Fact is, there are no "nudist rights" in the US to be taken away. It is entirely at the mercy of your state and local governments, some of which have extreme laws in effect..
In the past the Supreme court had already ruled that nudity is not a protected form of expression and the states are free to regulate it as they see fit. That was long before the current super-conservative majority. Us nudies have ALWAYS been operating under exactly the same rules as women's reproductive health is now experiencing.
I don't think nudists per se are under attack as we are such a small minority. SCOTUS has much larger fish to fry if they want to change the political/social landscape in the US.
I believe they will eventually target anything and everyone who does not fit their conservative religious values. There has really never been a seperation of church and state (only in words), with religious filters driving thought and “truths”. They are now going after anyone who is not heterosexual because anything other is an “abomination”. Next will be the “sex perverts” including anyone who is a nudists, because, as you know, the only reason to shed one’s clothing is: For Unlawful Cardinal Knowledge.
Viewed from across the pond, Trump’s Supreme Court legacy does appear to be making “conservative” inroads. But it also appears to be polarising states’ opinions and reactions. While some states are being quick to outlaw abortions, others have gone to the other extreme of becoming sanctuary states; when Trump reneged on climate change agreements the blue states carried on anyway. It almost looks like a 21st century war between the states is bubbling under. Naked people move to California!
Jul 1, 2022·edited Jul 1, 2022Liked by Jillian Page
The Republicans only want to impose their religious values on everyone. They want a Christian Taliban.
Welcome to Gilead.
Too bad I can't retire in Canada. Since I am retired and don't work, I won't be contributing to the Canadian economy. In other words, I can come to visit, but I can't live there.
I doubt the Republicans will achieve that goal. Au contraire, I can see them losing votes. But Canada should give some serious thought to making it easier for Americans fleeing oppression in the United States to move here. Time to get the idea out there . . .
You aren't seeing the details of the state and congressional politics here. I am old enough to have opposed the Vietnam war. My older brother went and when he came back, he was ready to help me get to Canada if my draft number came up. I remember the race riots of the 60's and 70's. I even remember seeing "whites only" on water coolers. But nothing has ever made me genuinely afraid for the future of my country until now.
Trump is not the problem, he is only a symptom. He won't run again in 2024 for two reasons. First, he would have to give up his most profitable grift ever. The millions of dollars his "rallies" bring in goes straight into his pocket. Legally. No different than an entertainer. As soon as he announces his candidacy, all of the money from the "rallies" have to be reported to the Federal Election Commission, and it has to be spent of campaign expenses. Second, he would be more likely to lose than he was in 2016, and Trump is a sore loser. (Always has been, just ask any New Yorker).
I was hoping you were going to tell me that I am wrong about not being allowed to move to Canada to retire.
Steve, I'm not sure that you can't move to Canada. Surely there must be a way. Let me look into it a little more.
But if not, what about New York State? I have a colleague who lives in Malone, New York (has an apartment in Montreal, too). Thinking of you, I looked at real-estate prices in the Malone area. Houses are decently priced.
We're in Massachusetts now and our daughter is in New Hampshire. Vermont is a possibility, but as the Republicans keep chipping away at democracy, no state will be safe. For example, just yesterday the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in their next term that would, if they agree with the Republicans who wrote the law being challenged, state legislatures would be empowered to ignore the vote of the people and install their choice of electors. When this happens, why bother voting?
Fact is, there are no "nudist rights" in the US to be taken away. It is entirely at the mercy of your state and local governments, some of which have extreme laws in effect..
In the past the Supreme court had already ruled that nudity is not a protected form of expression and the states are free to regulate it as they see fit. That was long before the current super-conservative majority. Us nudies have ALWAYS been operating under exactly the same rules as women's reproductive health is now experiencing.
Welcome to the club!
I don't think nudists per se are under attack as we are such a small minority. SCOTUS has much larger fish to fry if they want to change the political/social landscape in the US.
I believe they will eventually target anything and everyone who does not fit their conservative religious values. There has really never been a seperation of church and state (only in words), with religious filters driving thought and “truths”. They are now going after anyone who is not heterosexual because anything other is an “abomination”. Next will be the “sex perverts” including anyone who is a nudists, because, as you know, the only reason to shed one’s clothing is: For Unlawful Cardinal Knowledge.
<sigh> Why does most of Canada have to be north of Mynot, North Dakaota? (Asks a guy from Texas.)
Viewed from across the pond, Trump’s Supreme Court legacy does appear to be making “conservative” inroads. But it also appears to be polarising states’ opinions and reactions. While some states are being quick to outlaw abortions, others have gone to the other extreme of becoming sanctuary states; when Trump reneged on climate change agreements the blue states carried on anyway. It almost looks like a 21st century war between the states is bubbling under. Naked people move to California!
Oregon or Washington would be better. Nudity is legal in all three places under state law but more accepted in the Pacific NW.
The Republicans only want to impose their religious values on everyone. They want a Christian Taliban.
Welcome to Gilead.
Too bad I can't retire in Canada. Since I am retired and don't work, I won't be contributing to the Canadian economy. In other words, I can come to visit, but I can't live there.
First, congrats on the retirement, Steve.
If you are in an oppressive state, perhaps you could move to a more liberal state?
I am already in a liberal state, but the Republicans are working toward a national American Taliban.
I doubt the Republicans will achieve that goal. Au contraire, I can see them losing votes. But Canada should give some serious thought to making it easier for Americans fleeing oppression in the United States to move here. Time to get the idea out there . . .
You aren't seeing the details of the state and congressional politics here. I am old enough to have opposed the Vietnam war. My older brother went and when he came back, he was ready to help me get to Canada if my draft number came up. I remember the race riots of the 60's and 70's. I even remember seeing "whites only" on water coolers. But nothing has ever made me genuinely afraid for the future of my country until now.
Trump is not the problem, he is only a symptom. He won't run again in 2024 for two reasons. First, he would have to give up his most profitable grift ever. The millions of dollars his "rallies" bring in goes straight into his pocket. Legally. No different than an entertainer. As soon as he announces his candidacy, all of the money from the "rallies" have to be reported to the Federal Election Commission, and it has to be spent of campaign expenses. Second, he would be more likely to lose than he was in 2016, and Trump is a sore loser. (Always has been, just ask any New Yorker).
I was hoping you were going to tell me that I am wrong about not being allowed to move to Canada to retire.
Steve, I'm not sure that you can't move to Canada. Surely there must be a way. Let me look into it a little more.
But if not, what about New York State? I have a colleague who lives in Malone, New York (has an apartment in Montreal, too). Thinking of you, I looked at real-estate prices in the Malone area. Houses are decently priced.
Vermont is also a beautiful little state.
Both of those states border Quebec.
We're in Massachusetts now and our daughter is in New Hampshire. Vermont is a possibility, but as the Republicans keep chipping away at democracy, no state will be safe. For example, just yesterday the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case in their next term that would, if they agree with the Republicans who wrote the law being challenged, state legislatures would be empowered to ignore the vote of the people and install their choice of electors. When this happens, why bother voting?