We read:
"Every conceivable medium, including art and pornography, has been drawn into figuring out where art ends and pornography begins. Now a lowly rear window in Montana has become the battleground for this contentious debate.
Shanna Weaver of Great Falls has a sticker on the rear window of her SUV that depicts a woman's silhouette above the word "SKIN."
Great Falls resident Brian Smith, meanwhile, parks across the street from Weaver's SUV and says he should not be forced to endure what he considers to be a sacrilegious display of the human body.
The logo itself appears to be from Skin Industries, an organization that dubs itself a "Sports Fashion" company. The sticker is akin to the famous mudflap girl silhouette that's often seen on big-rigs – it contains no shadowing but is more detailed than the famous mudflap girl.
Weaver and Smith have discussed it, with Weaver taking the opinion that her First Amendment rights condone the sticker, whereas Smith feels it's obscenity. Smith took his complaint to the police, but the officer sent to investigate the dispute decided the sticker wasn't obscene. So, for now at least, the sticker remains in plain sight.
Source
Ladies must not appear to have implants, I guess
8 comments:
I for one would like to personally assess the woman who posed for this to see if it accurately and properly depicts her. Despite the 1st Amendment rights issue, I would hate to see and false advertising.
This man appears to be another person damaged by religion. When will it stop?
isn't obscenity protected under the first ammendment?
If not, why aren't those people who make "art" by putting the Holy Cross in a jar of urine arrested for obscenity?
Or people defecating on the flag?
"Or people defecating on the flag?"
Sometimes a person just has to take a crap.
jwenting:
No, obscenity is not covered under the First Amendment, but there are very strict rules on what is "obscene," and so very little speech is actually considered obscene.
The person who complained is a whining busy-body. He is no different than lefties who complain and moan about the slightest thing that offends them.
Yes, it is mildly sexual...so what? Western nations have extremely low birthrates. It makes more sense to encourage this kind of imagery, rather than suppress it.
Mr. Smith needs to get a life.
So glad to see that religious tolerance is alive and well on these response boards. I was afraid the poor guy was going to be attacked as a mentally defective nut trying to shove his dogmatic beliefs down other people's throats. Oh wait, must've been another board where people took tolerance seriously....
The truth is, "obscenity" is subject in the United States to "Community Standards." If this woman parked her SUV in an Amish driveway, she might be subject to public indecency laws. I say "might," because it would have to go to trial and 12 of her community "peers" would have to declare the artwork obscene.
If this man can get a prosecutor to prosecute, and a jury to convict, the image in question would be "obscene" in her community and it would have to go.
As for this man's being "damaged" by religion - I take it the damage done by the objectification of women in a secular society and the promotion of the "ideal" female form isn't damaging at all to anyone, eh?
Young girls exposed to such images of "perfection" develop feelings of inadequacy that can result in life long issues, and it is a serious problem. But again, that's ok, because it's not OBSCENE.
We are all exposed to "images of perfection" whether physical, or in terms of desirable social status or the "character" approved by current society.
Failure to meet any of these standards may well result in a sense of social failure, inadequacy, resort to unhealthy habíts like abusing alcohol, drugs or diet, and very possibly suicide.
Of course such vulnerable people can so easily become victims of dominating individuals or organizations - whether to fleece them finacially &/or emotionally with "saving" products or "saving" religions.
Post a Comment