Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)

22. A question mark implies a request for clarification. I think the request was reasonable

Reply to stevenleser (Reply #20)

Tue Sep 24, 2013, 03:26 PM

Sep 2013

based on the OP. You will note that in their reply to me the OP noted "some level of permissible public sphere
interest in personal expression" but wouldn't say specifically whether that included women being topless and if
so only in some specific cases.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

31 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I do not favor open-carry for pornography. [View all] cthulu2016 Sep 2013 OP

BUT MAH FREEDOMS! Ohio Joe Sep 2013 #1

That is a spot on caricature of an anti-gun zealot. Well done. aikoaiko Sep 2013 #3

Nah... The caricature would be that they are making up for... shortcomings Ohio Joe Sep 2013 #4

Your analogies titillate me. aikoaiko Sep 2013 #2

Open carry or concealed carry. House of Roberts Sep 2013 #5

I drive a pickup truck and I legally carry concealed. ... spin Sep 2013 #11

I had relatives fight on both sides. Neoma Sep 2013 #31

Speaking as a nudist, I love wearing cotton clothes. upaloopa Sep 2013 #6

Crap. I forgot to get a plain brown wrapper at the dirty book store. riqster Sep 2013 #7

So you think women that go topless in public should be arrested? n/t PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #8

You should include the sarcasm tag. People are going to think you were serious with that question. stevenleser Sep 2013 #9

The OP mentioned 'person's. Women count as persons. The OP also mentioned 'nudity' PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #14

Oh boy, you WERE serious. Talk about creating straw men and leaping to conclusions all in the stevenleser Sep 2013 #15

No, it's a textbook example of asking an OP to clarify their views using a specific case. n/t PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #18

You phrased it in such a way that you were more accusing than asking. nt stevenleser Sep 2013 #20

A question mark implies a request for clarification. I think the request was reasonable PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #22

That is a rather tendentious reply. cthulu2016 Sep 2013 #10

They worked really hard to put words in your mouth that sound bad. stevenleser Sep 2013 #17

Tits don't kill people, people kill people. 1-Old-Man Sep 2013 #12

What if I'm drop-dead gorgeous? Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #19

I've never had any doubt but that you are. 1-Old-Man Sep 2013 #29

You could poke an eye out! n/t PoliticAverse Sep 2013 #23

Excellent post, thanks cthulu2016. Scuba Sep 2013 #13

So concealed-carry of porn is acceptable then? cleanhippie Sep 2013 #16

Yes, and remember -- Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #21

Lack of public nudity laws doesn't seem to have caused Portland to implode. Egalitarian Thug Sep 2013 #24

Nude in public doesn't bother me. Guns do. hunter Sep 2013 #25

I want to meet the nudist who can still carry concealed. Nuclear Unicorn Sep 2013 #30

Does that apply to cops as well? (nt) The Straight Story Sep 2013 #26

I agree. bemildred Sep 2013 #27

Good analogy. You want to own a firearm, fine by me. But flaunting it everywhere you go nomorenomore08 Sep 2013 #28