Iceland Bans All Strip Clubs

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dwyer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Beau_Ouiville said:
Freedom of artistic expression. Its part of free speech.
Click to expand...
Oh brother. I observed nothing during my brief trip to a gentlemen’s club that constituted expression of any sort. It was pointless and only concerned tittilation, nothing more.

Speaking as an art student, I saw nothing artistic either.

The respect accorded to the nude model in life drawing classes was not given to the women at this club. The National Organization for Women should have protesters outside of each one since their only purpose is to treat women like sex objects.

God bless,
Ed
Choose Jesus.
 
edwest2 said:
Oh brother. I observed nothing during my brief trip to a gentlemen’s club that constituted expression of any sort. It was pointless and only concerned tittilation, nothing more.
Click to expand...
Folks used to say that about the polka, the can-can and then dancing at all!
 
The purpose of the state is to promote virtue and destroy vice. Strip clubs make destroying vice easy… they actually packed a bunch of vice into an above-ground edifice. No bunker busters even required.
 
stanmaxkolbe said:
I have to disagree becasue there are people in our great nation that would ban my bible study group becasue they think Christians are harmful.

I tell you how to ban strip clubs don’t go and the free market will close them; down but don’t ban someone’s freedom.
Click to expand...
That is kind of what is happening anyways. Strip clubs are nowhere near as big as they were ten years ago.
People move on to other things.
 
Adeodatus said:
Only documents written under the direct inspiration of God are above reproach.
Click to expand...
Which amounts to one set of documents in all history - the Bible. We all, I believe, acknowledge that.

I don’t see your point.
 
Adeodatus said:
The purpose of the state is to promote virtue and destroy vice. Strip clubs make destroying vice easy… they actually packed a bunch of vice into an above-ground edifice. No bunker busters even required.
Click to expand...
That’s right. There used to be Vice Squads. But self-described artists and intellectuals kept saying “We want it. We want it.”

So they kept “pushing the envelope of what the public finds acceptable.”

It took 40 years but here we are. Global porn 24/7, strip clubs, one out five people walking around with an STD. This is better? This is healthier? This is more rational? I don’t think so.

God bless,
Ed
Choose Jesus.
 
edwest2 said:
It took 40 years but here we are. Global porn 24/7, strip clubs, one out five people walking around with an STD. This is better? This is healthier? This is more rational? I don’t think so.
Click to expand...
Sure, but that’s what you have to put up with when people have free will, not even counting the 1st Amendment and a general revulsion against censorship.
 
edwest2 said:
Oh Beau, why do you look at history this way?
Click to expand...
Our constitutional history has less to do with vice squads than with control of the government and support of individual rights. The Bill Of Rights features restrictions on government and support of individual rights, not vice control. So do the later amendments. The one measure of control (Prohibition) was eliminated.

And I tend not to click on links. Please state your point.
 
edwest2 said:
Oh brother. I observed nothing during my brief trip to a gentlemen’s club that constituted expression of any sort. It was pointless and only concerned tittilation, nothing more.

Speaking as an art student, I saw nothing artistic either.

The respect accorded to the nude model in life drawing classes was not given to the women at this club. The National Organization for Women should have protesters outside of each one since their only purpose is to treat women like sex objects.
Click to expand...
As an art student you should be aware of the multiple times people have protested works of art and asked for them to be banned. The Danish cartoons for example, were derided as pointlessly provocative, much modern art is seen as pointless.

I do not agree that banning people from showing off their body for profit in a private establishment is pointless. It is a huge involvement of the government into the private affairs of the individual. I agree with another poster that this implies that laws against prostitution would be considered wrong- I think this is true and do support the repeal of government prohibition on prostitution.

I would not that there are countries where masturbation is illigal, where extramarital relationships are severely punished, where the drawing of Muhammad’s picture can lead to a death sentence, etc. The supporters of these laws always talk about the immorality of the actions that are banned. But the immorality of an act and whether it should be illigal have very little to do with each other. I believe in a society where the maximal amount of individual freedom exists and only actions that directly interfere with the rights of others are regulated by law.

To preempt some comments: there does not exist a right not to be offended, or a right to have your children protected from seeing others act “immorally”, etc.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Sure, but that’s what you have to put up with when people have free will, not even counting the 1st Amendment and a general revulsion against censorship.
Click to expand...
Catholics have to practice self-censorship every day. For secularists, it’s appropriate restraint, which rests on the concept of community values.

God bless,
Ed
Choose Jesus.
 
edwest2 said:
Catholics have to practice self-censorship every day.
Click to expand...
You may do that if you like. And, it might be good advice for young people, but I’m a mature adult Catholic and I’ll read or view whatever I care to.
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
Sure, but that’s what you have to put up with when people have free will, not even counting the 1st Amendment and a general revulsion against censorship.
Click to expand...
No. People may evilly choose to murder because they have free will, but that doesn’t mean that murder should be legal. Nor do I consider it an acceptable form of expression or speech.

What a perversity to use the 1st Amendment to shield villains and their villainy.
 
There goes tourism. Ice sculpting and whale watching anyone?
 
Rich_Olszewski said:
There is a difference between 1950s’ stripping that ended in a blackout and the show it all, do it all performances of today.
Click to expand...
I believe both are to excite the sexual passions of men therefore evil.:bigyikes:
 
Adeodatus said:
No. People may evilly choose to murder because they have free will, but that doesn’t mean that murder should be legal. Nor do I consider it an acceptable form of expression or speech.
Click to expand...
Sigh. Neither does anyone else, and you should know that.
What a perversity to use the 1st Amendment to shield villains and their villainy.
Click to expand...
No one, but no one believes that murderers are covered by the free expression aspect of the 1st Amendment.
 
John_Bradley said:
I believe both are to excite the sexual passions of men therefore evil.:bigyikes:
Click to expand...
I guess you’re not married.

From Day 1 of our honeymoon, my wife was not at all averse to exciting my sexual passion. And, I don’t think that other wives refuse to do the same for their spouses. 🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top