[MD] So cometh MOQ, what next?

[Platt Holden]

Hi Horse,

Great to hear from you. 
 
> Platt Holden wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > Well, we can see one contributor who uses the MOQ to justify his view
> > that it would be OK if sanctions against public nudity were removed. 
> > Personally I don't agree that a world full of naked people would
> > constitute a pragmatic application of the MOQ. But, I could be wrong. :-)
> 
> Platt, what is it about public nudity that frightens you so much? 

Frighten? What makes you think public nudity frightens me? The question
is, "Does the MOQ justify a social morality of public nudity? If so, on 
what basis?"

> Personally I couldn't care less if other folk choose to wander around
> without clothes - why would you?

Well, I generally support laws against indecent exposure. Many find 
exposing one's genitals offensive. Would you approve of fornicating in 
public? If not, why not?

> What I find a lot more worrying is the
> strange need to insist that everyone behaves in the way that you think is
> correct.

Where do you get the idea I insist that every behave in the way I think is
correct? I have opinions. So do you. 

>It would also be a good idea to at least attempt to answer Arlo's
> question without recourse to insult.

How have I insulted Arlo that he hasn't insulted me?  Should I roll over
and play helpless every time he makes a snide personal remark? 

> Arlo's Question:
> 
> "Why is it "moral" for American men to forbid women from exposing their
> breasts in public based on these same men finding breasts "sexually
> provocative", but its not moral for Muslim to do the same with other body
> parts?"

I don't except the premise that Muslims find a woman's face "sexually 
provocative." Arlo has provided no evidence to support such a claim. 
Anyway, I don't see in the rules of MOQ discuss that one must answer every 
question put to her or him. That would be silly. No one is on trial here. 

Best regards,
Platt