Neurotik: because this is supposed to be a free country, and the state has no compelling interest in the private affairs of individuals when those private affairs are freely and harmlessly engaged in. Duh.
Now if either you or Shodan would like to actually add something of substance, I’ll be glad to listen. So far you haven’t said anything more than “Nuh uh!” And I can have a conversation like that with my best friend’s 7 year old.
Except, obviously, when it comes to things like taking my money to help someone else out. Isn’t my income a private affair?
A “compelling interest” can always be manufactured to justify passing a law. I don’t actually disagree with you about the City Council’s position on lapdancing or prostitution. Nor do I disagree with taxation or welfare or anything like that. But I don’t pretend that my support for these things comes from anything but my desire to see my morality imposed on society as a whole. Therefore, I don’t get outraged when someone tries to do the same thing on an issue I’m opposed to. It helps keep my hypocrisy quotient to a minimum.
Considering your entire OP was pretty much devoid of substance I find this laughable. Basically, it amounted to a 7 year old’s temper tantrum, complete with name calling. Wah-wah, someone’s doing something I don’t agree with, wah-wah. People are disagreeing with me - they’re big stupidheads! Wah-wah-wah.
But this is the Pit and if your OP actually had more substance it would be in GD.
I wouldn’t worry about this law; I believe that it will be struck down as unconstitutional.
So long as dancing the lambada is legal, making lap dancing illegal is an EP violation.
And stoid? Yer making an ass of yourself.
Sua
What exactly are you talking about here, Neurotik, since you keep bringing it up. Are you bitching about the existance of income taxes? And this relates how, exactly? If you can find a thread in which I demanded that you cough up money to support my pet charitys, please direct me there.
If you wish to see your morality imposed on society as a whole, that’s you, no me.
Are you really unable to see the difference between imposing a morality, any morality, and allowing each individual to * decide for themselves * what is moral behavior, assuming no harm comes to others in the exercise of that behavior? Because if you sincerely do not see a distinction between “I choose for you” and “we all choose for ourselves” then this is definitely a waste of time.