Nudity in Spain [Archive] - ClothesFree Forum

nakeduni

01-30-2008, 01:45 PM

Nudity is legal in Spain, but if the police ask you to put your clothes on, you should do so, as the advisory said, or risk arrest.

Stu is anti-nudist troll and is trying to destroy this forum, so keep that in mind. IMO, he is dishonest in his debates in other threads. I have seen trolls destroy other theme forums and it can and will happen here. Here are numerous references to Spain being nude legal.

http://www.aquick.org/blog/2005/03/13/naked-in-barcelona/

http://www.barcelona-metropolitan.com/Article.aspx?TabID=2&MenuID=8&ArticleID=287

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/07/AR2006100700255.html

http://www.homesworldwide.co.uk/europe/spain/news/articles/naked_protesters_swarm_barcelona?news_id=0054498

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=barcelona+naked&s=int&ss=2&z=t

http://chrisrako.blogspot.com/2007/05/naked-man-of-barcelona.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/notesandqueries/query/0,5753,-25909,00.html

http://www.nudist-resorts.org/talk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=2329

http://forum.skype.com/lofiversion/index.php/t53536.html

http://pjpark84.blogspot.com/2007/06/itsy-bitsy-teeny-weenie-yellow-polka.html

http://www.westerncourier.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticleComments&ustory_id=83e83d64-3886-4fa0-9acd-4734106740f8

http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=35666

http://www.nudistday.com/index.php/article/nude-photos-cause-political-storm-in-spain.html

http://eseduca.org/apartamento/legalidad_ing.pdf

nakeduni

01-30-2008, 01:51 PM

Stu you made two bad assumptions. The first is that the police consistently know what the law is. The second is that they consistently enforce what the law ACTUALLY is as opposed to what they WISH it was.

That is so true. Stu picks are chooses what supports him, and not what the actual truth of the matter is. He is not objective and is on a fool's errand to try to convince nudists to put our clothes on. LOL

Stu2630

01-30-2008, 02:38 PM

Jon

Stu you made two bad assumptions. The first is that the police consistently know what the law is. The second is that they consistently enforce what the law ACTUALLY is as opposed to what they WISH it was.

I think the police generally do know the law - certainly those parts of the law which affect them. But in the case I cited, the man concerned was actually prosecuted, convicted and fined by the judge - and presumably the prosecutor and judge knew the law even if the police didn't.

nakeduni

Nudity is legal in Spain, but if the police ask you to put your clothes on, you should do so, as the advisory said, or risk arrest.

:laugh: If it were truly legal, the police could make no such demand.

Here are numerous references to Spain being nude legal.

The only references which state that public nudity is legal in Spain are those which cite the Spanish naturists! Other references you mention focus on specific instances of organised nudity (mainly protests) in one city, Barcelona, capital of Catalonia and a city known for its avant garde culture - the San Francisco of Spain. But get naked in Madrid or Valencia and don't be surprised if you get arrested. And as the news article I posted shows, you can even get arrested and fined for being nude in Barcelona.

and is on a fool's errand to try to convince nudists to put our clothes on.

I have no wish to see nudists put their clothes on. Nudists have every right to enjoy their lifestyle and I respect and even admire them for doing so. But I'm not comfortable with nudity in public. So I keep well away from nudist places and I expect nudists to keep their nakedness out of the textile environment. That's perfectly reasonable, surely?

Stu

Naturist4Ever

01-30-2008, 02:51 PM

>> If it were truly legal, the police could make no such demand.

Untrue, if you resists you get in conflict with another law which is obstructing the work of the police, and it is that they will charge you on. But you & your buddy Harold should know that don't you!!

>> So I keep well away from nudist places

No you don't! you were on vacation in Denmark and visited nude beach(es), you are going to Almeria in Spain. But one things is for sure, at least your friends will have a great nude vacation in Vera, while you are trolling around on this forum. Get a life....

nakeduni

01-30-2008, 04:10 PM

Stu lies again. He doesn't stay away from nudist places. He's here, isn't he? GO AWAY STU! You textiles are ill mannered. Keep your ignorance to yourself. We already have a bush here.

Stu2630

01-31-2008, 07:58 AM

Naturist4Ever

>> If it were truly legal, the police could make no such demand.

Untrue, if you resists you get in conflict with another law which is obstructing the work of the police, and it is that they will charge you on. But you & your buddy Harold should know that don't you!! If you have an established right to do something, neither the police nor any other arm of government can prevent you from doing it. Furthermore, any court would uphold that right for you. But it isn't a right to be naked anywhere in Spain as the article about a man being fined for nudity in Barcelona proves. The judge even told him that people had a right to be protected from the sight of his nakedness!

>> So I keep well away from nudist places

No you don't! you were on vacation in Denmark and visited nude beach(es), you are going to Almeria in Spain. But one things is for sure, at least your friends will have a great nude vacation in Vera, while you are trolling around on this forum. Get a life....That's (a) unfair and (b) factually wrong.

(a) I would not normally have dreamed of visiting any nudist beach anywhere, but I was asked to do so by the moderator, BobS, and others here, so that I could report how I found it (Bob will confirm that). That's the only reason I went, so to throw that in my face shows just how unfair nudists can be!! It's akin to giving someone something as a gift and then accusing them of stealing it from you!

(b) I was planning to go to Almeria - but reflected on it and decided against it, partly because I don't want to have to think about how I can avoid nudists. I have now booked to go somewhere else that is not anywhere near a nudist beach.

Nakeduni

We already have a bush here.

I'm really not interested in your bush.

Stu

Agde

01-31-2008, 10:00 PM

Public nudity is legal in Spain is it? I think not!
If it were truly legal, the police could make no such demand.
Good grief! We've already been through this loop recently with Stu. Public nudity is not "legal" or a "right" in Spain the way Stu is pitching it. But it is also "not illegal" -- it is simply regulated by custom and circumstance, not law. With no law against it, there is no legal basis for courts to get involved and no legal basis for folks like Stu to "call the cops" if offended. If people find someone is inappropriately casual for the circumstances, they say something, and everyone discusses and adjusts. Every day, Spain proves that public funds don't have to be squandered on frivolous matters that can better be handled by dialog, courtesy and commonsense.

newfred

02-01-2008, 12:38 AM

Stu go away you irratate people.

Stu2630

02-01-2008, 08:05 AM

Agde

Public nudity is not "legal" or a "right" in Spain the way Stu is pitching it.That applies to most European countries as most do not have a specific law against non-sexual nudity - but they still effectively prohibit it.

But it is also "not illegal" -- it is simply regulated by custom and circumstance, not law.So how come a man got fined 80 Euros for being nude in Barcelona?

Stu

HaroldTheNudist

02-01-2008, 09:33 AM

seems Stu2630 triumphs again.

as nudists we do not need to promote illegal activities. public nudity is not legal in Spain. I wrote the tourism bureau of that country an enquired.

I am disappointed how willing to violate laws, or promote the violation of them that these nudists if I may call them that feel is deserved.

I really like things here the way they are. there is a nude beach a couple of them in the country, some private clubs. I like the exclusivity of being a nudist. I am not sure I would want to share a nudist area with some of the posters on this board. they give nudism a bad name.

Harry

MoonShadow

02-01-2008, 09:47 AM

I really like things here the way they are. there is a nude beach a couple of them in the country, some private clubs. I like the exclusivity of being a nudist. I am not sure I would want to share a nudist area with some of the posters on this board. they give nudism a bad name.

Harry

Yes, guess you do, Harold. Exclusivity to have sex on the beach with your young hot "babes", or to have naked parties with swinging and sex occurring.

Yes, I agree, one does give nudism a bad name - you.

walter05

02-01-2008, 09:57 AM

You said, “no legal basis for folks like Stu to "call the cops" if offended”.

Stu sends e-mails reporting nudists to the cops to test nudists assertion that the cops will not act. However, he has no intention that the cops should actually act.

{To the rest of you, please insert your own sarcastic comment here: _________.}

I can’t imagine what he would do if he was offended.

MoonShadow

02-01-2008, 10:05 AM

Walter, isn't that the truth.

Sanslines

02-01-2008, 10:12 AM

Anyone who notifies the police regarding a nudist event is NO FRIEND OF NUDISTS! Anyone who does not like such an event only need to ignore the event and stay away. However, to notify the police and then come to a forum and play games with people's intelligence by suggesting that 'my intentions were never to have the police act' or other assorted rubbish is only fooling himself. Stu has proved himself over and over again that he is NO FRIEND of nudists. Anyone who is fooled by his deceptive nonsense will wake up some day to find that their so called 'nudist friend' was the individual who notified the police of their nudist activity and will then have plenty of time to reflect upon their 'nudist chum' while sitting in a jail cell. Who on earth needs a friend like that! Maybe, at that point, Stu will have a wee bit of compassion and bring a cake to his 'nudist chum' while they rot away in jail.

walter05

02-01-2008, 10:14 AM

I understand your being afraid of Stu. If he thinks you are his friend he may e-mail the cops on you to.

I am glad you are protecting yourself.

Sanslines

02-01-2008, 10:18 AM

I understand your being afraid of Stu. If he thinks you are his friend he may e-mail the cops on you to.

I am glad you are protecting yourself.

Walter,

Let's just hope that no one in this forum is fooled by Stu's 'friendship'. It is so obvious that Stu is a real backstabber who would turn in his own family if any of them joined a nudist event in the local park.

walter05

02-01-2008, 10:23 AM

He may just be deluded. I want to give him the benefit of the doubt.

In the meantime, for your protection be careful of being a good friend to him. He may need to show his support. If he does, we may need to bail you out of jail.

MoonShadow

02-01-2008, 10:42 AM

LOL Please! Don't hold your breaths!

nakeduni

02-01-2008, 10:46 AM

The naked man of Barcelona was fined for civil disobedience, not nudity.

http://bcnweek.com/feature58.html

Nude in the North

02-01-2008, 11:29 AM

Naturist Mark

02-01-2008, 11:50 AM

I am disappointed how willing to violate laws, or promote the violation of them that these nudists if I may call them that feel is deserved.

