It is necessary to inform the representatives of the Conservatives that their legislative initiatives violate the rights and freedoms of citizens, therefore, the initiative group will launch an agitation to vote against the Conservatives in all elections.
This legislation is alarming in the sense that these bills tend to be quickly emulated is like-minded legislatures around the country. It is important that we use the language that prompted this legislative effort, i.e. the concern of a "Christian parent". Our appeals to the senators should address this same language:
Parent: These bills undermine parental rights of parents to determine and act on what they consider the best interests of their children. No laws were violated; the mother in question was trying to impart to her child a value she considered important– body positivity. The activity in question was riding a bicycle!
Christian: this legislation was apparently prompted out of a concern from a Christian parent that certain parts of the nude human body are inherently offensive and immoral. Centuries ago, the Church determined that the human body- all of it- is made in the image of God (Imago Dei) and therefore cannot be considered per se immoral. There are many Christian naturists and there is a national organization, Naturist-Christians.org, which professes that naturism is both healthy and biblical. This leglislation abridges the rights of those Christians (and other religions) who believe that all of the human body is devinely inspired and is not inherently immoral.
I don't live in Wisconsin or anywhere near there, but I am a member of The Naturist Society, which has it's offices there. I am concerned that they are going to be affected by this SICKNESS that is spreading across our country. I certainly hope that people down there (I live in Alaska) will see the defeat of this proposed legislation, AND the removal of the officials that are proposing it.
I tuned in at 10am Central and there hasn't been anything on the live feed. Surely they didn't complete the hearing in the first 30 minutes, right? ("We scheduled a hearing at the last minute and we are SHOCKED nobody came to speak against the bill.")
You’re right. They gave no notice for the hearing whatsoever, ensuring no opposition. Luckily there are two more public hearings set. I’ve updated the article with these details!
All of the bills' sponsors and co-sponsors are Republicans. This is a partisan bill designed to cast any opponents of the legislation as pedophile-lovers and groomers. This makes it less likely that Democratic Governor Tony Evers would veto the bill, and even if he did, the Republicans have a super-majority in the state senate and a near super-majority in the state assembly, so they might be able override a veto. Based on the political makeup of the state legislature, you might think Wisconsin is a solidly Republican state, but you'd be wrong. The state-wide elected governor is a Democrat and Biden received 20,000+ more votes in the last presidential election. The problem, as always, is gerrymandering.
It goes without saying that, due to small numbers and knee-jerk stereotyping, nudists don't have much political clout anywhere. Politicians are more than willing to throw a small number of potential voters under the bus if it will rile up the base. And yes, there are plenty of nudists who vote Republican and who will still vote for the Republican regardless of what anti-nudity laws are proposed or passed. Maybe Republican nudists living in Wisconsin can persuade their representatives to oppose the bill, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
In my experience trying to influence local or state officials, they will only pay attention if you are a constituent. Given that I'm poverty-level income so all I have is my voice and time, what can I do that would make a difference in WI? I'm trying to fight in CA where I live but here it's not a fight against elected officials.
That Jeff Weigand guy has every right to teach his children to be snobbish and closed-minded. He might as well put them under a glass dome (but given that they might be "assaulted" by the shape of human bodies, maybe it should be a privacy glass dome). It's his freedom to do so. It's not his freedom to tell others to behave only in ways that his pathetically narrow worldview deems appropriate.
It is important that this legislation be opposed at this time and place, as the initiatives often spread to other like-minded legislative bodies around the country.
One strategy is to use the same language that prompted the legislation, to oppose it. The legislation was initiated by a complaint from a "Christian Dad". We can use both of these words to oppose the proposed legislation:
Dad= Parent: These bills undermine rights of parents to determine and act on what they consider the best interests of their children. No laws were violated; the mother in question was trying to impart to her child a value she considered important– body positivity. There was no "lewd or lascivious conduct", only a naked person riding a bicycle under parental supervision.
Christian: This legislation was apparently prompted out of a concern from a Christian parent that certain parts of the nude human body are inherently offensive and immoral. Centuries ago, the Church determined that the human body- all of it- is made in the image of God (Imago Dei) and therefore cannot be considered per se immoral. There are many Christian naturists and there is a national organization, Naturist-Christians.org, which professes that naturism is both healthy and biblical. This legislation abridges the rights of those Christians who hold to the centuries-old teaching of the Church that the human body in its entirety is "very good".
