A member of Congress promotes a bill criminalizing any sexual solicitation of under 18s online … and most of you know the rest of the sordid story. Another politician proposes a bill to specify that the location of “unnatural and lascivious” acts increases the penalty, in particular, that it be a second degree felony to commit such acts within 1,000 feet of a public park. Where was that politician arrested (and, of course, presumed to be innocent) for allegedly offering $20 for the right to perform fellatio on an undercover police officer? A public park, of course.
I’ve long believed that the “religious right” and other moralists (including the sanctimonious left) are motivated too much by introspection (the former into their overactive libidos, the latter into their personal stinginess) and too little by empirical observation of how most people go about their lives. To the examples above (and there are plenty of others), we can add a peek at the tax returns of prominent advocates of redistributing the wealth of others (the Gores, the Clintons, etc.).
I get religious right and overactive libidos, I don’t get sanctimonious left and personal stinginess.
Oh, I got it…finally.
I thought thats what the parks were for — alcohol, lascivious behavior and overall enjoyment of nature. All in moderation of course. Let’s regulate sex — we can give people licenses and permits and improve the flow of money to the local governments. Think of all the parks, streelights and other improvements!
Yeah! Charge for an “oral sex in public” license — kind of like a hunting license. And the fees would go to make the lavs less disgusting. Cool idea, Orkster.
hahahahahahaha
That is a great idea! We could even charge politicians a “taking bribes in season” license and use the money to pay for more parks, where they could have sex (after paying for the “oral sex in public” license).
No Sam, we have to be concerned about privacy! Have you ever had to give a bribe? It’s all about creating a special connection between the two people. We, proponents of personal freedom, least of all should seek to intrude upon this strictly personal matter!