Ahhh, but that's the point. The guy in Barcelona DIDN'T violate the law against nudity, because there is no such law. The police and legal system punished him for behavior certain individuals with power disliked DESPITE the lack of a legal offense. This is very very common. Mr. Gough in Scotland has violated no British law against nudity, yet is repeatedly charged with nebulous 'breach of peace' violations - a catchall charge that can be used against anyone who doesn't submit to the whim of authority even when said authority lacks a statutory basis for their whim.

Similarly here in the US individuals are often charged with 'disturbing the peace' or 'unruly' or 'disorderly behavior' even when their behavior is completely peaceful and orderly, in the extreme they are charged with 'failure to follow the instructions of an officer'. Clearly in the US our much vaulted 'freedoms' are conditional on the goodwill of authority, since they can quash any legal behavior they wish, and if general public sentiment is not outraged they generally get away with it (it is only recently that many Americans have discovered they live in a semi-fascist state).

The fact that you can be arrested or ticketed for legal behavior does not mean that behavior is illegal, it means the public trust is being abused by those in authority.

There are no rights, and there is no rule of law when those who act in authority betray the public trust and employ fascist tactics.

In many cases, in democratic societies, those excesses by authority can be appealed and overturned in the judicial process if the victim has the patience and resources to pursue justice. In Spain the Basque Naturist Club (http://eseduca.org/apartamento/legalidad_ing.pdf) and other naturist groups assert that the statutory law allows non sexual public nudity, and have specific recommendations should public authorities attempt to assert otherwise.

In my United States the various states each have their own legal codes, about half of them do not define mere non sexual nudity as an offense under the public indecency laws - they require an additional factor of lewdness or intent to offend. Technically that means non sexual nudity on public land is legal in much of the US, but law enforcement in the USA is far less scrupulous about following the letter of the law than our Spanish cousins are. Over-reaching of authority is a given here, it is part of the reason that we have more lawyers per capita than any other 'civilized' society - our 'rights' are only valid if we are willing to employ legal gladiators to fight for them in our courts - few people charged with offenses resulting from peaceful non sexual nudity are willing or able to fight, so nebulous and even non existent charges for anything a person with authority doesn't like have been allowed to stand. That is not the same as making that behavior legal. You would never argue in the reverse that a prosecutor who dismisses charges or even agrees to a plea bargain in a felony theft case has made embezzlement legal. That is not a binding legal precedent, and similarly a spurious fine for legal nudity doesn't change the law to make it illegal.

The Spanish naturists - who know the state of their law as it applies to them better than anyone else, assert that under their law nudism on public land is a right, and they affirmatively defended that position. That the law has been violated by authority doesn't mean that the right doesn't exist - it means that the public authority has erred.

Now ... when we speak of rights and what is legal we are speaking on a higher plain. Most of us must take notice of the practical reality that practicing nudism in anything but the most secretive and hidden manner will result in harassment or even illegal sanction from those in authority. It appears that Spain is one of the most scrupulous societies when it comes to the rights of citizens to choose their state of apparel, yet outside of the beach or parkland they can still expect to be persecuted (and occasionally prosecuted) - but are likely to prevail should they have the fortitude to contest in the courts. In the United States, unless your nudity was carefully concealed in a remote location or behind barriers where the unsuspecting public is unlikely to intrude (or was incidental to First Amendment political speech) you are likely to be charged with an offense even in those states where non sexual nudity is not an offense.

-Mark

nakeduni

02-01-2008, 12:41 PM

Just a thought here.

If we americans had not undertaken a bit of "civil disobedience" in the past, we would still be chanting "Long live the Queen" at baseball games.
Not to mention, a few other rights wouldn't be around that have been established since that time.

Long live Civil Disobedience! Long live the Right to Change peoples opinions. Long live the Right to Protest against Opression.

I agree. That's why I think pushing the envelop is required sometimes. The problem is how to push it without turning people off. Gays all over the world have their parades, and do it in the nude in some cases. They are also a lot of hotels that cater to gays where nudity at the hotel pools are accepted. Most gay hotels are clothing optional. If gays can do so well, we can't the straight nudists do the same? I'm aware that there is $2 bill initiative to show merchants that nudists have spending power. I wonder how well that is doing this days?

HaroldTheNudist

02-01-2008, 01:03 PM

Ahhh, but that's the point. The guy in Barcelona DIDN'T violate the law against nudity, because there is no such law. The police and legal system punished him for behavior certain individuals with power disliked DESPITE the lack of a legal offense. This is very very common. Mr. Gough in Scotland has violated no British law against nudity, yet is repeatedly charged with nebulous 'breach of peace' violations - a catchall charge that can be used against anyone who doesn't submit to the whim of authority even when said authority lacks a statutory basis for their whim.

Similarly here in the US individuals are often charged with 'disturbing the peace' or 'unruly' or 'disorderly behavior' even when their behavior is completely peaceful and orderly, in the extreme they are charged with 'failure to follow the instructions of an officer'. Clearly in the US our much vaulted 'freedoms' are conditional on the goodwill of authority, since they can quash any legal behavior they wish, and if general public sentiment is not outraged they generally get away with it (it is only recently that many Americans have discovered they live in a semi-fascist state).

The fact that you can be arrested or ticketed for legal behavior does not mean that behavior is illegal, it means the public trust is being abused by those in authority.

There are no rights, and there is no rule of law when those who act in authority betray the public trust and employ fascist tactics.

In many cases, in democratic societies, those excesses by authority can be appealed and overturned in the judicial process if the victim has the patience and resources to pursue justice. In Spain the Basque Naturist Club (http://eseduca.org/apartamento/legalidad_ing.pdf) and other naturist groups assert that the statutory law allows non sexual public nudity, and have specific recommendations should public authorities attempt to assert otherwise.

In my United States the various states each have their own legal codes, about half of them do not define mere non sexual nudity as an offense under the public indecency laws - they require an additional factor of lewdness or intent to offend. Technically that means non sexual nudity on public land is legal in much of the US, but law enforcement in the USA is far less scrupulous about following the letter of the law than our Spanish cousins are. Over-reaching of authority is a given here, it is part of the reason that we have more lawyers per capita than any other 'civilized' society - our 'rights' are only valid if we are willing to employ legal gladiators to fight for them in our courts - few people charged with offenses resulting from peaceful non sexual nudity are willing or able to fight, so nebulous and even non existent charges for anything a person with authority doesn't like have been allowed to stand. That is not the same as making that behavior legal. You would never argue in the reverse that a prosecutor who dismisses charges or even agrees to a plea bargain in a felony theft case has made embezzlement legal. That is not a binding legal precedent, and similarly a spurious fine for legal nudity doesn't change the law to make it illegal.

The Spanish naturists - who know the state of their law as it applies to them better than anyone else, assert that under their law nudism on public land is a right, and they affirmatively defended that position. That the law has been violated by authority doesn't mean that the right doesn't exist - it means that the public authority has erred.

Now ... when we speak of rights and what is legal we are speaking on a higher plain. Most of us must take notice of the practical reality that practicing nudism in anything but the most secretive and hidden manner will result in harassment or even illegal sanction from those in authority. It appears that Spain is one of the most scrupulous societies when it comes to the rights of citizens to choose their state of apparel, yet outside of the beach or parkland they can still expect to be persecuted (and occasionally prosecuted) - but are likely to prevail should they have the fortitude to contest in the courts. In the United States, unless your nudity was carefully concealed in a remote location or behind barriers where the unsuspecting public is unlikely to intrude (or was incidental to First Amendment political speech) you are likely to be charged with an offense even in those states where non sexual nudity is not an offense.

-Mark

I assume you have legal credential to back up your statements.

please list them.

what Law School did you attend, and when did you graduate?

if you lack credentials, then I simply will ignore what you say as hearsay.

Harry

nakeduni

02-01-2008, 03:31 PM

Agde

02-01-2008, 11:48 PM

Just to note my original point about custom and common sense in Spain. The Barcelona fellow decided to "dress casually" at the formal celebration of the city's patron saint! So on that particular occasion, he merely discovered a point where "pushing the envelop" turns into disrespect and confrontation, so he got fined. Anyone showing up in a speedo probably would have gotten the same citation. He has and had been "casual" around town on many other occasions without incident. Oh, and Harry, if you require law school credentials in order to listen to Mark, I am sure several of us here would be happy to offer you ours in his support. :)

Naturist Mark

02-02-2008, 12:52 AM

I assume you have legal credential to back up your statements.

please list them.

what Law School did you attend, and when did you graduate?

if you lack credentials, then I simply will ignore what you say as hearsay.

Harry

I am not a lawyer, never claimed to be. I have an advanced degree in public administration (which does include some law courses), and was formerly in law enforcement.

I'd be very interested in seeing an analysis of my little rant above by a 'credentialed' professional.

Let's get on point here. My rant was in response to the oft made claim that nudity is illegal because this or that person was arrested or cited because of it. Quite often that is simply not true - however as a practical matter it might as well be true if victims of over reaching authority do not push back and assert their rights.

-Mark

eaglepeakpete

02-02-2008, 03:33 AM

Sanslines

02-02-2008, 03:52 AM

As you can see from my profile I own and run a nudist complex in Spain so I am more aware of the situation than Stu.

In Barcelona the guy was arrested because he failed to identify himself, you can be nude almost anywhere in Spain but must always carry your passport or ID or you could be nicked..

The only thing to believe is the report from the Spanish Naturist Federation look it up on
www.naturismo.org (http://www.naturismo.org)

Ah ha....so nakeduni was right and the man was not arrested for merely being nude in public. Thank you for clearing up the false misperceptions that were being strongly promoted in this thread.

Stu2630

02-02-2008, 07:40 AM

Sanslines and eaglepeakpete

Look at exactly what the article said:

A judge has fined a man who habitually walks about the streets of Barcelona with nothing on, eighty euros for disobeying the orders of a pair of Guardia Urbana officers who asked him to identify himself and put his clothes back on. The man, Esteban TE, refused and was arrested.
In his ruling the judge "considers that the officers had the authority to order the man to get dressed, and although not punishable under the Penal Code, a council byelaw dictates that 'nobody may undervalue the rights of others, nor offend their dignity'." The judge went on to say that the nudist seems to forget that "others also have the right not to see him without clothes."

