAT CHILD MARRAIGE WAS EVER A WAY OF LIFE IN OUR CULTURE

ONE CAN QUOTE DEVI  SITA IN RAMAYANA , DRAUPADI IN MAHABHARATA ,  RUKMINI  -THEY WERE NOT CHILD WHEN MARRIED

AND ABOVE ALL OUR LADIES HAD A CHOICE TO  SELECT THEIR HUSBANDS LIKE  SWAYAMVARS WERE HELD

AND LOVE MARRAIGES WERE ALSO DONE AS LORD KRISHNA DID IN CASE OF RUKMINI


FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS MAY NOT BE DECIDED  ON YARDSTICK OF CULTURE

BUT THEY MUST BE DECIDED ON THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS OF WHAT IMPACT WILL IT HAVE ON OTHERS IN SOCEITY


WHY SUPREME COURT MADE PUBLIC SMOKING AS A PENAL OFFENCE 

BECAUSE IT HAD DEVASTATING EFFECT ON OTHERS  HEALTH AND ALSO GAVE A WRONG SIGNAL TO HE YOUNG CHILDREN


IF YOUR SOCEITY IS SO BOLD COME IN OPEN AND SUPPORT   THE  PERSONS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED SOMETHING WHICH THE ISLAMIC WORLD SAYS IS AGAINST THEIR BELIEFS

YOU WILL NOT DO SO

THAT CANNOT BE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

BECAUSE THE RERACTIONS MAY BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT HINDUS OR BUDDHISTS DO


COMING TO YOUR SPECIFIC  QUESTION , NUDITY

NUDITY IN PRIVATE MAY BE ALLOWED BUT EXPRESSING IT PUBLICLY MAY NOT BE ALLOWED

WHAT YOU DO IN YOUR BEDROOM OR YOUR HOTEL ROOM IS YOUR PERSONAL MATTER BUT  IT CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO BE TAPED AND SOLD FOR PUBLIC VIEWING

The Other day You will demand one is FREE TO MAKE INTERCOURSE IN PUBLIC

IF YOU WANT TO DO AWAY WITH 'A' CERTIFICATE  ITS YOUR WISH

SUPREME COURT SHOULD NOT ALLOW IT , IN MY OPINION

PL REVERT  WITH YOUR VALUABLE RESPONSE SO THAT COURSE OF LEARNING GOES ON

WITH REGARDS
Mob : 9929596546

 

 

 

 

 

 
Reply   
 

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE
Fundamental Rights are THOSE RIGHTS WHICH DO NOT IMPUNGE ON OTHERS AND HAVE DEVASTATING EFFECT.

Exactly, in other words, your fundamental rights are absolute untill you violate fundamental rights of others. If you claim your fundamental rights are violated and you have power over fundamental rights of others, you are under strict burdern of proof. Your mere allegations, personal conjectures and opinions will not suffice to restrict the fundamental rights of others.

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE
IF RIGHT TO EXPRESS AND RIGHT TO LIFE CAN BE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS WHY NOT RIGHT TO END ONES LIFE

It should be be since fundamental rights are negative rights, one can choose to enjoy or not. If Supreme Court is making some wrong judgment it does not mean we stop using our mind. Supreme Court is not infalliable, in the past it has made various mistaken judgments.

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS MAY NOT BE DECIDED  ON YARDSTICK OF CULTURE

BUT THEY MUST BE DECIDED ON THE FUNDAMENTAL BASIS OF WHAT IMPACT WILL IT HAVE ON OTHERS IN SOCEITY

It is good that you are at last accepting the fundamental rights cannot be decided on yardstick of culture. Similarly they cannot be prevented merely because of some moral conjectures that it will have some "undesirable" effects on society. It needs to be remembered that our Constitution is secular constitution without morality. Morality is domain of religion. Whever their is conflict or confusion, the Constitution will tilt towards secularism. Above all one is under strict burdern of proof when demanding powers over fundamental rights.

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE
IF YOUR SOCEITY IS SO BOLD COME IN OPEN AND SUPPORT   THE  PERSONS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED SOMETHING WHICH THE ISLAMIC WORLD SAYS IS AGAINST THEIR BELIEFS

YOU WILL NOT DO SO

THAT CANNOT BE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT

BECAUSE THE RERACTIONS MAY BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM WHAT HINDUS OR BUDDHISTS DO

Fundamental rights have to stand on their own strength and not on the strength or type of response of others. The day fundamental rights begin decided on basis of frivilous reasons like "response", culture etc. of others starts happening, then that day the guarantee of fundamental rights looses its meaning and get reduced to just deception of guarantees. Let that day not happen. To protect the sancity of fundamental rights, they stand above all these lame excuses.

