Aiken Area Progressive

Progressive blog for the Central Savannah River Area.

Month: January, 2015

Yes, my religion is Nudism

So, today, I finally found out about my main religion.

My main religion is Nudism.

This much I knew for over 11 years now.

But, as anyone knows: it ain’t official until you make it Facebook official.

I did just that this morning.

Nudism is the belief that nudity is natural and that the god the Nudist worships – whether that is the Christian God, the Jewish god (YHVH), the Muslim god (Allah), the Pagan god (Ishtar), or whoever the person worships as their god – make people naked because it is natural.

My belief is that unless it is absolutely necessary – as in cases of safety issues or cold weather – forcing people to wear clothes in public is wrong, dead wrong and flat wrong.  My belief is that any law that bans public nudity is an unjust law, no matter the purpose.

While I still identify as a Unitarian Universalist, as it is one of the few recognized religions (along with Pagan) that does not judge others, I also want people to be aware of my other, and true, official religion and that my beliefs about nudity in public should be treated the same way as other religious beliefs are currently being treated in the Hobby Lobby era.

Advertisements

Nudity in public (and breastfeeding) is not just a civil rights issue – it’s also a reproductive rights’ issue

If reproductive rights activists really want equal rights, the civil rights of nudists like George Davis and breastfeeding mothers must also be on their reproductive justice agenda. Even in 2015, nudists are being denied their civil rights (similar to sex workers) in some jurisdictions, while breastfeeding mothers are being harassed by citizens in others.

In recent years, sex workers, transgender people and African-Americans successfully convinced reproductive rights activists that their right to live without fear or harassment from cops is an issue they need to work on.

However, reproductive rights activists still have two lingering groups of people that they really need to be paying attention to: nudists/naturists and breastfeeding mothers.

Like the three groups mentioned in the opening paragraph, nudists are also harassed and arrested for doing nothing wrong.  Like sex workers, nudists are also denied of their civil rights.  And, like all three groups mentioned in the first paragraph, both nudists and breastfeeding mothers alike are harassed by ignorant citizens daily just for exercising their legal rights in public.

Below the fold, we will post more about these two groups of people.  We’ll begin alphabetically, with breastfeeding mothers and why their rights are a reproductive justice issue.
Read the rest of this entry »

Today in Weather History: the 30th anniversary of the coldest low (and day) in Barnwell County’s history – in Williston

Yesterday and today are important weather anniversaries – and yes, both of 30-year anniversaries.

It may have been a spring-like 60°f for a max temp on Tuesday (and the same forecast again today), but 30 years ago today, that was not the case.

On January 21, 1985, the day started off as the second coldest day in the county’s history day temperature-wise – it was –2°f. A Banana Front so powerful shredded its way through the nation, and the historic cold was just about to be in store for the town of Williston, or Barnwell County for that matter.

The skies cleared throughout the night the previous night.  That allowed the temperatures to fall like a rock.

At 1am, the mercury in Williston fell to –3°f, tying the record set in Blackville on Valentine’s Day 1899. This would prove to be the last minutes that the Valentine’s Day 1899 record would stand as the county’s coldest ever.

At around 1:30 am, the mercury dipped to a mind-boggling (at the time) –4°f, breaking the mark set at the Clemson Extension station in Blackville in 1899.

Then, just before sun up, a new county record was set again: this time, –5°f.

Then it started to ‘heat up’ once the sun went up.

It did not get above zero until 11am, when the temperature hit 1°f.

It was still 5°f at noon.

It got above ten at 2pm, when the temperature hit 12°f.

It got up to 18°f the next hour, and then 19°f at each reporting hour after that for the rest of the day.

However, the max temperature in Williston was 20°f – but that temperature was not reached until 23:59:36, just 24 seconds in front of January 22, 1985.

Yes, Williston School District 29 missed being below 20 by 24 seconds on this day in 1985.

At Orangeburg Municipal Airport; the Regional Airport in Augusta, Ga.; and Columbia Metropolitan Airport, the low was –1°f in each location.  All three are record lows that still stand to this day.