Look at what the judge said. He didn't mention passports or ID cards - he explicitly asserts - QUOTE - "others also have the right not to see him without clothes." How clear do you want it? I'm sure you would rather believe the legal interpretation of the Spanish naturists, but I'll go with the police, the prosecutor and the judge who all agree that walking around naked in a Spanish city is not lawful.

And keep in mind that this occurred in a city which is the most liberal city in Spain by a mile - Barcelona. I challenge eaglepeakpete to try walking around the centre of Madrid naked (with your ID card and passport in your rucksack if you like) and see what happens. I bet you virtually every Spanish city has similar byelaws and the authorities won't pat you on the back and send you on your way with a friendly smile.

It seems that nudists here are deluding themselves about Spain.

Stu

nakeduni

02-02-2008, 09:03 AM

Ah ha....so nakeduni was right and the man was not arrested for merely being nude in public. Thank you for clearing up the false misperceptions that were being strongly promoted in this thread.

There was another article on the net that I read some time ago, but couldn't locate it, that specifically said why he was arrested. He wasn't arrested for nudity. The judge wasn't there to arrest the man, the police did. So what the judge said later in court is irrelevant to the arrest. AGAIN, FOR THE PEOPLE WITH ULTRA SLOW MINDS, THE POLICE DID NOT ARREST THE MAN FOR NUDITY, AS EAGLE SAID.

Naturist Mark

02-02-2008, 09:06 AM

And keep in mind that this occurred in a city which is the most liberal city in Spain by a mile - Barcelona. I challenge eaglepeakpete to try walking around the centre of Madrid naked (with your ID card and passport in your rucksack if you like) and see what happens. I bet you virtually every Spanish city has similar byelaws and the authorities won't pat you on the back and send you on your way with a friendly smile.

What Bylaw?

There was NO bylaw in the Barcelona case involving nudity. The man in question was cited for entirely different 'offenses'. As I explained in my earlier rant, when a person does something legal that those in authority do not like, they will find alternative charges to oppress the nonconformist. The judge in Barcelona did not adjudicate the case of the man on an anti-nudity law, because none exist - that he then invented a 'right to not be offended' to justify his ruling proves the poverty of his legal opinion, not its strength.

Stu is probably correct that a naked stroll through downtown Madrid would result in a citation or arrest (except during a well orchestrated political demonstration like the WNBR), but the charges will not be for public nudity, they will be for nebulous catchall offenses. But Stu would be correct not because the nudist is breaking the law, but because the public authority is breaking the law.

-Mark

nakeduni

02-02-2008, 09:08 AM

As you can see from my profile I own and run a nudist complex in Spain so I am more aware of the situation than Stu.

In Barcelona the guy was arrested because he failed to identify himself, you can be nude almost anywhere in Spain but must always carry your passport or ID or you could be nicked..

The only thing to believe is the report from the Spanish Naturist Federation look it up on
www.naturismo.org
I'll make it a point to stay at your complex when I visit Spain.

Stu2630

02-02-2008, 10:16 AM

Stu is probably correct that a naked stroll through downtown Madrid would result in a citation or arrest (except during a well orchestrated political demonstration like the WNBR), but the charges will not be for public nudity, they will be for nebulous catchall offenses.I entirely agree: nudity is neither specifically illegal, nor specifically legal. In the case mentioned, the "catchall" offence is, as the article said, a "council byelaw", which "dictates that 'nobody may undervalue the rights of others, nor offend their dignity'". We have the same situation here - a "catchall" offence which says you can be convicted for using "insulting words or behaviour" which is "likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress". But the bottom line is that if you engage in a behavior which results in you being convicted before a court of law, then that behaviour is de facto illegal, and would be so regarded by all legal authorities.

But Stu would be correct not because the nudist is breaking the law, but because the public authority is breaking the law.In this case, the conviction was determined by a court of law. So unless and until a higher court rules that the trial court erred, the conviction is good and the judge was not breaking the law.

Stu

Agde

02-02-2008, 11:34 AM

Lest others take Stu too seriously, the Spanish judge was merely making the point that civic courtesy needs to be mutual. Stu is making a big deal out of an isolated event and trying to impose Anglo-Saxon notions of precedent and specific "rights" in a situation where general civic principles applied precisely because there were no specific legal issues. Its just Stu's usual tactic of diverting the discussion way out into some extreme corner. This particular incident was a blip unlikely to have any lasting significance.

Sanslines

02-02-2008, 12:30 PM

Sanslines and eaglepeakpete

Look at exactly what the article said:

Look at what the judge said. He didn't mention passports or ID cards - he explicitly asserts - QUOTE - "others also have the right not to see him without clothes." How clear do you want it? I'm sure you would rather believe the legal interpretation of the Spanish naturists, but I'll go with the police, the prosecutor and the judge who all agree that walking around naked in a Spanish city is not lawful.

And keep in mind that this occurred in a city which is the most liberal city in Spain by a mile - Barcelona. I challenge eaglepeakpete to try walking around the centre of Madrid naked (with your ID card and passport in your rucksack if you like) and see what happens. I bet you virtually every Spanish city has similar byelaws and the authorities won't pat you on the back and send you on your way with a friendly smile.

It seems that nudists here are deluding themselves about Spain.

Stu

Stu,

You again chose to believe what you want to believe so long and promote the opinion of ONE judge as some kind of universal law etched in stone. You know very well that judges have their own personal biases and opinions and in so many cases no two judges will rule exactly the same. None of us know the background of this judge but what we do know is that this one judge does not speak for all judges in the entire coutry of Spain. Of course you will agree with this judge, police, etc because they promote a position that you entirely agree with. However, you can not make broad sweeping generalizations based upon the opinion of ONE judge and you are very WRONG to do so. Sorry, but no matter how much you want to confine and control nudism, you do not have the right to make braod generalizations in order to promote your agenda. Of course you know this but you still continue to insult the intelligence of this forum by playing your game.

Stu2630

02-02-2008, 12:34 PM

Agde

This particular incident was a blip unlikely to have any lasting significance.

I wonder if Steve Gough is thinking that the last two years he spent in prison is just a "blip" and is "unlikely to have any lasting significance".

The fact is the guy was punished not just in Spain, where we're told public nudity is entirely lawful, but in the most liberal and avant garde city in Spain, too. And what's more, the judge in the case publicly asserted the RIGHT for people not to have to see nudity.

Some "blip"! :laugh:

I really don't want to rub this in. It shouldn't be a matter that concerns nudists too much because they have no desire to walk about the streets of any city naked. From what I read on here, they simply want opportunities and locations to practise nudism without fear of harassment and I fail to understand why they are so eager to defend the "right" of the odd extremist like Mr Gough, or the character who was convicted in Barcelona. These guys are not nudists: they couldn't care less about nudists getting more and better beaches or other facilities. Reasonable people don't find responsible nudists to be offensive, but they do find these fringe activists to be offensive and the authorities respond accordingly. As this case shows, that includes in Spain as much as anywhere else in Europe and, regardless what the Spanish naturists claim, inappropriate nudity is punished in that country.

Stu

Sanslines

02-02-2008, 12:35 PM

Sanslines

02-02-2008, 12:39 PM

Stu,

Would you please stop telling nudists in this forum what they want and not want to do vis a vis nudism. You are not the ultimate authority of what is right or wrong concerning nudism. Your dictatorial demands concerning nudism demonstrate just another mind game that you are playing of trying to manipulate nudists into thinking that your views represent what nudists should believe and do.

Stu2630

02-02-2008, 01:07 PM

Sanslines

Would you please stop telling nudists in this forum what they want and not want to do vis a vis nudism.

I said:

From what I read on here, they simply want opportunities and locations to practise nudism without fear of harassment...

As you can see, I made it crystal clear that I was reporting my perception of what nudists want from reading sites like this and so I certainly wasn't dictating to them what they want, as you suggest.

I don't believe it helps the nudist cause to support public nudity fanatics any more than it helps moderate Muslims to say Osama bin Laden is a splendid chap.

Stu

eaglepeakpete

02-02-2008, 01:18 PM

Sanslines and eaglepeakpete

Look at exactly what the article said:

Look at what the judge said. He didn't mention passports or ID cards - he explicitly asserts - QUOTE - "others also have the right not to see him without clothes." How clear do you want it? I'm sure you would rather believe the legal interpretation of the Spanish naturists, but I'll go with the police, the prosecutor and the judge who all agree that walking around naked in a Spanish city is not lawful.

And keep in mind that this occurred in a city which is the most liberal city in Spain by a mile - Barcelona. I challenge eaglepeakpete to try walking around the centre of Madrid naked (with your ID card and passport in your rucksack if you like) and see what happens. I bet you virtually every Spanish city has similar byelaws and the authorities won't pat you on the back and send you on your way with a friendly smile.

It seems that nudists here are deluding themselves about Spain.

Stu

Well Stu You are wrong again.I have indeed walked around my town( a fairly big one) nude with no problem albeit it was by accident,I was working on my building and needed some materials and went to the ironmongers to get things,only when I went to pay did I realise I had forgotton to put shorts on, I had queued in the shop for 5 mins and walked though the town center to get to the shop no one commented.

I have even gone to a town center bar nude again no comment by anyone.

The judge in Barcelona was wrong in another case here a man was arrested for being nude in a big town, the judge dimissed the case and fined the policeman for aresting him.

Stu2630

02-02-2008, 01:34 PM

I have indeed walked around my town( a fairly big one) nude with no problem albeit it was by accident,

Pete

Steve Gough had the same experience. He walked naked into several places in Scotland before the law finally swung into action, but when it did - well, you know the rest! Here's a challenge to you. Go to your nearest major city and walk naked down the main street and make sure the police see you. While you're at it, walk into a police station, or a government building court of law. If it's legal - what's the problem?

The judge in Barcelona was wrong in another case here a man was arrested for being nude in a big town, the judge dimissed the case and fined the policeman for arresting him.

Oh, I see! So you decide which judge is right and which one is wrong, then. How exactly does that work? Are you a senior member of the Spanish judiciary? I seem to recall reading about that case and, if I remember rightly, the police arrested the guy for an obsolete offence under the Penal Code instead of arresting him for a byelaw offence (like the man was convicted of in Barcelona). It's similar here. If the police arrest you for the wrong offence, then you get off scot free and can possibly make a claim against the police. But that doesn't mean the behaviour which gave rise to the arrest was lawful.