 

Instead of running behind faith, it is better to run behind truth. Truth shatters the stupidity and makes life much better than any blind faith. Faith is not bad thing but then at particular point of time that faith must materialize as truth(Truth is truth as it is, it is not what is truth to you or me)

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE
NUDITY IN PRIVATE MAY BE ALLOWED BUT EXPRESSING IT PUBLICLY MAY NOT BE ALLOWED

WHAT YOU DO IN YOUR BEDROOM OR YOUR HOTEL ROOM IS YOUR PERSONAL MATTER BUT  IT CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO BE TAPED AND SOLD FOR PUBLIC VIEWING

Good that at last you are accepting, understanding that being completely nude and seeing completely nude is your undamental right within your private space. Your private space is not limited to your bedroom or hotel room. It can also be created at public space. For example when you are using public urinal or toilet, you create private space around you. I will illustrate it with an example below:

 

Notice: If you click the below mentioned publicly accessible link, you will see nude pictures:

 

http://www.debonairblog.com/blog/2012/08/nri_lady_posing_nude_at_nudist_beach_showing_tits.html

 

Please note, nobody is compelling or forcing you to click the above link. You have been told what is inside the link. You have free choice to click or not to click.

 

If you click you have decided to enjoy your freedom of expression as per your free will. If decided not to enjoy your freedom of expression, then also it is your free will. There is no injury to your fundamental right in any choice you make. Both parties are enjoying their fundamental rights to their fullest extent without causing any injury to anybodies fundamental right. Where is the problem? The problem is your personal belief system that is uncomfortable with the idea that is being discussed.

 

Similarly taping and selling such material for viewing is perfectly Constitutional so long it has a notice about what is inside it. Also the act of deleting explicit scenes from A category movies by Censor Board is grossly unconstitutional. When anyone goes to see an A movie, he or she is going to enjoy the fundamental right to see nudity to the fullest extent in common private space of cinema hall. Preventing choice of such people to view fullest nudity is clear violation of fundamental right of expression.

 

Just as you are free to choose to enjoy or not enjoy your fundamental rights out of YOUR OWN FREE choice, every body else too have the same right of  THEIR OWN FREE choice of whether or nor to enjoy their fundamental rights, and not have someone else force his/ her/ their choices on them - this is called FREEDOM and LIBERTY. Without FREEDOM and LIBERTY we are just like monkeys in the zoo.

 
Reply   
 
ADVOCATE

Its EXTREMELY STRANGE

IF MORALITY IS LINKED WITH CULTURE AND NOT SECULARISM

NO CONSTITUTION CAN BE WITHOUT BASIC HUMAN MORALS WHICH ARE UNIVERSAL IN NATURE

CREATING PRIVATE SPACE AND IN PUBLIC HAVE DIFFERENT CONNOTASTIONS IN DIFFERENMT COUNTRIES

MERELY PRESCRIBING BURKA FOR A MUSLIM GIRL AND THE GIRL ADHERING TO IT CANNOT BE ( OF HER VOLITION) CANNOT BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL

WHY THEN THE BOUNDARIES OF COUNTRIES ARE THERE

HAVE ONE COUNTRY IN WHOLE WORLD AND HAVE ONE GOVT AND HAVE ONE FAITH

BUT CAN IT BE SO

CAN IT BE SO EASY

WHY THEN NATURE HAS MADE FEW WHITE AND FEW BLACK

NO TWO HUMANS CAN BE IDENTICAL

SO  THERE HAS TO BE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VIEWS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE

THERE HAVE TO BE SOME LAWS WHICH WILL GOVERN HUMANITY TO ACT WISELY AND TENDERLY

ANY COMMUNITY < COUNTRY , RELIGION, CULTURE OR RELIGION WITHOUT ANY LAWS PRESCRIBIBG DAY TO DAY LIFE WILL RUN AMUC

WHY THEN HAVE CONSTITUTION AT ALL

WHY THEN  ASK SUPEREME COURT TO GIVE ITS RULING ON NUDITY

THERE IS BOUND TO BE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CULTURES OF US , UK, FRANCE , ITALY , SUDAN , INDIA , CHINA , JAPAN

AND SO LAWS AND THE CONSTITUTION IS MADE AS PER THE EXISTING BELIEFS AND THE PRESENT DAY SITUATION OF THE COUNTRIES

        There is a beautiful song in Film CHITRALEKHA  sung by LATA DIDI

        IT QUESTIONS

 

                               ' SANSAR ME BADALTE DHARMO KO KAISE ADARSH BANAOGE'


                             YOU WILL FEEL I AM BATTING FOR YOU

 

                              BUT I AM STATING A FACT

 

                            WHATEVER ARGUMENTS YOU HAVE MADE MAY BECOME TRUE FOR WHOLE  INDIA SAY AFTER 50; 100;200YEARS IF THE ATMOSPHERE OR SITUATION BECOMES EXACTLY SAME AS IN US .

