Public sex

[Bunyippie]

Problem
The Nudist Rights Splinter Group, WANG, demands the right to have sex in public, saying it is natural and other people should quit being "Prudes."

Option 1.

"This is disgusting!" Said Pope McSteeple, pastor of the head church of the area. "Sex is something that is shameful and shouldn't be seen by any. That is why I propose we have designated locations where sex can take place for purposes of procreation between two pre-approved married couples and only be allowed in certain church sanctioned positions."

Option 2.

"This is a grand idea!" Said Quag Giggity, head of WANG. "Think about it, no more prudish hiding, no more worrying about kids being taught the wrong things. If your kid comes out of school and sees their parents having sex, then they will see how its done, it will reduce injuries among experimenting youngsters and more importantly, help prove to those uptight prudes that seeing sex at an early age is not harmful to the kids at all!"

[Conservative Alliances]

If I got this issue I would dismiss it. Both options are too extreme.

[Bunyippie]

If I got this issue I would dismiss it. Both options are too extreme.

but that is the point, there is no right answer!

[Kandarin]

In the real world, even nations with extremely laissez-faire attitudes towards prostitution, pornography, and other sexual issues tend to clamp down on public sex. Ditto for municipalities that permit public nudity; the whole underlying idea of naturism is, after all, the disassociation of nudity from automatic association with sexuality. While NS is of course not the real world, this is far and away more extreme than the typical sex- and decency- related issues.

You might also want to take a look at the Issues FAQ, which says:

Is it acceptable to a young reader? Meaning: don't send us issues on the morality of various sexual acts and stuff. Issues about abortion and prostitution are OK, because they're 'standard' sexual dilemmas. But anything about whether we should be allowed to get jiggy with the family dog will be deleted. No exceptions.

[Cynthia McKinney]

Your right that there is no right answer because both options are wrong and so is the issue.

Someone needs to get their mind out of the gutter.

[Linux and the X]

I'd pick option two.

[Enlightened Anomie]

I'd pick option two.

As would I. I don't consider this excessively controversial at all, though the addition of a more "moderate" viewpoint may be appropriate.

[Tezdrian]

I'd pick option two.

As would I. I don't consider this excessively controversial at all, though the addition of a more "moderate" viewpoint may be appropriate.

Option two.

[Sarzonia]

This needs a third, more moderate option.

[Bunyippie]

public sex but only in designated areas?

[Dark Side Messiahs]

That would be a good one to have.

[Nouvelle Rhodes]

Maybe like a 'public sex legal but heavy advertising makes it frowned upon' type deal, moderate and good for the economy

[Vanternia]

Option 2 to increase civil rights and Option 1 to decrease them I bet...

[Bunyippie]

1. Yes for public sex, tourists flock
2. No, downgrade civil rights and nudity crimalized
3. Yes in certain areas, certain places become popular

[The chrisman union]

1. Yes for public sex, tourists flock
2. No, downgrade civil rights and nudity crimalized
3. Yes in certain areas, certain places become popular

I lolled at that first one.

Although it is a good issue, it may not be suitable for younger NSers.

[Linux and the X]

Hey idea! Let's ask a younger player! Oh wait, I just did that. He says it's fine.