You know as well as I do that if you walk about the streets of a Spanish town or city naked, there is a possibility at least that you will be ordered to cover up and could even be arrested and fined - not because there is a specific law against nakedness, but because the legal authorities recognise that some people don't wish to see your nudity and so they will invoke some law or byelaw that fits the crime. That happened to Gough in both England and Scotland and it can happen in Spain.

Stu

nakeduni

02-02-2008, 02:00 PM

Well Stu You are wrong again.I have indeed walked around my town( a fairly big one) nude with no problem albeit it was by accident,I was working on my building and needed some materials and went to the ironmongers to get things,only when I went to pay did I realise I had forgotton to put shorts on, I had queued in the shop for 5 mins and walked though the town center to get to the shop no one commented.

I have even gone to a town center bar nude again no comment by anyone.

The judge in Barcelona was wrong in another case here a man was arrested for being nude in a big town, the judge dimissed the case and fined the policeman for aresting him.

Stu is always wrong. When one person says he's wrong, it's debatable, but when a dozen people tell him he's wrong, his gray cells should be registering something, but not in his sad case. He's the Ann Coulter (the master of brains farts) of Anti-nudism. Look at all the countries that he has been kicked out of all of his life. He can go to Antarctica; hardly any nudes there to complain about.

eaglepeakpete

02-02-2008, 02:31 PM

Pete

Steve Gough had the same experience. He walked naked into several places in Scotland before the law finally swung into action, but when it did - well, you know the rest! Here's a challenge to you. Go to your nearest major city and walk naked down the main street and make sure the police see you. While you're at it, walk into a police station, or a government building court of law. If it's legal - what's the problem?

Oh, I see! So you decide which judge is right and which one is wrong, then. How exactly does that work? Are you a senior member of the Spanish judiciary? I seem to recall reading about that case and, if I remember rightly, the police arrested the guy for an obsolete offence under the Penal Code instead of arresting him for a byelaw offence (like the man was convicted of in Barcelona). It's similar here. If the police arrest you for the wrong offence, then you get off scot free and can possibly make a claim against the police. But that doesn't mean the behaviour which gave rise to the arrest was lawful.

You know as well as I do that if you walk about the streets of a Spanish town or city naked, there is a possibility at least that you will be ordered to cover up and could even be arrested and fined - not because there is a specific law against nakedness, but because the legal authorities recognise that some people don't wish to see your nudity and so they will invoke some law or byelaw that fits the crime. That happened to Gough in both England and Scotland and it can happen in Spain.

Stu

Recently we were out on one of my nude safaris when swimming in the pools when the police appeared on a training course for river rescues they stopped and joined us for drinks. A dog we had taken with us was having such a good time it would not come to us when called,but the friendly police went and arrested the dog for us,the dog was also nude.
so they do arrest sometimes.

eaglepeakpete

02-02-2008, 02:40 PM

Recently we were out on one of my nude safaris when swimming in the pools when the police appeared on a training course for river rescues they stopped and joined us for drinks. A dog we had taken with us was having such a good time it would not come to us when called,but the friendly police went and arrested the dog for us,the dog was also nude.
so they do arrest sometimes.

Stu

If you read carefully my earlier posting by the Spanish Naturist Organisation ( FEN ) you will see you are wrong as usual.The article makes the legal position here very clear, the problem here is most of the police dont know the law themselves, and that is why Fen published the article. They would not say what they do if it was incorrect on a topic in which they are experts and in which they will have taken legal advice.

Stu2630

02-03-2008, 01:48 AM

When one person says he's wrong, it's debatable, but when a dozen people tell him he's wrong, his gray cells should be registering something, but not in his sad case.

The fact that a lot of people believe something does not make them right. Go back five centuries and tell people that the earth is round and see how many people agree with you.

Look at all the countries that he has been kicked out of all of his life. He can go to Antarctica; hardly any nudes there to complain about.

I've never been kicked out of a country in my life. And in some of the countries I have visited, you would be punished very severely for practising nudism.

eaglepeakpete

I have read the article by the Spanish Naturist Organisation ( FEN ) - and I also read in one of the links someone else posted on here that the Spanish police don't share their interpretation of the law. So, if you are so confident, take me up on my challenge and test it by walking through the centre of a major Spanish city naked and in full view of the police and see what happens. If they arrest you and take you to court, you will obviously be found not guilty and you can publicize that fact in the national Spanish press for all to see and establish your "right". But you see there are those annoying byelaws, aren't there? Like the one in Barcelona. And no doubt there are others in other cities, too. So, just like Steve Gough, you may be ignored in some places, but in others you will find yourself in trouble because the authorities will find a law that "fits" the circumstances. And, as that is the case, it makes a mockery of the assertion that you have a right to be nude in any public place in Spain. FEN makes a claim from its own perspective: the man who was fined in Barcelona discovered that their interpretation can not be relied upon.

Stu

Sanslines

02-03-2008, 04:23 AM

The fact that a lot of people believe something does not make them right. Go back five centuries and tell people that the earth is round and see how many people agree with you.

Exactly! The fact that Stu keeps telling nudists that the majority do not agree with them does not make the majority right. The fact that Stu bases some of his arguments on the fact that he speaks for the majority wishes of textiles do not make them right. Even though nudists may be a minority group, their opinions are not wrong and should not be supressed only because they do not represent the majority.

I have read the article by the Spanish Naturist Organisation ( FEN ) - and I also read in one of the links someone else posted on here that the Spanish police don't share their interpretation of the law. So, if you are so confident, take me up on my challenge and test it by walking through the centre of a major Spanish city naked and in full view of the police and see what happens. If they arrest you and take you to court, you will obviously be found not guilty and you can publicize that fact in the national Spanish press for all to see and establish your "right". But you see there are those annoying byelaws, aren't there? Like the one in Barcelona. And no doubt there are others in other cities, too. So, just like Steve Gough, you may be ignored in some places, but in others you will find yourself in trouble because the authorities will find a law that "fits" the circumstances. And, as that is the case, it makes a mockery of the assertion that you have a right to be nude in any public place in Spain. FEN makes a claim from its own perspective: the man who was fined in Barcelona discovered that their interpretation can not be relied upon.

Stu, No matter what anyone says here or no matter how many times and how clearly they prove you wrong, you will NEVER admit or accept the fact that you can be (and are inthis case) just plain wrong. You again prove that you will believe what you want to believe and are virtually incapable of altering your views or opinions based upon presentation of factual information.

Stu2630

02-03-2008, 05:42 AM

Sanslines

The fact that Stu keeps telling nudists that the majority do not agree with them does not make the majority right....

Nudism is anything from a recreational preference to a lifestyle. It is neither right nor wrong. I have never said that "the majority do not agree with them (nudists)", merely that the majority have limits as to when and where they find it acceptable to encounter nudity.

Stu, No matter what anyone says here or no matter how many times and how clearly they prove you wrong, you will NEVER admit or accept the fact that you can be (and are in this case) just plain wrong.

If I were proved wrong, I'm big enough to accept that. Nobody here has proved me wrong.

You again prove that you will believe what you want to believe and are virtually incapable of altering your views or opinions based upon presentation of factual information.

What has been presented on this thread is a document written not by some Spanish legal authority, but by Spanish nudists - and the nudists here are the ones who are "believing what they want to believe" by accepting it as the Gospel truth. I have shown a reported case where a man was fined by a judge in Barcelona for public nudity - and the judge stated the right of people not to have to see nudity. That's a FACT - inconvenient to your case but a fact none the less.

The claim has been made by the Spanish naturists that nudity is a right which can be exercised anywhere in public in Spain, but that is based upon the premise that there is no specific law banning it. As Steve Gough is learning to his cost, the absence of an explicit prohibition on doing something is not the same thing as an inalienable right to do that thing. I accept that there is nothing in the Spanish Penal Code to outlaw nudity (just as there isn't in the UK), but it is evident that local byelaws may be used if police decide that nudity was undesirable or inappropriate. It is then up to a court to decide whether or not they agree with the police's view.

Stu

MJ_KC

02-03-2008, 06:58 AM

If I were proved wrong, I'm big enough to accept that. Nobody here has proved me wrong.

Stu

I simply do not believe you. You will simply deny that you have been proven wrong, as you just did.

Stu2630

02-03-2008, 07:09 AM

I simply do not believe you. You will simply deny that you have been proven wrong, as you just did.

What have I said that you "simply" do not believe? This?

http://www.thinkspain.com/news-spain/13968

It's a newspaper report. I didn't write it.

In the end, you'll believe what you want to believe and ignore reality. The guy got prosecuted and fined in Barcelona for nudity: it happened, and the fact that it happened proves that I am right.

Stu

Sanslines

02-03-2008, 07:55 AM

Sanslines

[quote]Nudism is anything from a recreational preference to a lifestyle. It is neither right nor wrong. I have never said that "the majority do not agree with them (nudists)", merely that the majority have limits as to when and where they find it acceptable to encounter nudity.

You are wrong! You have continuously brought up in the past (over and over again) how the 'majority' textiles have rights and majority rules. You have specifically stated that nudists are a small minority and a small minority can not dictate or impose changes to the majority. You first need to admit that you will do anything and say anything to protect your position which is extreme abhorrance and disguist towards nudity.

If I were proved wrong, I'm big enough to accept that. Nobody here has proved me wrong.

Lol......what a joke......You have been proven wrong and yet instead of 'manning up' and admitting that you were wrong, you continue to deny it. Instead of admitting that you have ever been wrong, you just deny that you are wrong in spite of all of the very obvious evidence to the contrary.

What has been presented on this thread is a document written not by some Spanish legal authority, but by Spanish nudists - and the nudists here are the ones who are "believing what they want to believe" by accepting it as the Gospel truth. I have shown a reported case where a man was fined by a judge in Barcelona for public nudity - and the judge stated the right of people not to have to see nudity. That's a FACT - inconvenient to your case but a fact none the less.

What you have presented is NOT a document that was written by a legal authority, but an article. Everyone knows that articles are full of misrepresentations and half truths. Instead of admitting this, you continue to claim that your article trumps anything that anyone else can say unless it is from some recognized legal authority. How absurd!