City or Town 
Max Temperature (1/20) 
Min Temperature (1/20) 
Max Temperature (1/21) 
Min Temperature (1/21) 
Average Temperature on Coldest Day 
Williston-Elko High 
43
-2
20
-5 
7
Aiken 
47
6
25
0
12
Orangeburg Municipal 
46
10
28
-2
13
Hampton 
 50
9
26
-1
12 
Beaufort 
 
 
26 
16 
Barnwell County Airport 
46 
18 
27 
-3 
12 
Charleston 
 
 
27 
6 
17 
Daniel Field 
55 
30 
15 
Augusta (Ga.) Regional 
46 
25 
-1 
12 
Owens Field 
39 
24 
-1 
11 
Cayce 
46 
26 
-1 
12 
Florence 
48
25 
13 
Darlington 
48 
3 
22 
-2 
10 
North Myrtle Beach 
 
 
26
15
Greenwood 
38 
-1 
20
-8 
6
Greer 
40
26
-4
11 
Asheboro Regional 
40
0
26
-8
10
Greensboro 
36
-6 
21
-8
7
Asheville 
32
-13 
7
-16
-5
Jefferson, N.C. 
32 
-11 
0
-12
-6
Tarboro, N.C. 
47
10
17 
-5
6
New Bern 
53 
22
1
11
Charlotte 
41
-2 
24 
-5
9
Winston-Salem 
39 
-3
20 
-10 
5
Wilmington 
 
 
27 
5
16 
Statesboro 
54 
28 
0
14
Savannah-Hilton Head 
 
 
26
15
Macon 
45 
24
-6
9
Atlanta 
43 
-6
18
-8 
5
Knoxville, Tenn. 
24
-18
10
-24
-7
Nashville 
7
-16
17 
-17
-4 
Crossville, Tenn. 
-21
11 
-21 
-8
Memphis 
17 
-4 
24 
1 
6
Drakesboro, Ky. 
0 
-16 
8
-14 
-8
Paducah, Ky. 
1
-15 
17
-10
-7 
Woodbine, Ky. 
-2 
-18 
6
-16 
-10
Lexington, Ky. 
1 
-18
9
-16 †
-9
Louisville, Ky. 
2
-16
12 
-11 
-6 
Jackson, Ky. 
-18
5
-18 
-6
Olive Branch, Miss. 
22
-4 
26
2 
9
Tupelo, Miss. 
18 
-4
24 
-6 
9
Huntsville, Ala. 
18 
-9
16 
-11 
3
Muscle Shoals, Ala. 
16
-8
17
-11 
3 
Bristol, Tenn. 
25
-16
0
-21
-11
Roanoke, Va. 
30
-10
9
-11
-1
Washington, D.C. 
21
-7
17
-7 †
5

† – not a record low (records are as follows: in Lexington, Ky., –17°f on January 21, 1984; in Washington, D.C., –16°f on January 21, 1984.)

There are many other records that are not on the list, as this was the historic cold event in the United States history.  Look up those on http://wunderground.com/.  Type in the airport code and access the records for both January 20 and 21, 1985.  It’s free!

With the notable exception of the beach counties (Jasper, Beaufort, Colleton, Charleston, Georgetown and Horry), every county’s record low occurred some time between 1982 and 1985.  Those six aforementioned counties are the only six counties that still have a record low from Valentine’s Day 1899.

Today in Weather History: 30th anniversary of the third coldest low in Barnwell County’s history – in Williston

Today and tomorrow are important weather anniversaries – and yes, both of 30-year anniversaries.

It may have been a spring-like 60°f for a max temp today, but 30 years ago today, that was not the case.

On January 20, 1985, the day started off as a normal winter day temperature-wise – the max was 43°f. However, a Banana Front so powerful was shredding its way through the nation, little did some know what would be in store for the town of Williston, or Barnwell County for that matter.

After sunup, the skies clouded up first.

After that, while the daytime talk shows were on, the divebomb began.

While there was only a trace of snow, it was enough to deal a devastating blow to the temperatures.

When the snow began in Williston, at roughly 11am, the temperature was 40°f. When the front blew the doors off Blue Devil Country the next hour, the temperature dropped all the way down to 18°f at high noon.

At sundown, roughly 17:45 on the day, the temperature fell to 10°f at the Williston School District.

At 20:00, it was down to 8°f.

By 22:30, it was down to 0°f at the School District 29.

Finally, at the very last minute of the day, it was –2°f.

That temperature was briefly the second coldest day in county history, only behind the –3°f set in Blackville on Valentine’s Day 1899. January 20, 1985 would be the last day that the 1899 record would stand as the county’s coldest ever.

At Orangeburg Municipal Airport, the low temperature was 9°f; at the Regional Airport in Augusta, Ga., the low was 8°f; and at Columbia Metropolitan Airport, the low was 5°f. All three were record lows that still stand to this day.

Coming up Wednesday…it’s the 30th anniversary of the coldest day in Barnwell County’s history. We’ll have more on some of the numbers from that day.