                           IT MAY BE TRUE TO CERTAIN PARTS OF MUMBAI WHERE PEOPLE CALL THEMSELVES MUCH MORE ADVANCED (I DO NOT KNOW ION WHAT RESPEC)  TO CREATE A  PRIVATE SPACE FOR YOUR NUDITY WISH

                         BUT TO SUPERIMPOSE IT ON WHOLE OF INDIA IS REALLY PREOSTUROUS

                         AS IT WILL IMPUNGE ON OTHERS RIGHTS

                         IN WESTERN WORLD PROSTITUTION IS LISCENCED

                       BUT THAT DOES NOT GIVE ANYONE A RIGHT TO WALK  NUDE ON BUSY STREETS OF PARIS, UK, Berlin, NEW YORK , CHICAGO

                       USA is governed thro Irving Wallaces  SEVEN MINUTES

                      PREVIOUSLY IT WAS GOVERNED THRO MIXED CULTURES OF BRITISH, GERMAN, FRECH AND RED INDIANS

                   US HAS COME A LONG WAY TO REACH WHERE  THEIR SUP COURT HAS JUDGED  NUDITY IN TERMS OF PRIVATE SPACE AND PUBLIC

                   THE DIVISION IS RAZOR THIN

                   ONE CAN JUSTIFY DOING ACTS IN PUBLIC AND SAY I WAS DOING IT IN PRIVATE SPACE

                 Then YOU may not have  HE and She toilets seperately

                 IN FACT THERE SHOULD BE NO CURTAIN TO HIDE A LADY FROM WHAT SHE IS DOING

FURTHER ONE CAN SAY I  LOVE THIS LADY AND  SO I HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE WHAT SHE LOOKS LIKE WHEN SHE IS IN TOILET OR NAKED IN HER BED

                FOR HIM IT CAN BE A PRIVATE SPACE

                I  FEEL FOR INDIA THE SITUATION IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THAT OF US

                FURTHER YOU HAVE NOT COMMENTED  MY ARGUMENTS WITH REGARD TO CHILD MARRAIGE < UNTOUCHABILITY  AND  GITA  AND OTHER THINGS

               PL COMMENT ON THAT TOO

               AS IT THROS LIGHT ON THIS TOPIC TOO .

 

             With regards ,

                 

                     

              

 
Reply   
 

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE


Its EXTREMELY STRANGE


MERELY PRESCRIBING BURKA FOR A MUSLIM GIRL AND THE GIRL ADHERING TO IT CANNOT BE ( OF HER VOLITION) CANNOT BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL

 

why covering a woman is not unconstitutional but uncovering is?


WHY THEN THE BOUNDARIES OF COUNTRIES ARE THERE

HAVE ONE COUNTRY IN WHOLE WORLD AND HAVE ONE GOVT AND HAVE ONE FAITH

BUT CAN IT BE SO

 

we should take the good side of all countries and culures and reject the bad sides.  nudity is not bad at all. when you are a kid, you are also nude oftentime. if nudity was bad according to you then you are also bad logically.
 

CAN IT BE SO EASY

 

we have to make it easy.
 

WHY THEN NATURE HAS MADE FEW WHITE AND FEW BLACK

NO TWO HUMANS CAN BE IDENTICAL

SO  THERE HAS TO BE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN VIEWS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE

 

yes. our views differ from your view. so it is very natural according to you.

THERE HAVE TO BE SOME LAWS WHICH WILL GOVERN HUMANITY TO ACT WISELY AND TENDERLY

 

what is wise is merely your opinion. it is not fact.


THERE IS BOUND TO BE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CULTURES OF US , UK, FRANCE , ITALY , SUDAN , INDIA , CHINA , JAPAN

 

yes but there MUST BE A GENERAL FEATURE PERTAINING TO HUMAN CULTURE.
 

AND SO LAWS AND THE CONSTITUTION IS MADE AS PER THE EXISTING BELIEFS AND THE PRESENT DAY SITUATION OF THE COUNTRIES

 

yes and belief HAS TO BE CHANGED IF IT IS AGAINST HUMAN NATURE.
 