In spite of all of the evidence and commentary to the contrary, Stu continues to deny that he could possible be wrong. Stu continues to make concrete assumptions based upon that which will support his position and will never, ever admit that he is wrong. In spite of information from a naturist who actually owns a naturist facility and lives in Spain. Stu claims to know the laws in Spain better then someone who obviously had better know Spanish law concerning nudism. Stu is just plain wrong again and yet he continues to deny that he is wrong. You claim that "a judge stated the right of people not to have to see nudity" is dishonest. What the judge actually did was express his own personal opinion which is NOT the same thing as a legal ruling. Got the difference Stu?

The claim has been made by the Spanish naturists that nudity is a right which can be exercised anywhere in public in Spain, but that is based upon the premise that there is no specific law banning it. As Steve Gough is learning to his cost, the absence of an explicit prohibition on doing something is not the same thing as an inalienable right to do that thing. I accept that there is nothing in the Spanish Penal Code to outlaw nudity (just as there isn't in the UK), but it is evident that local byelaws may be used if police decide that nudity was undesirable or inappropriate. It is then up to a court to decide whether or not they agree with the police's view.

The police can always find something to charge an individual that they wish to charge. Why you can even be charged with 'breach of peace' for coming into this forum and 'disturbing the peace'. It can also be concluded that some of what you post is a form of written 'pollution' and you would therefore be found guilty of violating world anti pollution laws.

Sanslines

02-03-2008, 08:12 AM

What have I said that you "simply" do not believe? This?

http://www.thinkspain.com/news-spain/13968

It's a newspaper report. I didn't write it.

In the end, you'll believe what you want to believe and ignore reality. The guy got prosecuted and fined in Barcelona for nudity: it happened, and the fact that it happened proves that I am right.

Stu

No Stu, you did not write it. However you certainly misinterpret it and I will prove this. This is the exact article that you refer to:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="95%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=titular12bold vAlign=center align=left>Stubborn nudist fined 80 euros

By: thinkSPAIN

</TD></TR><TR><TD class=textosimplejustify vAlign=top align=left>A judge has fined a man who habitually walks about the streets of Barcelona with nothing on, eighty euros for disobeying the orders of a pair of Guardia Urbana officers who asked him to identify himself and put his clothes back on. The man, Esteban TE, refused and was arrested.
In his ruling the judge "considers that the officers had the authority to order the man to get dressed, and although not punishable under the Penal Code, a council byelaw dictates that 'nobody may undervalue the rights of others, nor offend their dignity'." The judge went on to say that the nudist seems to forget that "others also have the right not to see him without clothes."
The incident occurred on the 24th September during the La Mercè festival in Barcelona's Barceloneta district.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Cleary the officers asked this man two things: 1) Identify yourself 2) Put your clothes back on.

The man refused. BUT what did the man refuse to do? Identify himself, put his clothes on, or both? It appears to be both and yet this article mentions nothing about the man refusing to identify himself, which is clearly an offense (at least in the USA). In the USA, if a peace officer asks you to identify yourself to him or her, you must comply or you can be changed. Very interesting how this article mentions nothing further about whether this man did or did not identify himself.
Obviously, the intent of the police was to charge this man with being nude. However, no such Spanish law exists to do this. Hence, he was charged with a much more nebulous law which can apply to a very wide variety of situations. "Nobody may undervalue the rights of others, nor offend their dignity" can mean anything such as telling your neighbour that he or she is fat or a munchkin.
The question to be asked is who was specifically offended ie who filed the complaint? Did anyone? If not then no one's dignity was offended. The judge further went on to express his own personal opinion against nudity whcih demonstrates motive as to why he ruled the way that he did. Basically the judge wanted to charge this man with public nudity and did not have a specific law to do so. He therefore found and applied another law which clearly does not deal specifically with public nudity.

In the final analysis, Stu is very much like the judge in that Stu is determined to demonstrate that the rights of the textiles trump those of nudists. Where no specific law exists to do this, Stu will find some nebulous law that very vaguely might apply with a stretch just to prove his point. In spite of all evidence to the contrary, Stu will ignore all of this evidence and cling to his flimsy arguments. Stu believes what he wants to believe and then accuses others of that which he is guilty of himself. This is one of the oldest games in the book which further proves that Stu is just here to play games. Now watch Stu reply with more denials, spin, twists and turns in his never ending game of trying to convince nudists that they should be segregated from society so that Stu can be protected from nudity. Stu ought to be fined 80 euros for promoting segregation.

Stu2630

02-03-2008, 08:52 AM

Sanslines

You are wrong! You have continuously brought up in the past (over and over again) how the 'majority' textiles have rights and majority rules.Textiles do have rights. And we do have a majority rule system. So I'm not wrong.

You have specifically stated that nudists are a small minority and a small minority can not dictate or impose changes to the majority.They are and they can't.

You first need to admit that you will do anything and say anything to protect your position which is extreme abhorrence and disgust towards nudity.No, I won't admit that because it's not true.

What you have presented is NOT a document that was written by a legal authority, but an article. Everyone knows that articles are full of misrepresentations and half truths.This is a newspaper report in which a judge is directly quoted. It would be a contempt of court for a newspaper to wilfully misquote a judge.

Stu claims to know the laws in Spain better then someone who obviously had better know Spanish law concerning nudism.A man was fined by a judge for being naked in Barcelona. No matter how many ways you want to spin it, that's a fact. The Spanish are doing what they do in most European countries - they use broad, public order laws to control inappropriate behaviour. In this case, it is a byelaw as with this case in Serbia:

http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSEIC35164920070723

You claim that "a judge stated the right of people not to have to see nudity" is dishonest. What the judge actually did was express his own personal opinion which is NOT the same thing as a legal ruling. Got the difference Stu?Of course it's a legal ruling! Judges have to decide cases every day on the basis of their own "judgment" and when they do, that's a legal ruling whether it is binding on future cases of similar fact or not. In this case, the judge decided that being naked in public was enough to 'undervalue the rights of others' and to 'offend their dignity'.

Cleary the officers asked this man two things: 1) Identify yourself 2) Put your clothes back on. The man refused. BUT what did the man refuse to do? Identify himself, put his clothes on, or both? It appears to be both and yet this article mentions nothing about the man refusing to identify himself, which is clearly an offense (at least in the USA).You choose to believe that the man was punished because he refused to identify himself. The article doesn't say that. It does quote the judge, though, and nudity was the reason he gave for the conviction. The judge verbalised and upheld the right of people not to see nakedness. As is the case in Spain, and the UK, very few European countries have specific laws against nudity - but the authorities use other laws as they deem appropriate. That's how the law here works.

In spite of all evidence to the contrary, Stu will ignore all of this evidence and cling to his flimsy arguments.The only "evidence" is an advisory leaflet written by Spanish naturists. And that's it! I have provided evidence showing that a man was prosecuted and fined in Barcelona for public nudity. You are the one with a "flimsy argument".

Stu

Sanslines

02-03-2008, 10:23 AM

textiles do have rights. And we do have a majority rule system. So I'm not wrong.

You also said this: "The fact that a lot of people believe something does not make them right. Go back five centuries and tell people that the earth is round and see how many people agree with you."

Clearly being a majority does not make textiles right based upon your own very clear statement. Therefore your past demands that since textiles are a majority, and majority rules, then textiles may rule BUT they MAY NOT BE RIGHT IN RULING logically follows. Therefore, you have invalidated any past claim that you have made that since textiles are the majority, they must be right. Textiles can and are wrong. You are a textile. You can and are wrong at times.

They are and they can't

They can if they prove that they are right regardless of whether they are a minority or a majority. Your above statements prove this.

No, I won't admit that because it's not true.

You won't admit it because you are closed minded and refuse to see that you are just plain wrong about this. You are wrong so admit it!

This is a newspaper report in which a judge is directly quoted. It would be a contempt of court for a newspaper to wilfully misquote a judge.

Newspapers misquote and edit quotes each and every day and you know this. The newspaper obviously did not quote everything that this judge had said. You know this and so you have put up another straw man argument that has just been knocked down.

A man was fined by a judge for being naked in Barcelona. No matter how many ways you want to spin it, that's a fact. The Spanish are doing what they do in most European countries - they use broad, public order laws to control inappropriate behaviour. In this case, it is a byelaw as with this case in Serbia:

http://www.reuters.com/article/oddlyEnoughNews/idUSEIC35164920070723

You are doing the spinning and continue to deny the obvious. You have put your blinders on and see only that which you wish to see based upon your own personal phobias. You ignore each and every point that I made above because it knocks down your straw man arguments whcih are based upon information that you selectively pick and chose.

Of course it's a legal ruling! Judges have to decide cases every day on the basis of their own "judgment" and when they do, that's a legal ruling whether it is binding on future cases of similar fact or not. In this case, the judge decided that being naked in public was enough to 'undervalue the rights of others' and to 'offend their dignity'.

Judges are human and can also be wrong. You refuse to admit this for doing so would destroy your argument against nudity. Just another example of your extreme hatred and disguist towards nudity. Oh wait, above you refused to agree with this statement because you say it is not true. lol...lol What a joke!

This case can also be overturned on appeal just as any case in life can be overturned.

You choose to believe that the man was punished because he refused to identify himself. The article doesn't say that. It does quote the judge, though, and nudity was the reason he gave for the conviction. The judge verbalised and upheld the right of people not to see nakedness. As is the case in Spain, and the UK, very few European countries have specific laws against nudity - but the authorities use other laws as they deem appropriate. That's how the law here works.

If a police authority asks someone to identify themself and that person refuses, then that person is in violation of the law. If the police officer refused to charge this man on a clear violation of the law pertaining to identification and instead focused upon charging this man under some nebulous, catch all law, then this clearly demonstrates how the police officer picked which indirect law (for there is no clear and direct law in Spain against public nudity) he chose to charge this man with, and how the police officer chose which clear law to ignore.

The only "evidence" is an advisory leaflet written by Spanish naturists. And that's it! I have provided evidence showing that a man was prosecuted and fined in Barcelona for public nudity. You are the one with a "flimsy argument".

