What you call freedom, guys, I see as degeneracy. It probably works the other way around.

Dubious thanks to Tam, who mentioned a development – I don’t know that I should call it “progress” – in the great burning issue of our time…

The 11-member [San Francisco] Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote Tuesday on the ordinance, which would prohibit exposed genitals in most public places, including streets, sidewalks and public transit.

It actually took San Francisco to discover a new law I’m not totally negative on. It’s not an issue that comes up, er, arises, … that is, presents itself very often around here. But the fact is – call me a bigot – unless you’re female and I’m naked too, I really don’t want to see your junk. This will come as a shock to denizens of the Castro District, but I have friends I’ve known for decades and have never once seen naked. And I’m perfectly happy with that.

But I’m a weirdo who loves freedom, so if you pose it as a problem in freedom I’ll at least listen to your argument…before dismissing you as a degenerate.

“Freedom is not something man gives anyone. It’s something we all – men, women, children – are born with and then people come in and try to erase it from you and if you won’t let that go they want to silence you,…”

So far I’m actually agreeing, but…

“…they want to banish you and they want to burn you at the stake,” Ckiara Rose, one of two dozen activists who staged a nude protest in front of City Hall last week.

The article says the penalty for disobeying the new law is a $100 fine, and the ordinance seems to contain no mention of burning at the stake. It’s just barely possible – be still, my heart – that the authorities are being more reasonable than the protesters here. And what the hell kind of name is “Ckiara,” anyway? I don’t even know if the person I’m mocking is male or female. Then I remember we’re discussing San Francisco and that those are somehow not the only choices.

It reminds me of how wildly divergent people’s views can be. We all know of people who raise much more outrage than these have, simply by walking around – fully clothed! – with pistols visible on their belts. I consider that completely reasonable behavior even in public, but lots of people disagree. Probably these very activists would disagree. They might well be shocked and horrified.

This is the sort of conundrum I enjoy. Castro District weirdos aren’t harming me at all, and I don’t care what they do – but I really prefer that they do it over there where I don’t have to watch. They consider that an unreasonable restriction on their freedom. I like to go about carrying a fully-visible handgun, and the mildest, most “common-sense” hoplophobes alive just want me to hide it under a shirt. In fact that’s probably the mainstream view, but I consider it an unreasonable restriction on my freedom.

Weird, huh? :^)