      I

       
 

                            WHATEVER ARGUMENTS YOU HAVE MADE MAY BECOME TRUE FOR WHOLE  INDIA SAY AFTER 50; 100;200YEARS IF THE ATMOSPHERE OR SITUATION BECOMES EXACTLY SAME AS IN US .

 

why not now? media can change public opinion.

                           IT MAY BE TRUE TO CERTAIN PARTS OF MUMBAI WHERE PEOPLE CALL THEMSELVES MUCH MORE ADVANCED (I DO NOT KNOW ION WHAT RESPEC)  TO CREATE A  PRIVATE SPACE FOR YOUR NUDITY WISH

                         BUT TO SUPERIMPOSE IT ON WHOLE OF INDIA IS REALLY PREOSTUROUS

 

well then please start it at mumbai. forget rest of india, illiterate, superstitious, dominating, uncivilized, barbaric india.

                         AS IT WILL IMPUNGE ON OTHERS RIGHTS

                         IN WESTERN WORLD PROSTITUTION IS LISCENCED

                       BUT THAT DOES NOT GIVE ANYONE A RIGHT TO WALK  NUDE ON BUSY STREETS OF PARIS, UK, Berlin, NEW YORK , CHICAGO

                       USA is governed thro Irving Wallaces  SEVEN MINUTES

                      PREVIOUSLY IT WAS GOVERNED THRO MIXED CULTURES OF BRITISH, GERMAN, FRECH AND RED INDIANS

                   US HAS COME A LONG WAY TO REACH WHERE  THEIR SUP COURT HAS JUDGED  NUDITY IN TERMS OF PRIVATE SPACE AND PUBLIC

 

wrong. supreme court order nudity in public magazine. so it is public.

                   THE DIVISION IS RAZOR THIN

                   ONE CAN JUSTIFY DOING ACTS IN PUBLIC AND SAY I WAS DOING IT IN PRIVATE SPACE

                 Then YOU may not have  HE and She toilets seperately

 

in our home do we have a HE or SHE toilate? then why in public place they are required?

                 IN FACT THERE SHOULD BE NO CURTAIN TO HIDE A LADY FROM WHAT SHE IS DOING

 

why need at all?

FURTHER ONE CAN SAY I  LOVE THIS LADY AND  SO I HAVE A RIGHT TO SEE WHAT SHE LOOKS LIKE WHEN SHE IS IN TOILET OR NAKED IN HER BED

 

we do it in p*rn films.

                FOR HIM IT CAN BE A PRIVATE SPACE

                I  FEEL FOR INDIA THE SITUATION IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THAT OF US

 

savage barbaric india.

               

                 

                     

              

 
Reply   
 
ADVOCATE

DO NOT EQUATE MAGZINES WITH PUBLIC PARKS

THERE IS A SEA DIFFERENCE

HE PURCHASES THE MAGZINE OF HIS OWN VOLITION KNOWING WELL WHAT WILL BE IN IT


PUBLIC PARK OR A TRAIN OR A PUBLIC TRANSPORT IS A DIFFERENT CUP OF TEA  ALLTOGETHER

Also there is a warning that the magzine contains ADULT CONTENT and a pNON-adult must not view it .


FURTHER

Greivous error

Calling names

You seem to be all pervading and All knowing

Every thought is BAD AND BARBARIC SAVAGE  UNLESS IT IS IDENTICAL TO WHAT YOU SAY

ONLY GODIS EVER PERVADING AND ALL KNOWING

YOU CAN CALL IT NATURE

YOU KNOW

WHAT KNOWLEDGE IS

ITS  TO KNOW MORE AND MORE OF LESS AND LESS  AND TO KNOW  LESS AND LESS OF MORE AND MORE

I FEEL

                 NO AMERICAN  FATHER AND MOTHER , WHO BATS FOR YOUR ARGUMENTS AND WANT FREE SOCEITY ,

                WILL SEE A PORNOGRAPHIC MOVEIE  WITH HIS WIFE , 12 Yrs DAUGHTER and 16YRS SON  IN WHICH THE BROTHER MAKES AN INTERCOURSE WITH SISTER OR  SON MAKES INTERCOURSE WITH HIS MOTHER OR FATHER  EXCHANGES WIVES OR SHARES HIS WIFE WITH HIS FRIENDS

                YOUR VIEWS ARE BATTING FOR THIS KIND OF A SOCEITY

                ASK  ONES MOTHER , BROTHER , WIFE , SON OR SISTER


               EVEN WHEN THEY ARE AN AMERICAN FAMILY , I STILL DO NOT FEEL THAT THE FAMILY WILL ENDORSE THIS KIND OF PORN MOVIE  VIEWING SITTTING SIDE BY SIDE IN THEIR HOMES OR EVEN IN CINEMA THEATRES

