Mothering Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
11,133 Posts
Quote:
Police have granted a permit but threatened to arrest any topfree women. That constitutes unwarranted intimidation, being in direct conflict with the 1st Amendment to the Constitution. Numerous court cases have upheld topfreedom and even nudity in conjunction with freedom of speech.
It says the case was dismissed, not lost...or are you referring to a different case than the Nov. 1 one?

Quote:
2005 November 01. CASE DISMISSED. The topfree Moravia 4 appeared in court tonight to hear that the case against them was dismissed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,067 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by applejuice
No, that is the case.
Then they didn't lose their case, it was actually the DA's case against them and it was thrown out.


Quote:
2005 November 01. CASE DISMISSED. The topfree Moravia 4 appeared in court tonight to hear that the case against them was dismissed. A few weeks ago, a letter from the District Attorney's office admitted it had no case and would not continue. Nonetheless, it tried to intimidate the women by suggesting they might be arrested if they did the same thing again.

We must ask: did the DA's office not know it had no case from the beginning? This is a victory for four courageous women---in a battle that should never have gone on this long, nor even been fought at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,139 Posts
I'm confused. I thought it was a specific NY state law that women had an equal right to remove their shirts in public as men.

Quote:
In 1992 New York's highest state court ruled that women could be topfree in public. Since 1992 women in the highly populous State of New York have enjoyed the right to bare their chests whenever men could do so. As one New York Justice wrote in his concurring opinion, "One of the most important purposes to be served by the equal protection clause is to ensure that 'public sensibilities' grounded in prejudice and unexamined sterotypes do not become enshrined as part of the official policy of government."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by the sunshine
Boobs are scary. They are evil, in fact. This case should not have been thrown out. We must protect the morals of this country.

That, by the way, was sarcasm.

(.)(.)
it's true. dirty dirty boobs.

nak
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,064 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
No, they lost their case and they are threatening to "flash" tomorrow, and have been promised to be arrested if they do... This is in CA and they are protesting the governator's policies and the election Tuesday.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,009 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by kama'aina mama
I'm confused. I thought it was a specific NY state law that women had an equal right to remove their shirts in public as men.

Seriously? So I can walk around with my boobies flopping everywhere?! Awesome! Not that I ever, ever would, but awesome nonetheless.

Kelly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
866 Posts
I'm not sure which case is which. The women in the case I've heard about were claiming a first amendment right--and I thought that a court had held that they didn't have a first amendment right to bare their breasts. That seems a little odd to me, if only because it would seem to fall under the cases which held during the '60's that it was okay to wear shirts or pants made from flags because, although they did not seem to be speech, the intent of the wearer made them a form of expression. I didn't see the case, or the reasoning, so I'm not sure what went on.

Are there links out there?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,064 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
They were not arrested;

They were threatened with arrest and with being listed as sex offenders...
:

The CHiPs were afraid there would be accidents on the nearby highway with people ogling the women and their barebreasts.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
776 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by applejuice
They were not arrested;

They were threatened with arrest and with being listed as sex offenders...
:

The CHiPs were afraid there would be accidents on the nearby highway with people ogling the women and their barebreasts.


:
:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,009 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by applejuice
They were not arrested;

They were threatened with arrest and with being listed as sex offenders...
:
Are you sure? I was watching CNN or something at the gym and the little ticker thing at the bottom said "Breasts Not Bombs activists were arrested for removing their tops and exposing their breasts in order to protest..." and then it cut to commercial.

Either way--got a link?

Kelly
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,192 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by CookieMonsterMommy
Seriously? So I can walk around with my boobies flopping everywhere?! Awesome! Not that I ever, ever would, but awesome nonetheless.

Kelly
LOL...you can do it in Columbus, OH too...
:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,009 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by AllyRae
LOL...you can do it in Columbus, OH too...
:
As soon as I lose 25 lbs, get my tummy tuck, and my boobs perk up, I'm there!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,009 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by wynkenblynken&nod
Cookie, I will if you will
But honestly, I am expecting these women to be on a Girls Gone Wild video and anyone who watches it probably won't know their reasoning, just that "THOSE ARE BOOBIES!!""


lol
Nah, because I'm sure most of these mamas had normal boobies, not 18 year old, plastic boobies.

Unfortunately, I'm sure it'll be seen as "Women acting like over emotional wackos".

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,139 Posts
Quote:
Carol Clarke, 54, of Branchport; Barbara Crumb, 61, of Branchport; Claudia Kellersch, 40, of La Jolla, Calif.; and Madeline McPherson, 40, of Rochester, have been charged with exposure, a violation.

The group were with topless male companions, who do not face charges.
Girls gone wild, indeed.
 
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top