You have provided a news brief with limited information. You subsequently chose to pick that which you needed to base your anti nudity argument on. You know very well that a great deal of information was left out of your limited news brief and yet you have taken it upon yourself to fill in the blanks for missing or incomplete information to base your argument on. You have built your argument on a house of cards that has been show to be deficient in foundation and has subsequently collapsed. Instead of admitting your shortcomings, you twist and turn and refuse to admit that you were wrong about many things and have dug yourself deeper and deeper into a hole. Face it Stu, you are not only closed minded, but you are dishonest when you refuse to think outside of the box and admit when you are clearly wrong. You put on your blinders and pick and chose anything and everything to spout the same old tired slogans against nudity. You have been doing this for five years.

nakeduni

02-03-2008, 10:24 AM

No Stu, you did not write it. However you certainly misinterpret it and I will prove this. This is the exact article that you refer to:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="95%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=titular12bold vAlign=center align=left>Stubborn nudist fined 80 euros

By: thinkSPAIN

</TD></TR><TR><TD class=textosimplejustify vAlign=top align=left>A judge has fined a man who habitually walks about the streets of Barcelona with nothing on, eighty euros for disobeying the orders of a pair of Guardia Urbana officers who asked him to identify himself and put his clothes back on. The man, Esteban TE, refused and was arrested.
In his ruling the judge "considers that the officers had the authority to order the man to get dressed, and although not punishable under the Penal Code, a council byelaw dictates that 'nobody may undervalue the rights of others, nor offend their dignity'." The judge went on to say that the nudist seems to forget that "others also have the right not to see him without clothes."
The incident occurred on the 24th September during the La Mercè festival in Barcelona's Barceloneta district.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Cleary the officers asked this man two things: 1) Identify yourself 2) Put your clothes back on.

The man refused. BUT what did the man refuse to do? Identify himself, put his clothes on, or both? It appears to be both and yet this article mentions nothing about the man refusing to identify himself, which is clearly an offense (at least in the USA). In the USA, if a peace officer asks you to identify yourself to him or her, you must comply or you can be changed. Very interesting how this article mentions nothing further about whether this man did or did not identify himself.
Obviously, the intent of the police was to charge this man with being nude. However, no such Spanish law exists to do this. Hence, he was charged with a much more nebulous law which can apply to a very wide variety of situations. "Nobody may undervalue the rights of others, nor offend their dignity" can mean anything such as telling your neighbour that he or she is fat or a munchkin.
The question to be asked is who was specifically offended ie who filed the complaint? Did anyone? If not then no one's dignity was offended. The judge further went on to express his own personal opinion against nudity whcih demonstrates motive as to why he ruled the way that he did. Basically the judge wanted to charge this man with public nudity and did not have a specific law to do so. He therefore found and applied another law which clearly does not deal specifically with public nudity.

In the final analysis, Stu is very much like the judge in that Stu is determined to demonstrate that the rights of the textiles trump those of nudists. Where no specific law exists to do this, Stu will find some nebulous law that very vaguely might apply with a stretch just to prove his point. In spite of all evidence to the contrary, Stu will ignore all of this evidence and cling to his flimsy arguments. Stu believes what he wants to believe and then accuses others of that which he is guilty of himself. This is one of the oldest games in the book which further proves that Stu is just here to play games. Now watch Stu reply with more denials, spin, twists and turns in his never ending game of trying to convince nudists that they should be segregated from society so that Stu can be protected from nudity. Stu ought to be fined 80 euros for promoting segregation.

The above should be very clear to anyone with at least an average intelligence. Only a madman, or a right wing wacko could spin this down into his personal black hole. Some people's synapses are not firing correctly, or at all. Judges do not legislate law, they apply law. Since there is no law making nudity illegal in Barcelona, the judge has no anti-nudity law to apply in this case.

Naturist Mark

02-03-2008, 10:37 AM

It would be a contempt of court for a newspaper to wilfully misquote a judge.

LOL

Is it possible that a British subject is unfamiliar with the 'accuracy' of the press?

Sanslines

02-03-2008, 10:38 AM

The above should be very clear to anyone with at least an average intelligence. Only a madman, or a right wing wacko could spin this down into his personal black hole. Some people's synapses are not firing correctly, or at all. Judges do not legislate law, they apply law. Since there is no law making nudity illegal in Barcelona, the judge has no anti-nudity law to apply in this case.

Some people have such strong phobias against nudity that they can't even admit that they have a serious problem. Sadly, denial of the obvious is what prevents some from overcoming serious problems. It is so obvious in this case that the phobias are so strong and to the point where any admission that a person can be wrong about certain things would be personally devistating. Irrational fears and panic sets in as the person fears loss of control of the situation. No amount of rational and logical arguments will ever get the person to face that which he is terrified of facing and that is an extreme and irrational, abhorant fear of any form of nudity including female toplessness.

MoonShadow

02-03-2008, 11:34 AM

Stu, you need to review history. Change and changes among homo sapiens have ultimately been a result of a "minority" struggling, fighting, demanding, or implementing CHANGE(S). Minorities will always have that impact.

Nudists are a minority who are in the direction of changing others' perception of what nudism is about and what non-sexual nudity is about. To do this, we have to push the envelope on current thinking among the MAJORITY. And push the envelope, we will.

nakeduni

02-03-2008, 02:41 PM

Some people have such strong phobias against nudity that they can't even admit that they have a serious problem. Sadly, denial of the obvious is what prevents some from overcoming serious problems. It is so obvious in this case that the phobias are so strong and to the point where any admission that a person can be wrong about certain things would be personally devistating. Irrational fears and panic sets in as the person fears loss of control of the situation. No amount of rational and logical arguments will ever get the person to face that which he is terrified of facing and that is an extreme and irrational, abhorant fear of any form of nudity including female toplessness.

Man, I couldn't agree with you more. Maybe I should have more empathy, but promoting nudism to rational people is a better use of our time. :)

Pete Knight

02-03-2008, 11:42 PM

Well done guys, looks like you've given Stu a good thrashing there, you have shown him to be contradicting himself once again, knowing that CFF is in good hands it looks as though I can enjoy my naked time in Australia, but will Stu have the good grace to admit he's wrong, I think not!
I'll be meeting Bushnud in a few weeks, may even get to meet Dario in Brisbane too! (I fly in on the 24th Dario, do you know where the YHA hostel is?).

Pete Knight

Stu2630

02-06-2008, 07:44 AM

Pete

Thrashing? Really? Well cast your eyes over this.

Today, I got an email reply from a lawyer in the Spanish "Ministerio de Justicia". I don't speak Spanish, but this is what it says:

Hola Stu:<o></o>
<o></o>
Efectivamente el nudismo está despenalizado en España y por tanto su práctica no es delito (ilícito penal) en ningún lugar. No obstante puede constituir una infracción administrativa, y conllevar una sanción monetaria, por desobediencia a las ordenanzas municipales en algunos ayuntamientos, que pueden prohibirlo dentro de sus términos municipales de forma directa o genéricamente en diferentes interpretaciones como actos que atentan a la moral o a las costumbres de las personas<o></o>
<o></o>
Recibe un cordial saludo
As I said, I don't speak Spanish, so I put it through an instant translator on the Internet, and it came out as follows:

Really the nudism is legalized in Spain and therefore his practice is not a crime (illicit penalty) in any place. Nevertheless it can constitute an administrative infraction, and bear a monetary sanction, for disobedience to the municipal ordinances in some towns, which can prohibit it inside his municipality of direct form or generically in different interpretations as acts that commit an outrage against the morality or against the customs of the persons

It receives a cordial greetingAs this is an electronic translator, some of this is somewhat incoherent, but it's clear that while nudism is not a crime anywhere in Spain, there are byelaws ("municipal ordnances") in some towns which make it illegal and for which you can get a fine ("monetary sanction). That is pretty much along the lines of what I have been saying - so I was right all along!!!!! :)

Now, will anyone here have the good grace to accept that? I doubt it!

Stu (taking a smug bow)

Sanslines

02-06-2008, 07:52 AM

- so I was right all along!!!!! :)

Now, will anyone here have the good grace to accept that? I doubt it!

Stu (taking a smug bow)

Right about what? Right about taking certain, very defined specifics and attempting to make such specifics a universal case? The only thing that you have proved and are actually right about is that you will never admit that you can be wrong, and when it is clearly pointed out that you are wrong, you will only twist and spin the information to make yourself 'right'. You fool no one here but yourself.

The only thing that you have 'proved' is how legal representatives in Spain can always find some kind of law to charge anyone with for anything. In this case, the intent was to punish someone for being nude where no clear law prohibited such activity. Then again, we already knew this as this is a common occurance in many countries. So, in the final analysis, you have proved nothing more then the fact that your hatred of nudity is to such an extreme extent that you will stop at nothing to 'prove yourself right' regardless of whether your so called 'proofs' make sense or not.

Stu2630

02-06-2008, 08:11 AM

The only thing that you have 'proved' is how legal representatives in Spain can always find some kind of law to charge anyone with for anything.

I said that the Spanish could use more generally-worded byelaws and make them fit if they wanted to prevent or discourage nudism. That was the point I made and I was evidently correct. The fact that you and other nudists think that laws should not be adapted in that way is immaterial - the fact is that they are and they always have been and they always will be. Laws are not simply theoretical concepts: they are pragmatic tools to regulate behaviour in society.

So, in the final analysis, you have proved nothing more then the fact that your hatred of nudity is to such an extreme extent that you will stop at nothing to 'prove yourself right' regardless of whether your so called 'proofs' make sense or not.

No - I have proved that there is no universal and unassailable right to be nude in public anywhere in Spain, as was stated by the Spanish naturists. That was the point I was making and the reply I received shows unequivocally that I was right. My own feelings towards the sight of nakedness are irrelevant in this.

Stu

nakeduni

02-06-2008, 08:41 AM

Right about what? Right about taking certain, very defined specifics and attempting to make such specifics a universal case? The only thing that you have proved and are actually right about is that you will never admit that you can be wrong, and when it is clearly pointed out that you are wrong, you will only twist and spin the information to make yourself 'right'. You fool no one here but yourself.

The only thing that you have 'proved' is how legal representatives in Spain can always find some kind of law to charge anyone with for anything. In this case, the intent was to punish someone for being nude where no clear law prohibited such activity. Then again, we already knew this as this is a common occurance in many countries. So, in the final analysis, you have proved nothing more then the fact that your hatred of nudity is to such an extreme extent that you will stop at nothing to 'prove yourself right' regardless of whether your so called 'proofs' make sense or not.