 

               When that day comes the whole fabric and INSTITUTION  of a family will be destroyed

               PL RECONSIDER WHAT YOU ARE SAYING

              IF STILL YOU FEEL OTHERWISE I HAVE NO FURTHER ARGUMENTS

              AND GOD FORBIDS OUR SUP COURT SHOULD NOT COME UP WITH SUCH A JUDGEMENT

             OTHERWISE EVERY FATHER WILL DOUBT HIS SONS EXISTENCE AND WILL MAKE A DNA TEST BEFORE ACCEPTING HIM AS A SON

            AND IF THIS HAPPENS THE EDIFICE OF  FAITH ON WHICH THE RELATIONSHIPS STAND  WILL BE DESTROYED

           THIS WILL BE A GREAT LOSS TO HUMANITY  AS SUCH

 

 

 
Reply   
 

Originally posted by : SURESH GODBOLE





Every thought is BAD AND BARBARIC SAVAGE  UNLESS IT IS IDENTICAL TO WHAT YOU SAY

 

the same argument goes to you also. everything is savage barbaric unless it is identical with your view.

 

ONLY GODIS EVER PERVADING AND ALL KNOWING

 

i don't believe in god. i believe in humanity.



I FEEL

                 NO AMERICAN  FATHER AND MOTHER , WHO BATS FOR YOUR ARGUMENTS AND WANT FREE SOCEITY ,

                WILL SEE A PORNOGRAPHIC MOVEIE  WITH HIS WIFE , 12 Yrs DAUGHTER and 16YRS SON  IN WHICH THE BROTHER MAKES AN INTERCOURSE WITH SISTER OR  SON MAKES INTERCOURSE WITH HIS MOTHER OR FATHER  EXCHANGES WIVES OR SHARES HIS WIFE WITH HIS FRIENDS

 

of course nobody in this world view p*rn movie with their parents or do they?. now for your information, go to california where women in bikini moves on road fearlessly and an american father see them with his 12 Yrs DAUGHTER and 16YRS SON.  also you know NOTHING about america. there father encourages their children to do s*x with women. if they don't do their parent worried. 


go to the nude sea beach of greece. there men and women move naked in the beach with no problem. please do some research before posting and don't try to superimpose your pathetic view on world. the world is much better place than what you think. it will be much better if all pathetic people like you no longer exist.
               

YOUR VIEWS ARE BATTING FOR THIS KIND OF A SOCEITY

                ASK  ONES MOTHER , BROTHER , WIFE , SON OR SISTER


               EVEN WHEN THEY ARE AN AMERICAN FAMILY , I STILL DO NOT FEEL THAT THE FAMILY WILL ENDORSE THIS KIND OF PORN MOVIE  VIEWING SITTTING SIDE BY SIDE IN THEIR HOMES OR EVEN IN CINEMA THEATRES

 

this is your pathetic view and not reality.

 

               When that day comes the whole fabric and INSTITUTION  of a family will be destroyed

 

america and europe still have families. so your prediction is not correct.

              

              AND GOD FORBIDS OUR SUP COURT SHOULD NOT COME UP WITH SUCH A JUDGEMENT

 

that depends on future. judges of the next generation may issue such order and that day indian youth will be the happiest creature on earth.

           

  OTHERWISE EVERY FATHER WILL DOUBT HIS SONS EXISTENCE AND WILL MAKE A DNA TEST BEFORE ACCEPTING HIM AS A SON

 

not every father sir. father like you will do that.

           

AND IF THIS HAPPENS THE EDIFICE OF  FAITH ON WHICH THE RELATIONSHIPS STAND  WILL BE DESTROYED

           THIS WILL BE A GREAT LOSS TO HUMANITY  AS SUCH

 

in america and europe where this happened, the edifice of faith did not lost  so your prediction is again wrong.

 

you are poor judg of human character sir.
 


 
Reply   
 

suresh godbole and others like him

 

adult expo 2011 is organised in hong kong, china, asia. i think nudity is no longer europe's property, it comes to asia now. just have a look:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwM4m64TuTo

 

this is asia adult expo 2010. have a look at it:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQfoagyziMw

 

dear keeper of meaningless bullsh*t hindu morality, do you think that china has lost its family or chinese father suspects the identity of his son? such bullsh*t.

 

just look at the other side: how much money one can make from nudity. its millions overnight.

 
Reply   
 

LEAVE A REPLY


    

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  



 

Search Forum:








×

  LAWyersclubindia Menu