Republican Montana lawmaker seeks to outlaw provocative clothing

www.greatfallstribune.com...

More from "you just can't make this **** up dept."

HELENA (AP) – A Montana lawmaker is seeking to strengthen the state's indecent exposure law, stopping just short of his wish to outlaw yoga pants.

Rep. David Moore on Tuesday introduced House Bill 365 in the House Judiciary Committee in response to a group of naked bicyclists who rolled through Missoula in August.

The proposal would expand indecent exposure law to include any garment that "gives the appearance or simulates" a person's buttocks, genitals, pelvic area or female nipple.

Are we headed down into a Conservative Fundamentalist theocracy? When the human body and the clothes on them is a source for legislation something is drastically wrong.

The Republican from Missoula says tight-fitting beige clothing could be considered indecent exposure under his proposal. He says he wouldn't have a problem with people being arrested for wearing provocative clothing but that he'd trust law enforcement officials to use their discretion.

Moore says he believes yoga pants and men's Speedo-style swim briefs should be illegal in public.

On TV we can watch be-headings, murders and torture but we need to be protected from "provocative" clothing....? WTF!!

Pandering to his voter base......
2nd

Ridiculous. This will never pass.

ETA: I bet this is the type of man who hates Muslims and Islam, but thinks... "But they know what they're doing when it comes to women!"

BOOOOOO!!!!! HISSSSSSS!!!!!


OTOH, there are some people you don't want to see nekkid. I propose a limited policy based on aesthetics--a panel decides who is okay to expose themselves and who is not.

The answer you will get is "pandering to the base". It has become the party of stupid. What has any of this to do with jobs! Everyone should walk naked down the street.

It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "Spandex is a privilege, not a right". Soon the fashion police and the REAL police will be one and the same.

originally posted by: olaru12
www.greatfallstribune.com...

More from "you just can't make this **** up dept."

HELENA (AP) – A Montana lawmaker is seeking to strengthen the state's indecent exposure law, stopping just short of his wish to outlaw yoga pants.

Rep. David Moore on Tuesday introduced House Bill 365 in the House Judiciary Committee in response to a group of naked bicyclists who rolled through Missoula in August.

The proposal would expand indecent exposure law to include any garment that "gives the appearance or simulates" a person's buttocks, genitals, pelvic area or female nipple.

Are we headed down into a Conservative Fundamentalist theocracy? When the human body and the clothes on them is a source for legislation something is drastically wrong.

The Republican from Missoula says tight-fitting beige clothing could be considered indecent exposure under his proposal. He says he wouldn't have a problem with people being arrested for wearing provocative clothing but that he'd trust law enforcement officials to use their discretion.

Moore says he believes yoga pants and men's Speedo-style swim briefs should be illegal in public.

On TV we can watch be-headings, murders and torture but we need to be protected from "provocative" clothing....? WTF!!

Then you have to get a panel together and decide what is "provocative". Shoulder? Is shoulder ok? Or is it now? How about tummy? Oh tummy's out? Ok, no more bikinis for you! Calves? Are calves ok? Ok, Calves are in, thighs are not. I mean what's next telling women it's back to swimming in head to toe ankle outfits? Men too? We don't want to be provocative now. Burkas? Hajibs?

a reply to: olaru12

Let's not make any new laws please, can't we all just agree that yoga pants are universally despised and move on?

Sounds like to me that Rep. Moore, is perhaps consumed with "lust of the flesh" and doesn't have the
fortitude to take personal responsibility like a good Republican, and just not look at what he deems sinful exposure.

originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: olaru12

Let's not make any new laws please, can't we all just agree that yoga pants are universally despised and move on?

No, they're not universally despised.
But I'm with you on the no new laws thing.

a reply to: greencmp

Well... I don't despise them on all people.

I gotta admit I'm not keen on the idea of explaining to my little girl why the old hairy guy has his schlong bulging out of his speedo at the playground.

originally posted by: Hoosierdaddy71
I gotta admit I'm not keen on the idea of explaining to my little girl why the old hairy guy has his schlong bulging out of his speedo at the playground.

Where do you live? In a trailer park?

a reply to: olaru12

Why do humans hate their body parts?

originally posted by: InverseLookingGlass
a reply to: olaru12

Why do humans hate their body parts?

Actually I Think it's just Americans...

It's not uncommon to see nudity in public parks in Europe and no one gives it a second thought.




www.chicagotribune.com...


Americans glorify violence, torture, blood and guts, shooting people, but the human body is to be hidden and legislated against being exposed. imo...symptoms of a very sick culture. No wonder the www. is mostly porn. See the disconnect?

Could just be that his wife isn't much to look at.

Yoga pants are a blessing to my eyes. I'll move to Argentina should they ever be banned.

The ones who claim to care so much about 'decency' always turn out to be the biggest pervs.

a reply to: olaru12

Well here's hoping for some topless feminist protests if this gets any traction at all.

I would join them, but I sunburn too easily.

I sure the hell don't wanna see Michael Moore or Rosie O'donnel in spandex.

Second verse same as the third verse saying:

What is seen can not be unseen.

Based on this, one could say his puritan roots are showing.

The USA, has more issues with the human body than any other country in the world. What will they ban next, if they so object the showing of the human body in all of its glory? Will they ban the works of the great artists of days gone past? Where they drew, painted and carved out of stone the human body, leaving nothing out? Will now the sculpture of David be banned cause he is nude, or the picture of the Breath of life be banned due to a lack of clothing? Shall now the works of Monet, Picasso, and other great artists no longer be of wonder to those who wish to view them?

And then there is the matter of free speech. Clothing is more than just something that covers the body, it is a statement of the person and what they show to the world. If the provocative dress of today is so offensive, is it any more than that of yesteryear, with that of the 50's and 60's, where the rage was mini skirts and hotpants? Where women dressed to reveal the full shape of the body?

Take a good look at the old films, the teen age films and musicals of the 50's, 60's and 70's. Was that clothing any less provocative?