Leave a comment

Comments 13

derhofnarr November 1 2009, 14:04:17 UTC
if they slip there could be some interesting ER situations . . . .

Reply


zixi November 1 2009, 14:09:19 UTC
Oh, god, it's been CRAZY between the drama from last year when they tried to register those people as sex offenders (why does our country not understand that nudity and sex and different things and why is violence fine to see and naked bodies not? AUGH) and all the preparation this year. The police have spent the last month TERRIFIED of Halloween (between the time change leaving things open an extra hour, it being on a Saturday, and it being post-football game for CU's homecoming weekend)

Reply


spiffystuff November 1 2009, 15:09:01 UTC
Bah. Let people do some crazy shennanigans as long as no one gets hurt :P

Reply


karaksindru November 1 2009, 17:40:09 UTC
ZOMG! Teh childrens might see some naughty bits! Oh noes!!!!11!one!

I agree with zixi up there; America's tolerances and filters for what we expose our children to are seriously messed up.

Reply


canis_ridens November 1 2009, 18:08:39 UTC
It reminds me of the shock and horror expressed by parents who stupidly thought that Watchmen would be a great movie for their kids because it was based on a comic book. Basically, very few complained about the explicit sex scene, but Dr. Manhattan's flaccid blue penis traumatized their children. One comment on Slashdot was a rant about how her 9-year-old nephew shouldn't have been subjected to the penis.

I would hope the poster's nine-year-old nephew would, in fact, understand what a penis is. Now, people getting their arms chopped off? That was perfectly fine.

Reply

chris_warrior November 1 2009, 18:17:49 UTC
i have to say i was traumatized by the chopping off of arms AND the blue penis. i'm 38, though - i should have recognized and exercised my ability to vote with my pocketbook like all adult Americans easily offended by blood, gore, and badly CGI'd naughty bits.

as far as public nudity? eh, i'd think the idea of responsible government would be to keep the rules the same for everyone, everywhere, as much as possible. and in Boulder's case, they're worried about "spectator-crowd" control, moreso than "participant-runner" control.

and dare i say that i think the ACLU should probably have more pressing items on their agenda than defending the actions of people who were likely more drunk than protesting anything? after all, where was their signage??

Reply

This. silberzauber November 1 2009, 21:15:22 UTC
I agree, responsible government should make fair laws and apply them as consistently as possibly, and the wisdom of the ACLU pursuing this one is dubious at best.

Also, Icon Love! <3 <3 <3

Reply

Re: This. chris_warrior November 1 2009, 21:46:49 UTC
i'm just mentally comparing this to, say, Bare Witness. that's naked protesting.

and, um, thank you. i have this thing for unicorns. or i am one, maybe. or something. :D

Reply


Leave a comment

Up