Stew was wrong all along, and will be in the future. He hasn't been right on anything.

Sanslines

02-06-2008, 08:46 AM

I said that the Spanish could use more generally-worded byelaws and make them fit if they wanted to prevent or discourage nudism. That was the point I made and I was evidently correct. The fact that you and other nudists think that laws should not be adapted in that way is immaterial - the fact is that they are and they always have been and they always will be. Laws are not simply theoretical concepts: they are pragmatic tools to regulate behaviour in society.

What you have shown is another example of where certain Spanish legal system individuals have found some archaic and nebulous law and have attempted to apply it to a case for which it was not specifically intended. The only thing that you have shown is how the legal system can always find a law to prohibit anything and everything that they so wish. Those of us who have studied the USA Civil Rights history know fully well how law enforcement used and abused laws to jail and harass the peaceful civil rights marchers. It took the power of the federal government to step in and start to prevent those abuses. You must know fully well that you are promoting a very naive view of how laws are "pragmatic tools used to regulate behavior in society". The only reason that you state this is because in this particualr case, laws were used to prevent something that you detest with a vengeance. It just goes to show how far you will go to protect your total avoidance of nudity.

No - I have proved that there is no universal and unassailable right to be nude in public anywhere in Spain, as was stated by the Spanish naturists. That was the point I was making and the reply I received shows unequivocally that I was right. My own feelings towards the sight of nakedness are irrelevant in this.

Stu

You have only proved another case of how you will 'lie with statistics'. One case and one reply does not prove that such responses and outcomes are universal. You again insult the intelligence of this forum by taking one example and trying to subtly convince this forum that your one example is universal. It is not and you know it. Your feelings concerning nakedness are extremely relevent as they demonstrate your intent. Your motives are always to step on nudists by reminding them of your limitations and toleration of nudism. In the end, you once again prove that you are NO FRIEND OF NUDISTS.

Stu2630

02-06-2008, 09:15 AM

Stew was wrong all along, and will be in the future. He hasn't been right on anything.

Yes, of course. And black is white, a whale is a species of insect and the moon is made of cheese.

I shove solid proof under your nose and you ignore it because it proves what I said is true. It's pointless discussing anything with you.

What you have shown is another example of where certain Spanish legal system individuals have found some archaic and nebulous law and have attempted to apply it to a case for which it was not specifically intended. The only thing that you have shown is how the legal system can always find a law to prohibit anything and everything that they so wish.

Even if I agreed with you - which I don't - the point is that the law in Spain can be used, and on occasion is used, against public nudity. Whether you agree that is right or wrong is entirely beside the point. These byelaws exist and can be used, so it is irresponsible of Spanish naturists to make out that a person has an inalienable right to be nude in public in Spain.

Those of us who have studied the USA Civil Rights history know fully well how law enforcement used and abused laws to jail and harass the peaceful civil rights marchers. It took the power of the federal government to step in and start to prevent those abuses.

I can guarantee you that won't happen in Spain! :laugh:

You must know fully well that you are promoting a very naive view of how laws are "pragmatic tools used to regulate behavior in society".

One of our top judges once called the law "a benign facilitating mechanism" - some laws are tightly framed and others are nebulous. In the case of the latter, the law is made to be sufficiently adaptable to cover a broad range of circumstances to deal with many social ills, and then allow the courts scope to interpret these as it sees fit in the public interest.

The only reason that you state this is because in this particualr case, laws were used to prevent something that you detest with a vengeance. It just goes to show how far you will go to protect your total avoidance of nudity.

The reason I'm stating it is that it's true.

You have only proved another case of how you will 'lie with statistics'. One case and one reply does not prove that such responses and outcomes are universal.

I haven't given you any statistics. I have recited verbatim a correspondence I have received from no less a source than the Spanish Ministry of Justice. Their response explains how it is that a man was fined for being nude in public in Barcelona a few months ago. No statistics, no lies, just (inconvenient?) facts.

Your feelings concerning nakedness are extremely relevent as they demonstrate your intent. Your motives are always to step on nudists by reminding them of your limitations and toleration of nudism. In the end, you once again prove that you are NO FRIEND OF NUDISTS.

I will always be a friend of responsible, considerate nudists. But I am no friend of people who want to get naked in public places and circumstances where it is not expected and can not be avoided.

Stu

eaglepeakpete

02-06-2008, 09:35 AM

Yes, of course. And black is white, a whale is a species of insect and the moon is made of cheese.

I shove solid proof under your nose and you ignore it because it proves what I said is true. It's pointless discussing anything with you.

Even if I agreed with you - which I don't - the point is that the law in Spain can be used, and on occasion is used, against public nudity. Whether you agree that is right or wrong is entirely beside the point. These byelaws exist and can be used, so it is irresponsible of Spanish naturists to make out that a person has an inalienable right to be nude in public in Spain.

I can guarantee you that won't happen in Spain! :laugh:

One of our top judges once called the law "a benign facilitating mechanism" - some laws are tightly framed and others are nebulous. In the case of the latter, the law is made to be sufficiently adaptable to cover a broad range of circumstances to deal with many social ills, and then allow the courts scope to interpret these as it sees fit in the public interest.

The reason I'm stating it is that it's true.

I haven't given you any statistics. I have recited verbatim a correspondence I have received from no less a source than the Spanish Ministry of Justice. Their response explains how it is that a man was fined for being nude in public in Barcelona a few months ago. No statistics, no lies, just (inconvenient?) facts.

I will always be a friend of responsible, considerate nudists. But I am no friend of people who want to get naked in public places and circumstances where it is not expected and can not be avoided.

Stu

Ther is little point in discussing this matter with Stu who is just out to be difficult.
I live in Spain and run a nudist business here so have first hand knowledge and experience, and all I can say is the police have always been co-operative and accepting of nudity here and everywhere Ive been, so I will believe as I find until personally proven wrong.

Sanslines

02-06-2008, 09:46 AM

Even if I agreed with you - which I don't - the point is that the law in Spain can be used, and on occasion is used, against public nudity. Whether you agree that is right or wrong is entirely beside the point. These byelaws exist and can be used, so it is irresponsible of Spanish naturists to make out that a person has an inalienable right to be nude in public in Spain.

The 'point' is now a moving target with you. You will continue to shift focus and make whatever small point that you can make and support it with whatever limited and very specific information that you can find only to save face in some attempt to prove that you are 'right' about something. Face it Stu, the only thing that you are 'right' about is that you take immense joy in bragging about some poor soul who was abused by the legal system for the mere 'crime' of public nudity in Spain - a crime for which no specific law prohibits it.

I can guarantee you that won't happen in Spain! :laugh:

You are in no position to guarantee anything. It appears that you have a somewhat dim view of Spanards and view Spain as a somewhat backward and disorganized country where the people are too lazy or stupid to ever make a stand for civil rights.

One of our top judges once called the law "a benign facilitating mechanism" - some laws are tightly framed and others are nebulous. In the case of the latter, the law is made to be sufficiently adaptable to cover a broad range of circumstances to deal with many social ills, and then allow the courts scope to interpret these as it sees fit in the public interest.

It's far past time for you to take a course in how the legal system can and does abuse their authority. For someone who claims to be involved in the legal process, you certainly have a very naive and limited view of the entirety of the legal process.

The reason I'm stating it is that it's true.

It is true to you because you must convince yourself that it is true based upon your hatred of nudity. It is just like the alcoholic who convinces himself that he does not have a drinking problem.

I haven't given you any statistics. I have recited verbatim a correspondence I have received from no less a source than the Spanish Ministry of Justice. Their response explains how it is that a man was fined for being nude in public in Barcelona a few months ago. No statistics, no lies, just (inconvenient?) facts.

Stu,

You really are too much at times. The extremes that you go to prove your point is so dishonest at times. You continue to insult everyone's intelligence by presenting your hand picked information as complete (as in subtly implied and not by fact) information. You are trying to pass off some piece of casual correspondence that was issued in response to your 'loaded' questions. Questions that we have no idea of as to how you phrased them in order to solicit the kinds of replies that you wanted to obviously receive. This is just another example of how desperate you are to go to such extremes to annoy a "Justice" who obviously has better uses of his time then to reply to your phobias against nudity.

I will always be a friend of responsible, considerate nudists. But I am no friend of people who want to get naked in public places and circumstances where it is not expected and can not be avoided.

Stu

In your dreams you will, but intelligent and aware nudists will very quickly come to the conclusion that you are NO FRIEND OF NUDISTS.

Stu2630

02-06-2008, 10:15 AM

Eaglespeakpete

I'm not doubting your experiences in the area you live in: I'm sure you are speaking honestly. My point is that it is wrong of the Spanish naturists to make out that there is an inalienable right to be naked anywhere in Spain because, as I have shown, in many places the authorities will use local laws to discourage or prevent it. That's all I'm saying. If you doubt what I'm telling you, why don't you show the quotation I supplied from the Ministry of Justice to a lawyer or a policeman in the area where you live and ask them whether or not it is accurate. I have no doubt they will confirm that it is.

Sanslines

Face it Stu, the only thing that you are 'right' about is that you take immense joy in bragging about some poor soul who was abused by the legal system for the mere 'crime' of public nudity in Spain - a crime for which no specific law prohibits it.

When the law works in a way you don't like, you call it 'abuse'. I don't: I call it protecting the public. Legal systems throughout the world have similarly vague laws designed to catch all manner of antisocial behaviour and of course they can and should be used against inappropriate nudity.

You are in no position to guarantee anything. It appears that you have a somewhat dim view of Spanards and view Spain as a somewhat backward and disorganized country where the people are too lazy or stupid to ever make a stand for civil rights.

I don't think that at all. I think the Spaniards are simply being pragmatic about this and they are right to be.

It's far past time for you to take a course in how the legal system can and does abuse their authority

I don't regard it as abuse - I regard it as entirely legitimate.

Quote:
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px inset ;" class="alt2"> The reason I'm stating it is that it's true. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
It is true to you because you must convince yourself that it is true based upon your hatred of nudity.

It's true because the Spanish Ministry of Justice says it's true: feel free to write to them yourself just as I did - you'll get exactly the same answer. :) And it's true because a man was fined in Barcelona just four months ago for being naked in public.

