State Ok's underage stripping.

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by avatar01

 

OK, let me rephrase... Just because someone is Sexually Mature does not mean that they are Emotionally Mature, nor does it mean that they are Legally Mature... Sorry, but this is just wrong...

So would you argue that when a girl turns 18 she IS emotionally mature? What exactly do you mean by emotional maturity? Don't we have emotions since childhood? How does one become "emotionally mature" ?

And now underage stripping is legal in iowa,

Does that mean if you use a cell phone to take a photo of one of these underage strippers that you could be arrested on federal charges for child porn.

federal law is that sexually explicit photos of children under 18 is child porn.
See 18 U.S.C. § 2256(2). A picture of a naked child may constitute illegal child pornography if it is sufficiently sexually suggestive.
www.law.cornell.edu...
how would photos of underage strippers not be sexually suggestive.

Its getting confusing as to what is child porn. and this law is Iowa just makes thing worse.
news.cnet.com...

Will the feds hide hidden cameras in one of these strip joints and start looking for men that take out the cell phones just so they can get search warrants for illegal photos.

This sounds like entrapment. this is entrapment.

[edit on 17-2-2010 by ANNED]

reply to post by TheWalkingFox


i agree with walking fox.

the united states needs to lighten up when it comes to nudity.

the whole world really needs to.

there's nothing wrong with the human body that it should have to be hidden.

there are people who are sexually aroused by shoes;

perhaps we should ban shoes?

but then there are also people who are aroused by bare feet;

so since there are people aroused by shoes AND bare feet;

i suppose we should just chop off peoples feet?!

but WAIT, there are people who are sexually aroused by severed limbs.

Do you see how ridiculous it is?

Evolution, God, Allah, or whatever you believe is responsible for you being here blessed you with eyelids.

If you see something you don't like, shut them.

so long as no one is being hurt, i see no problem with any form of nudity.

it's sad that VIOLENCE is more accepted in this country than nudity.




[edit on 2/17/2010 by JPhish]

There is just no answer here. Nobody can base the decision to strip or not to strip on anything other than the momentum of local voters. I say we all start voting for lower and lower stripper ages until we eventually run up against the local limit of mob rules. We might even get down to 7 in a place like San Francisco or Los Angeles or New York. It is all up to the local politicians and voters.

reply to post by Cabaret Voltaire


#ing retarded post.

IOWA is not a hotbed of LIBERALISM.


This is much more closely related to hard-core Libertarianism, which is a RIGHT-WING (like Iowans) philosophy.

Calling this an outcome of Liberalism is really retarded.

reply to post by JPhish


Toooo true.

Europe isn't full of horrible rape and murder and violence against women and its attitudes are MUCH more permissive.

reply to post by seethelight


Alright. Let's go with Libertarianism then. Let's give 7 year olds the liberty to strip for cash. We can provide security for them because everybody has a right to a safe work place, right? We can make sure they are safe and let them earn as much as they can earn in the free market. Can you come up any good reason not to?

reply to post by Cabaret Voltaire


You can tip them in Geoffrey Dollars





[edit on 17-2-2010 by cavrac]

reply to post by Cabaret Voltaire


Holy Crap man...you are saying this SO often and beating the point SO hard that I am starting to think you actually want to see 7 year olds naked. We get the point...get on with something different.

Now...I am not advocating pedophillia but I also agree that America needs to relax on the nudity thing. I have been to a nude beach in France. I was nervous as HELL to take my clothes off but man I realized I was the odd one out when I was still dressed. Once I relaxed I was really comfortable.

But seriously...enough with the 7 year old. This of course is opinion only but you are really starting to sound disgusting with it

-Kyo

Interesting...

There is also a thread that in which people discuss how more women than men blame the victims of rape.

I would have to say that this Iowa state law will only help to sway the women towards blaming the government instead of the victims!

Of course... only men will believe it is the fault of the attacker.

