5 ms·
I agree, but it has always been tyrannical to legislate decency. What next, fines for not saying "please" and "thank you"?
by thegrimmest 5y ago
I agree, but it has always been tyrannical to legislate decency. What next, fines for not saying "please" and "thank you"?
- leephillips 5y agoThere’s s difference between being impolite and being indecent. We have peeping-Tom laws because it's beyond impolite to press your face against someone’s window and peer through the gap in her drapes. Are such laws tyranny? Most think not, because they are there to protect potential victims.
- thegrimmest 5y agoIf someone can stand on public property and press their face against your window, they should have the perfect right to do so, for as long as they see fit.
- leephillips 5y agoSo you think that the nearly ubiquitous peeping-Tom laws are unjust? You see no purpose to them?
- thegrimmest 5y agoYes? Draw your curtains before you change? Anything you can see from a public space you have the right to stare at? Our government shouldn't be in the business of policing modesty or decency. Only administering the basic peace.
- leephillips 5y agoWhen I first became aware of these laws I thought as you do. But after a while I came to think the laws are OK, maybe even necessary. You say “draw your curtains”, but in my example the curtains are already drawn. Unless you seal them with duct tape, there are almost always tiny holes or gaps through which someone can see, if they're allowed to do things, like pressing their face against the window, that have no legitimate purpose aside from the intention to invade someone’s privacy. Our laws routinely consider the intention and purpose behind the act.
- kubanczyk 5y agoIt's not tyrannical in the dictionary sense of the word. You simply don't like it, that's what your arguments boil down to in this subthread so far.