You are trying to pass of some piece of casual correspondence that was issued in response to your questions. Questions that we have no idea of as to how you phrased the questions to solicit the kinds of replies that you wanted to obviously hear.

I wanted to resolve this issue once and for all, and this is what I wrote:

Hello I am a part-time law lecturer in England, and I have a question about Spanish law. I have read that, in Spain, naturism can be practised anywhere and at any time - and they say that a person can not be arrested or prosecuted for walking nude in any public place. They give this link to the Spanish naturists:

http://www.naturismo.org/legal.html (http://webmail.toucansurf.com/webmail?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.naturismo.org%2F legal.html&timestamp=1202321427&md5=7th7EPn85HLRI2cUSzfwJA%3D%3D)

Then I saw this report, which appears to conflict with this advice:

http://www.thinkspain.com/news-spain/13968 (http://webmail.toucansurf.com/webmail?redirect=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thinkspain.com%2 Fnews-spain%2F13968&timestamp=1202321427&md5=7th7EPn85HLRI2cUSzfwJA%3D%3D)

So what does the law really say about nudism and public nudity in Spain?

Thank you.

Best wishes!

Now you have the full picture. :D

Stu

MoonShadow

02-06-2008, 10:36 AM

Relentless!

and on and on and on - same stance, same messages

Oh! Forgot, it's a recording!

walter05

02-06-2008, 11:12 AM

I want to suggest that you cease this argument with Stu. He may show his support for nudists and friendship for you by testing you and e-mailing the Spanish cops.

nakeduni

02-06-2008, 12:02 PM

Relentless!

and on and on and on - same stance, same messages

Oh! Forgot, it's a recording!

He succeeds at only on thing; at trolling. He has found a forum that allows it. As a member of several watch forums, I have see trolls kicked out after a few messages. They don't like to waste bandwidth on nonsense, and allow the growth of hate and discontent.

Sanslines

02-06-2008, 12:06 PM

I want to suggest that you cease this argument with Stu. He may show his support for nudists and friendship for you by testing you and e-mailing the Spanish cops.

Exactly! Be very careful Eaglespeakpete for Stu would report you to the authorities in a millisecond and then we would have to take up a collection and bail you out of jail. This is how Stu demonstrates his 'friendship' for nudism. As long as you abide by HIS rules and follow HIS laws then you are ok. Once you cross the line with Stu, he will persecute you to the ends of this planet.

Also, one important sideline. Stu alleges to be a law professor and yet (over time) he has demonstrated (on numerous occasions) a very complete lack of understanding of the overall broad picture of law. I doubt that in real life that he has anything to do with the law. His has made far too many 'slip ups' as far as the law is concerned.

HaroldTheNudist

02-06-2008, 01:51 PM

Pete

Thrashing? Really? Well cast your eyes over this.

Today, I got an email reply from a lawyer in the Spanish "Ministerio de Justicia". I don't speak Spanish, but this is what it says:

As I said, I don't speak Spanish, so I put it through an instant translator on the Internet, and it came out as follows:

As this is an electronic translator, some of this is somewhat incoherent, but it's clear that while nudism is not a crime anywhere in Spain, there are byelaws ("municipal ordnances") in some towns which make it illegal and for which you can get a fine ("monetary sanction). That is pretty much along the lines of what I have been saying - so I was right all along!!!!! :)

Now, will anyone here have the good grace to accept that? I doubt it!

Stu (taking a smug bow)

Good work Stu

Harry

Stu2630

02-06-2008, 02:09 PM

Sanslines

Be very careful Eaglespeakpete for Stu would report you to the authorities in a millisecond and then we would have to take up a collection and bail you out of jail.I hereby promise that I will not report Eaglespeakpete to the Spanish authorities. I don't live in Spain. I don't go to Spain. What Eaglespeakpete does in Spain is of no concern to me.

So that's that one dealt with. :D

Also, one important sideline. Stu alleges to be a law professor and yet (over time) he has demonstrated (on numerous occasions) a very complete lack of understanding of the overall broad picture of law. I doubt that in real life that he has anything to do with the law. His has made far too many 'slip ups' as far as the law is concerned.Sanslines. Firstly, I am not a law "professor", and I have never said that I am. I do teach law both in colleges and for government agencies but I have never aspired to the dizzy heights of being a "professor" (which is a grand title in the UK).

Secondly, you may be in the habit of telling lies about yourself, but don't judge everyone by your own standards. These kind of ill-founded and ignorant aspersions just show how bankrupt your arguments have become. You have never caught me out in a single legal slip-up yet and you never will - except in your dreams! You have repeatedly failed to appreciate how and why some laws are loosely drafted, and why there is a difference in terms of jurisprudence between a positive and inalienable right to do something, and a mere absence of an explicit law to prohibit it.

I made an educated guess as to the position regarding Spanish law and, according to what I was told by the Spanish Justice Ministry, I was spot. You know I was right really and that's what is sticking in your craw. So you are now trying to sling mud and hoping it will stick to get your own back. It does you no credit.

Harry

Thank you. Nice to see a gracious nudist.

Stu

HaroldTheNudist

02-06-2008, 02:20 PM

Stu

you are welcome

really, its a stupid argument to try to claim the general public accepts the nudist version of why public nudity should be legal or claim it is infact is based on same logic.

I know from personal experience how the public feels about public nudity.

if I may, back to Steve Goof. he's in prison. your opinion, but do you think it is in his best interest for his own safety to be in prison?

how much more time is he likely to face? if he continues as he does, could he be infact in prisoned for 20 years or more?

Harry

Sanslines

02-06-2008, 03:59 PM

Sanslines

I hereby promise that I will not report Eaglespeakpete to the Spanish authorities. I don't live in Spain. I don't go to Spain. What Eaglespeakpete does in Spain is of no concern to me.

So that's that one dealt with. :D

Sanslines. Firstly, I am not a law "professor", and I have never said that I am. I do teach law both in colleges and for government agencies but I have never aspired to the dizzy heights of being a "professor" (which is a grand title in the UK).

Secondly, you may be in the habit of telling lies about yourself, but don't judge everyone by your own standards. These kind of ill-founded and ignorant aspersions just show how bankrupt your arguments have become. You have never caught me out in a single legal slip-up yet and you never will - except in your dreams! You have repeatedly failed to appreciate how and why some laws are loosely drafted, and why there is a difference in terms of jurisprudence between a positive and inalienable right to do something, and a mere absence of an explicit law to prohibit it.

I made an educated guess as to the position regarding Spanish law and, according to what I was told by the Spanish Justice Ministry, I was spot. You know I was right really and that's what is sticking in your craw. So you are now trying to sling mud and hoping it will stick to get your own back. It does you no credit.

Stu

Stu,

You are full of it! Refer to yourself however you wish but the bottom line is that you claim to teach law in some way, shape, or form. You have made many downright naive and nonsensical statements concerning the law and yet you deny that you have done so. A very clear example (laughable actually) is this:

This is a newspaper report in which a judge is directly quoted. It would be a contempt of court for a newspaper to wilfully misquote a judge.

Any person even without a law background (let alone with a law background) would understand how ridiculous such a statement is. You, who alleges to have some kind of law background or understanding, would certainly know better then to make such a statement. Yet, you are either taking the piss on all of us or you have no practical background in law. Given the other obvious 'flub ups' that you have made concerning basic legal understanding, you certainly would have been removed from the (legal practice) bar a very long time ago in the USA due to incompetence. Since the legal system in England is similar to that in the USA, you most certainly would not be permitted to teach any form of law and hence the obvious logical conclusion is that you have no legal background to speak of.

Another very reasonable and logical support of this conclusion is that you consistently either ignore or deny that laws can and are used improperly against individuals. Any person without a legal background (let alone one with such a background) fully understands this and yet in spite of my repeated attempts to make you aware of these very basic facts, you continue to ignore them. You plainly will always use the law to your advantage and yet deny when you are called upon doing so. This is being dishonest! You also take very specific and individual pieces of information and attempt to pull the wool over people's eyes by cleverly and subtly trying to generalize such pieces of information as universal fact that is etched in concrete and then deny that you are doing so when called to task. This is being dishonest! You also have the utter audacity and arrogance to claim that no one (specifically me in this case) can catch you in a legal 'slip up', when it is plainly obvious to any rational person that all individuals with a legal background, including judges, can and do make 'slip ups'. You will of course deny this and very subtly challenge what constitutes a 'slip up' and change the meaning of the words 'slip up' to suit your own devious and shifty purposes. Such a tactic is dishonest!

In addition, in spite of my repeated claims to explain why vague and nebulous, catch all types of laws are used against individuals in cases where no specific laws exist, and that there is a wealth of demonstrated case history of misuse of laws (ie my civil rights statements above) , you now falsely claim that I have no understanding of why certain laws are drafted in vague manners and attempt to rephrase slightly and regurgitate that which I initially presented to you. You have clearly demonstrated no originality in legal analysis, thought, or presentation of real world legal 'thinking' and appear incapable of doing so. You therefore are now resorting to accusing me of that which you were initially and plainly guilty of and that is that you resort to spreading false statements and misrepresenting yourself in order to 'prove yourself right'. Such desperate measures are certainly the mark of a individual that is certainly not at all who he claims to be. I just do not believe that you can comprehend what others are saying as you clearly have no interest in anything that does not agree with your narrow and prejudiced viewpoints. When called to task for that which you are cleary and plainly guilty of, you resort to your old and tired tactics of spin, twist, and turn. You attempt to very subtly change the focus of your previous incorrect statements to a very specific and clear statement that can appear to be correct. You then claim 'confusion' and state that you are never wrong even when you know that you are. There are words for tactics such as this - words such as 'bait and switch' and 'cheating' that quickly come to mind.

Another failed and laughable attempt to 'tar me' is your above statement that "I am in the habit of telling lies about myself" when any rational person would know immediately that I have said nothing about myself as far as this topic is concerned and so your statement is immediately discounted and revealed for all to see exactly what it is - a 'falsehood'!

In the final analysis, Stu has clearly shown over and over again that he is absolutely NO FRIEND OF NUDISTS! He will no doubt twist everything that I have just said in his usual attempt to feed his habit of 'endless debate'.