Weather Underground Columbia

Weather Underground Augusta, Ga.

Jeannie Jonas: Another nudist persecuted by government

On Friday, I wrote about a Piedmont woman who was being sent to jail for exercising the same civil rights that Martin Luther King Junior fought for all those years ago.

Just like with being African-American (even now), Muslim, transgender, a Pagan, a Satanist, and a sex worker, nudists and naturists are being persecuted for their beliefs in the United States of America, in direct violation of several constitutional amendments.

Each one of these aforementioned groups, as well as several others, have held on to the torch Dr. Martin Luther King Junior when he was shot to death in the head on April 4, 1968.  Dr. King’s speeches resonate with all of the aforementioned groups for a reason: women, African-Americans, trans people, Muslims, Pagans, sex workers, Satanists and nudists all have some thing that automatically makes them as part of the oppressed class – that is, a group of people who are, in some way, being oppressed by other groups of people (primarily men, whites, cis people, Christians and clothed people).

It was on Meet the Press on March 28, 1965, when Dr. King said the one thing that really resonates with me – although this was about him protesting unlawfully at the time.  Go to the 11:07 mark of the video above for more:

“…so I still don’t consider that breaking a court order or breaking what I consider an unjust law.  On the other hand, I must be honest enough to say that I do feel that there are two types of laws: one is a just law, and one is an unjust law.  I think we all have moral obligations to obey just laws, on the other hand, I think we have moral obligations to disobey unjust laws, because non-cooperation with evil is as much a moral obligation as is cooperation with good.  I think the distinction here is that when one breaks a law that conscience tells him (or her) is unjust, he (or she) must do it openly, he (or she) must do it cheerfully, he (or she) must do it lovingly, he (or she) must do it civilly – not uncivilly, and he (or she) must do it with a willingness to accept the penalties.  Any person who breaks a law that conscience tells him (or her) is unjust, and willingly accepts the penalties by staying in jail in order to arouse the conscience of the community on the injustice of the law, is at that moment expressing the very highest respect for law.”

Looking back at that now, I firmly believe that Jeannie Jonas, 55, is doing just what Martin Luther King Jr. said to do nearly 50 years ago, when the York County nudist was just a five (or six) year old girl.

She is accepting the penalty (90 days in jail) for breaking an unjust law (indecent exposure) after being persecuted by the York County government.  She knows that laws banning public nudity are unjust and people should not comply to these laws.  I’ve been saying this for years and years now and I’m following in MLK’s footsteps in this regard.

Public nudity is a civil right.  It is no different than the right to vote, the right to protest, the right to express yourself, the right to marry the person of your choice or the right to own a gun.  Nowhere in our constitution does it say that people have a right to not be offended.  Due to the fact that no one has a right to not be offended, that makes bans on public nudity not just unjust, but unconstitutional on its face.  That is why Gypsy Taub and George Davis is in court against San Francisco, and other nudists’ rights orgs have filed lawsuits against Sarpy County, Neb. for the same reason.

One of MLK’s dreams was for everyone to have the same equal rights.  Ridding the nation of nudity bans, abortion bans, photo-required voter ID laws, gerrymandering, anti-transgender laws and other forms of discrimination can ensure that Rev. Dr. King’s vision can finally be realized.

Another Title IX investigation: Man raped by co-ed at Stanford

STANFORD, Calif. — All of the Title IX investigations involving schools from coast to coast at this point have involved rape accusations with female victims and (in most investigations) male perpetrators.

Until now.

The latest school to be looking at the US Department of Justice investigating it for ignoring sexual assault is charged with turning a blind eye to female-on-male rape, a crime that is becoming increasingly common in the States.

An op-ed posted in the university’s newspaper on Sunday, January 11, charges Stanford with being dismissive of a man who was raped by a co-ed 15 months ago.  The victim, Justin Brown, is on track to graduate from the college in 3.5 months.  He wrote a very long op-ed that not only makes scalding charges against his school, but also slams women in the US for willfully and blatantly ignoring female-on-male rape.  Sorry, I am not able to truncate any of this, as the content is just too important and completely lays bare a culture of anti-male bias when it comes to sexual violence.  I am gonna slap a trigger warning on this.

In October 2013, I was sexually assaulted by a female student on campus.