If one is legally responsible for themself and they do not rely on their parents or guardians for anything, I say that this is their choice. They can choose to screw up their lives any way they want to... just like all of us have done in the past.

But, really, you know the real reason why this is allowed?

Think about it...

It's so that dirty politicians can go to a state and see underage girls strip. It's so that Iowa gains some semblence of tourism. It's a scam to attract dirtbags.

The good news is that those girls will be praying for God's help not too long from now. Kids are so foolish at that age that they sometimes barely know what they've gotten themselves into. Making the law against it was just a way of glorifying it - a stupid thing to do -... but erasing the law is that much worse because it shows us just how much more crooked people are becoming.

Ahh... I know people just don't care about sanctity and privacy... everyone is so bored with their lives that they've gotta ruin something GOOD.

It's all inevitable.

Originally posted by JPhish
reply to post by TheWalkingFox

 

i agree with walking fox.

the united states needs to lighten up when it comes to nudity.

the whole world really needs to.

there's nothing wrong with the human body that it should have to be hidden.

there are people who are sexually aroused by shoes;

perhaps we should ban shoes?

but then there are also people who are aroused by bare feet;

so since there are people aroused by shoes AND bare feet;

i suppose we should just chop off peoples feet?!

but WAIT, there are people who are sexually aroused by severed limbs.

Do you see how ridiculous it is?

Evolution, God, Allah, or whatever you believe is responsible for you being here blessed you with eyelids.

If you see something you don't like, shut them.

so long as no one is being hurt, i see no problem with any form of nudity.

it's sad that VIOLENCE is more accepted in this country than nudity.




[edit on 2/17/2010 by JPhish]

Then stop wearing clothes forever, hypocrite.

The both of ya.

You do realize that a lot of violence stems from the things that happen when people are nude right?

If you don't like the ideas of the people in this forum who are against public nudity, then maybe you should shut your eyes? Why the response, hypocrite?

People who are aroused by shoes are not literally aroused by the shoes, but by the implications of the shoes (i.e.-style, class, shape, balance, athleticism). NO one wants to screw a shoe and if they do they were messed with at some point in their life.

Men who are aroused by women's feet are not literally aroused by just the nice feet, but by the implications of bareness at the foundation of the woman.

People who are aroused by severed limbs have problems and have been harmed and/or neglected.

If you think that there is nothing to hide, GO EVERYWHERE NAKED. Not just "designated" areas.

People didn't start wearing clothes as a fashion.. it evolved into one. I know it's shocking, but humans didn't use to be THAT vain. Things like clothes and... brains... used to have a purpose.

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
Then stop wearing clothes forever, hypocrite. The both of ya.

I never said that clothes are bad; I said that nudity isn’t bad. Simply because it’s not hot, doesn’t mean it is cold. Try to read more carefully.

You do realize that a lot of violence stems from the things that happen when people are nude right?

the answer to your rhetorical question is “No, you are mistaken.”

If you don't like the ideas of the people in this forum who are against public nudity, then maybe you should shut your eyes?

I never said I didn’t like your ideas, I said I disagreed with them. Try to read more carefully.

Why the response, hypocrite?

ad hominem

People who are aroused by shoes are not literally aroused by the shoes, but by the implications of the shoes (i.e.-style, class, shape, balance, athleticism). NO one wants to screw a shoe and if they do they were messed with at some point in their life.

There are plenty of people that want to have sexual interactions with shoes.

Men who are aroused by women's feet are not literally aroused by just the nice feet, but by the implications of bareness at the foundation of the woman.

semantics which ultimately lead to you being wrong.

People who are aroused by severed limbs have problems and have been harmed and/or neglected.

wrong. Rule #34

If you think that there is nothing to hide, GO EVERYWHERE NAKED. Not just "designated" areas.

um I might if it was warm enough and if it were legal? When one has no shame, there is nothing to hide.

People didn't start wearing clothes as a fashion.. it evolved into one. I know it's shocking, but humans didn't use to be THAT vain.

straw man

Things like clothes and... brains... used to have a purpose.