It is necessary to inform the representatives of the Conservatives that their legislative initiatives violate the rights and freedoms of citizens, therefore, the initiative group will launch an agitation to vote against the Conservatives in all elections.
This legislation is alarming in the sense that these bills tend to be quickly emulated is like-minded legislatures around the country. It is important that we use the language that prompted this legislative effort, i.e. the concern of a "Christian parent". Our appeals to the senators should address this same language:
Parent: These bills undermine parental rights of parents to determine and act on what they consider the best interests of their children. No laws were violated; the mother in question was trying to impart to her child a value she considered important– body positivity. The activity in question was riding a bicycle!
Christian: this legislation was apparently prompted out of a concern from a Christian parent that certain parts of the nude human body are inherently offensive and immoral. Centuries ago, the Church determined that the human body- all of it- is made in the image of God (Imago Dei) and therefore cannot be considered per se immoral. There are many Christian naturists and there is a national organization, Naturist-Christians.org, which professes that naturism is both healthy and biblical. This leglislation abridges the rights of those Christians (and other religions) who believe that all of the human body is devinely inspired and is not inherently immoral.
I don't live in Wisconsin or anywhere near there, but I am a member of The Naturist Society, which has it's offices there. I am concerned that they are going to be affected by this SICKNESS that is spreading across our country. I certainly hope that people down there (I live in Alaska) will see the defeat of this proposed legislation, AND the removal of the officials that are proposing it.
I tuned in at 10am Central and there hasn't been anything on the live feed. Surely they didn't complete the hearing in the first 30 minutes, right? ("We scheduled a hearing at the last minute and we are SHOCKED nobody came to speak against the bill.")
You’re right. They gave no notice for the hearing whatsoever, ensuring no opposition. Luckily there are two more public hearings set. I’ve updated the article with these details!
All of the bills' sponsors and co-sponsors are Republicans. This is a partisan bill designed to cast any opponents of the legislation as pedophile-lovers and groomers. This makes it less likely that Democratic Governor Tony Evers would veto the bill, and even if he did, the Republicans have a super-majority in the state senate and a near super-majority in the state assembly, so they might be able override a veto. Based on the political makeup of the state legislature, you might think Wisconsin is a solidly Republican state, but you'd be wrong. The state-wide elected governor is a Democrat and Biden received 20,000+ more votes in the last presidential election. The problem, as always, is gerrymandering.
It goes without saying that, due to small numbers and knee-jerk stereotyping, nudists don't have much political clout anywhere. Politicians are more than willing to throw a small number of potential voters under the bus if it will rile up the base. And yes, there are plenty of nudists who vote Republican and who will still vote for the Republican regardless of what anti-nudity laws are proposed or passed. Maybe Republican nudists living in Wisconsin can persuade their representatives to oppose the bill, but I wouldn't hold my breath.
In my experience trying to influence local or state officials, they will only pay attention if you are a constituent. Given that I'm poverty-level income so all I have is my voice and time, what can I do that would make a difference in WI? I'm trying to fight in CA where I live but here it's not a fight against elected officials.
That Jeff Weigand guy has every right to teach his children to be snobbish and closed-minded. He might as well put them under a glass dome (but given that they might be "assaulted" by the shape of human bodies, maybe it should be a privacy glass dome). It's his freedom to do so. It's not his freedom to tell others to behave only in ways that his pathetically narrow worldview deems appropriate.
It is important that this legislation be opposed at this time and place, as the initiatives often spread to other like-minded legislative bodies around the country.
One strategy is to use the same language that prompted the legislation, to oppose it. The legislation was initiated by a complaint from a "Christian Dad". We can use both of these words to oppose the proposed legislation:
Dad= Parent: These bills undermine rights of parents to determine and act on what they consider the best interests of their children. No laws were violated; the mother in question was trying to impart to her child a value she considered important– body positivity. There was no "lewd or lascivious conduct", only a naked person riding a bicycle under parental supervision.
Christian: This legislation was apparently prompted out of a concern from a Christian parent that certain parts of the nude human body are inherently offensive and immoral. Centuries ago, the Church determined that the human body- all of it- is made in the image of God (Imago Dei) and therefore cannot be considered per se immoral. There are many Christian naturists and there is a national organization, Naturist-Christians.org, which professes that naturism is both healthy and biblical. This legislation abridges the rights of those Christians who hold to the centuries-old teaching of the Church that the human body in its entirety is "very good".