Podcast for 3 June 2013

[MrBogosity]

[mp3]http://podcast.bogosity.tv/mp3s/BogosityPodcast-2013-06-03.mp3[/mp3]


News of the Bogus:

• 0:25 - Like your health care policy? You may be losing it http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52036496/ns/local_news-charleston_sc/t/your-health-care-policy-you-may-be-losing-it/
  
• 3:00 - EU to ban olive oil jugs from restaurants http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/10064787/EU-to-ban-olive-oil-jugs-from-restaurants.html

Purchase web services at GoDaddy by 6/30/2013 and get 35% off by typing in the code: WOWNOBOGON http://www.godaddy.com

• 6:00 - Topless Women in Public Not Breaking the Law, Says NYPD http://www.policymic.com/articles/42359/topless-women-in-public-not-breaking-the-law-says-nypd
  

9:45 - Biggest Bogon Emitter: Rand Paul http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sen-rand-paul-aggressively-courting-evangelicals-to-win-over-gop-establishment/2013/05/12/d917ccb4-b8af-11e2-b94c-b684dda07add_story.html

Visit LibertyClassroom.com and get $11 off your first year with the promo code BOGOSITY
http://www.libertyclassroom.com

13:35 - Idiot Extraordinaire: Hungary http://www.realfarmacy.com/hungary-destroys-all-monsanto-gmo-corn-fields/

This Week's Quote: "It is a terrible tragedy of life that the innocent so often have to suffer for the sins of the guilty." —Harry Browne

[Travis Retriever]

And a politician lying for their cronies own personal gain?  Say it ain't so!

Well, I guess you could say they'll be real *sunglasses* Hungry in Hungary.

[Ibrahim90]

Well, I guess you could say they'll be real *sunglasses* Hungry in Hungary.

*groan*

in the meantime, I hope the Hungarians wake up already, before they go the way of Zambia. Too many have died because of these "environmentalist" wackjobs.

[evensgrey]

I thought that the whole matter of it being legal for women to go topless where men can go topless was settles in New York State back in the 1990's, at about the same time it was settled here in Canada.  (And, just like in Canada, the comments against are mostly from women.  Men rarely object to this sort of thing.)

[MrBogosity]

I thought that the whole matter of it being legal for women to go topless where men can go topless was settles in New York State back in the 1990's, at about the same time it was settled here in Canada.  (And, just like in Canada, the comments against are mostly from women.  Men rarely object to this sort of thing.)

The court case that declared it so was in 1992. Yes, it took them this long to acknowledge it.

[dallen68]

The main point being equal protection. The court could have just as easily found that it is illegal for men to be topless where it is illegal for women to be topless.

IMPO, you need to be fully dressed when in public, except in those public areas where X amount of undress is expected, like swimming pools, massage parlors, beaches, etc., other than that it is sort of disrespectful to those around you.

[MrBogosity]

The court could have just as easily found that it is illegal for men to be topless where it is illegal for women to be topless.

That would just have added men to the protests. Plus, society doesn't consider male toplessness to be obscene, so that would be a First Amendment violation as well.

[dallen68]

That would just have added men to the protests. Plus, society doesn't consider male toplessness to be obscene, so that would be a First Amendment violation as well.

Making it legal for the women to be topless isn't going to make society not consider female toplessness obscene.  There's lot's of things that are perfectly legal that society, taken as a whole, considers obscene.

I also doubt that requiring men to wear their shirt while laying bricks would violate the first amendment.

There are times it may be appropriate, but...

[MrBogosity]

Making it legal for the women to be topless isn't going to make society not consider female toplessness obscene.  There's lot's of things that are perfectly legal that society, taken as a whole, considers obscene.

Not really, not once those things are legalized and a generation passes. Shoulders used to be considered sexual and obscene. Strapless dresses used to be considered sexual and obscene. But then the next generation gets used to those things and they become commonplace, and it only becomes sexual in sexual contexts.

[dallen68]

Not really, not once those things are legalized and a generation passes. Shoulders used to be considered sexual and obscene. Strapless dresses used to be considered sexual and obscene. But then the next generation gets used to those things and they become commonplace, and it only becomes sexual in sexual contexts.

Well, yes.  However, playboy has been around for like 90 years, still considered obscene. Penthouse somewhat less than that, still obscene, vibrators IDK, still obscene...

[MrBogosity]

Well, yes.  However, playboy has been around for like 90 years, still considered obscene. Penthouse somewhat less than that, still obscene, vibrators IDK, still obscene...

Actually, people seem pretty blasé about Playboy these days. The old farts get their panties in a twist, but that's it. Grandmas have vibrators nowadays.

[evensgrey]

Well, yes.  However, playboy has been around for like 90 years, still considered obscene. Penthouse somewhat less than that, still obscene, vibrators IDK, still obscene...

Playboy has changed rather a lot.

The pictures that were run in the early issues?  They got shown on TV about 30 years ago.  The main reason TV standards haven't changed much is the entrenched bureaucracy that needs them the way they are to justify itself.