You should start employing the latter.

[edit on 2/17/2010 by JPhish]

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
everyone is so bored with their lives that they've gotta ruin something GOOD.

Meanwhile the religious right is so bored with their lives theyhave to tell everyone else how to act, think, drink, eat...whatever

No not all strippers will be praying to god at some point. There are many people who can live good lives without god...though some Christians here will argue that is impossible. Here is an idea...how about the left AND the right stay out of people's business.

Speaking of...here is a little primer on Age of Consent...we had to study this in Abnormal Sexuality....it's a good read if people want to know what they can and cannot do

AOC

People really need to relax...No I am not saying we should start getting 12 year olds on stage but according to the state laws in Iowa that girl is the age of consent...hence she can do as she pleases

-Kyo

[edit on 17-2-2010 by KyoZero]

You are dull.

You will find out for yourselves.

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
You are dull.

You will find out for yourselves.

So you have no response other than attacking me? What will I find out? That God is coming to beat us down? Well no offense but I am not worried

Thanks for the personal insult though

-Kyo

As the Satanist/Devil worshipers that are franchised in the NWO gain more and more control of the judicial and government they will more freely begin to bring out the various avenues of degradation they can imagine for you. This helps them maintain their control by keeping the society focused on it's decline rather than on enlightenment. Enlightened people aren't fooled and the corruption schemes fail. Degraded people are easily managed an pose little or no threat.

The day will come, if this progress is allowed to continue, when a car will pull up to your house, a government representative comes to your door, they congratulate you on you 5 year old child being selected and they reward you and take the child away. They tell you when to watch your child on TV. On that day you turn on the TV and watch something like a gladiators rape the child program and it's your child. If you say anything or complain, your unpatriotic, your anti-social, your an odd ball, a freak, a suspected terrorist. Your taken away and punished on live TV, so your neighbors no not to resist when their child's time comes. "Not possible", you say? "I'll fight to the death if that ever happens", you say? So what, it's too late by then. The key is still taking control of local government.

Hell, I am 17 ... so what do I care if girls my age start stripping? If you go to any public school in the nation you are likely to find some rather unsavory girls pretty much naked anyways? Aren't cheerleaders really just strippers anyways? Is this that much different?

reply to post by ReelView


Wow man...I gotta say that is some of the farthest reaching I have ever seen

-Kyo

Common guys its only ONE year, 17 is fine...Common guys its one ONE year, 16 is okay...Common guys quite being prudes, they're old enough at 15...Common people!

If you want us to start being nude like europeans, then move to Europe. Part of our attitude about being nude is that this once was a Christian nation. Once upon a time there were sacred and loyal bonds between a husband and a wife. Most nations of Europe are also a very passive. Where Americans should and still sometimes do draw lines in the sand on what we will accept as standards, Europeans will roll over to any whim that gets passed along.

The lack of setting standards in Europe has created a void that when filled will become a dangerous backlash to the relaxed ethics they hold today.

post by Bilw85


There is still a sacred and loyal bond. My wife and I are married 8 years amost. Not under your God and look...we are still completely fine. I am just sick and tired of people thinking the only way we'll survive is through a deity. There are still tons of good marriages out there and quit exxagerrating it. Yes you may not agree with 17 but instantly you just think we're gonna end up with 12 year old dancers. Well let me throw an exagerated example back at ya.

Let's not allow these 17 year old strippers. (ok fine I can handle that). Now let'smake stripping 21 and up. Now we'll just ban stripping! Uh oh! Christian values...man is the king of the castle...let's get women out of those workplaces...it goes against our morals

See it is ugly and terrible to assume regardless of what side you choose to fight against but I assure you that for ever conservative that thinks the liberals are wacky there are probably as many liberals that have the view that I just presented.

Europe relaxes sexual policy...look at the stats

Europe 4.9% of women have reported rape or sexual assault

America 14.8% of women have reported rape or sexual assault

BCS

ACSreply to

-Kyo