Subject:
|
Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 4 Feb 2004 20:25:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
511 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
> There should be a difference between sex and, well, not sex.
Why Dave? Didn't you agree before that if no one was being harmed, the laws
should not interfere? How would it harm you to happen upon a couple (or more,
gasp!) having leisure sex in a park near your house?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Skin (was: Re: Once again, etc.)
|
| (...) So we pass laws to lower the hemline back to ankles? There should be a difference between sex and, well, not sex. And this issue of toplessness falls on the non-sex side, or at least it should, for there are societies today that have no (...) (21 years ago, 4-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
88 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
