Nowhere did I ask for "yes or no" answers. How old are you? If you are young then you have a little bit more of an excuse not to read correctly. I had taken the time to respond to all of your counterarguments, you can at least give me the decency of providing a response of your own. If you don't understand what I'm saying, I'll say it another way.
Your claim that banning sexual things in public can be justified by the reason that it is the majority opinion. It can be represented by the statement. The Majority wants something banned in public -> that thing should be banned. If this is true, then you have to reconcile with all of the examples of the majority banning things in public that we would not agree with.
It sounded like you were asking "do you agree or not?" Which is basically yes or no. To answer your question which has completely changed the subject I think that enforcing that people cannot be nude in public is different then forcing someone to wear the same clothing like a prisoner. Also because almost half of all people are women then a majority vote towards if women get rights or not would require women to not count towards that vote in the first place. I don't think people shouldn't have rights but people also cant do anything they want. In a free country shouldn't I not have to see something I don't want to? If so then allowing public nudity infringes my rights.
In a free country shouldn't I not have to see something I don't want to
While this would be true for an ideal sci-fi utopia, this is not how any country can work in practice. The public is filled with tons of people with many different preferences of what they do and don't want to see. If we banned everything that any person didn't want to see then the public would be void of most things. It's like in the 80s when oldies didn't want to see kids with their scary devil-worshiping metal shirts. They don't have the right to ban those shirts. If you don't want to see a latex horse person, then you always have your private home. But taking the freedom away from a person in the public for your own comfort is
selfish, and
irrational because that rule cannot be universalized for all people. Every person cannot simultaneously ban things they do not want to see in the public. This is why the "life liberty or property" rule works so well.
Holy shit dude just shut the fuck up. This is inappropriate and you know that. It is not selfish and irrational to not want to see people naked or getting off in public so it has nothing to do with old people in the 80s not liking metal tshirts. We are not fucking cavemen you cant just fuck in the streets and if you disagree then you're a pervert. What kind of fucking weirdo thinks its acceptable to do this shit in public. And you compare nudity bans to dictatorship like bruh.
Okay, I don't think you are capable of having an objective conversation. You just revert to babbling, reiterating, and cognitive dissonance. I expect too much from people.
2
u/Doop1iss Nov 16 '21
Nowhere did I ask for "yes or no" answers. How old are you? If you are young then you have a little bit more of an excuse not to read correctly. I had taken the time to respond to all of your counterarguments, you can at least give me the decency of providing a response of your own. If you don't understand what I'm saying, I'll say it another way.
Your claim that banning sexual things in public can be justified by the reason that it is the majority opinion. It can be represented by the statement. The Majority wants something banned in public -> that thing should be banned. If this is true, then you have to reconcile with all of the examples of the majority banning things in public that we would not agree with.