tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15777355.post4076670676043822386..comments2023-08-11T07:45:18.050-07:00Comments on MetroMan - Confessions of a Metrosexual Dad: Missing the Forest for the Trees - Language and Subject matter Not Suitable for ChildrenPhillyMachttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01479117700460550973noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15777355.post-74405039565665511142007-10-10T21:46:00.000-07:002007-10-10T21:46:00.000-07:00Very interesting and insightful post.I believe par...Very interesting and insightful post.<BR/><BR/>I believe part of the confusion here involves the rights of the individual verses the rights of the group.<BR/><BR/>Yes, indivuduals have the right to copulate, but what about the rights of the viewing public? I'm ignoring the normal laws against public nudity/indecincy.<BR/><BR/>A friend and I were walking from BART (local transit) to The SF Opera House, on our way to, where else? an opera. It was Gay Pride Day. <BR/><BR/>For the six block treck I was treated to what I considered a disgusting visual and audible presentation of base human lust. I feel my rights were violated. But since I have standaards, I guess my rights don't count. <BR/><BR/>A homeless woman sued New York City because they committed her to a hospital when she was soiling herself in her own waste. The court settled in favor of her RIGHT to live on the street in her feces and vomit. What about the rights of the passers by?<BR/><BR/>Eventually, I hope something like group moality comes back into vogue. Even my atheist friends are offended at naughty behavior. So, God isn't the linch pin of this dialogue. <BR/><BR/>Think about the rights of the group the next time you stroll past a eurine soaked doorway and breathe in the scents wafting by.CyberGalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10528589788766721922noreply@blogger.com