Indecent exposure laws and how they are unconstitutional
Indecent exposure laws seem to be overlooked by many libertarians. People say it’s needed and to “think of the children”. I understand where they are coming from, but I came to a conclusion.
Here’s the problem, how people dress are an expression of themselves, people could dress in black, red, green, blue, whatever they want. Being naked is just another expression, it is no different than if a person chooses to wear pink.
Banning nudity because it offends some people is just as outrageous as banning t shirts that have pictures of Muhammad on it or forcing women to wear burqas because it may offend some muslims.
People say to “think of the children”, but this platitude can also even be applied to to the examples already mentioned. Some muslims can say “think of the children” to justify forcing women to wear burqas or banning t shirts that have pictures of Muhammad. Instead of violating everyone’s constitutional rights to express themselves, here’s an alternative: teaching your kids that some people live differently than you do.
As you can see, these indecent exposure laws are a violation of the first amendment and are a result of people having the government shove their values down everyone’s throats.
Article from r/Libertarian: For a Free Society