I arrived at a party with a group of friends and struck up a conversation with a girl. We both were a bit drunk, but not to any dangerous levels, and slowly moved our conversation to the dance floor. We started dancing, then making out, then before I knew it, her hand was down my pants. I was surprised, as I hadn’t given her consent to take things a step farther, but I was nevertheless okay with it. Time passed with us together on the dance floor until she began whispering in my ear that she wanted to have sex. While I was enjoying myself, sex was not on the agenda for the night. I took a step back and realized that her friends were gone and she was seemingly alone at this party with me. Even though I didn’t want to end the night in her bed, since she was drunk, I felt I should help her make it back to her dorm.

We started walking home together, but our walk was prolonged by frequent stop-offs. We’d take a few steps holding hands, then take a moment to move off the path and make out with each other for a bit. After a while, these stop-offs became less of a mutual decision and more of a demand from her. I began denying her advances; it was late and I just wanted to get her home safely so I could get some sleep. She continued to engage with me and I denied her requests with a verbal “no” several times. After several failed attempts to push off her advances, we got to the point where I was trading kisses and gropes for steps back to her dorm. Several times her hands went down my pants, and I was not okay with it. I did my best to stick to my “no” every time she demanded more, but at each denial she would stop dead in her tracks and refused to walk with me unless I complied. I felt stuck. Dragging her back to her dorm with her fighting against me simply didn’t feel right. Physically fighting her struggle was not the safest means to that end. But, it didn’t feel right to abandon her there either. She was drunk and could not be left alone in the state she was in. So I felt I had only one option: I complied.

When I got back to my dorm at 2:30 that night, I was confused. Didn’t I go out wanting to engage in sexual contact? Shouldn’t I feel proud and confident that someone wanted me? As a man, shouldn’t I always want sex? This had been what I wanted for so long, but once it was in front of me, it simply didn’t feel right.

I don’t fault her for my change of heart; I fault her for not listening to my clear “no” several times after I made my final decision. Was the situation handled perfectly? No. I was confused, horny and intoxicated. I wasn’t properly educated to even understand that this experience would qualify as sexual assault. But even with all of these things in play, the fact of the matter is that my “no” was not respected. Sure, she didn’t use force, but what was I supposed to do?

***

About eight months had passed since my assault before I even considered the gravity of what happened that night. I relayed the experience to a few friends and at first, we nervously laughed about it. It all just seemed like a joke. Trading kisses and gropes for steps back toward her dorm? The whole situation seemed laughable, all centering on the inconceivable image of a horny college male denying a female’s sexual advances.

In June, I started asking why the events happened even though I said no. It didn’t seem like sexual assault. I wasn’t physically beaten or forced to engage with her. This wasn’t some traumatic event that threw me into a deep depression.

But Stanford’s current definition of sexual assault states, “Sexual assault is the actual, attempted or threatened unwanted sexual act, whether by an acquaintance or by a stranger, accomplished against a person’s will by means of force (express or implied), violence, duress, menace, fear or fraud. If coercion, intimidation, threats and/or physical force are used, there is no consent.”

Actual unwanted sexual act? Check. Coercion? Check. There was no consent. However, this still wasn’t enough for me.

After I returned to campus for my senior year in September, I began the process of reaching out to the Sexual Assault and Relationship Abuse (SARA) Office on campus. When they were unable to meet immediately, I attempted talking to one of Stanford’s Confidential Sexual Assault Counselors. That position not yet having been set up, the University eventually forwarded me to the YWCA Sexual Assault Center on campus.

I began recounting my experience to the woman on the other line. I told my side of the story and she listened attentively until I ended with the simple question, “Does this qualify as sexual assault?” After a short moment acknowledging the difficulty of all the factors at play, what she said left me flabbergasted.

“You just have to be careful,” she said to me plainly. She began to outline how situations like these are difficult when alcohol is involved, but when I reiterated that I clearly said “no” and felt trapped in the situation she continued to astound me with her suggestions at what I should or could have done. “You could have just left her,” she insisted. “If I were a man in your shoes, I would have definitely called 911.” At this point it was tough to hold back my frustration. I was calling this hotline because I was trying to figure out if what I experienced was sexual assault. How could I have called 911 in the moment if I didn’t even know I was being sexually assaulted?

I continued and began speaking of how I felt my gender could have played a role in the incident and how it was beginning to color our conversation. In response to this she began explicitly insisting that the woman in my case might not even know what happened that night and could accuse me of sexual assault. I had gone from possible victim to possible attacker in this woman’s eyes. Not having received the counseling I sought, I quickly ended the conversation. I understand that I didn’t handle things perfectly that night, but not once did this YWCA representative give any ounce of support. She didn’t refer me to any further resources. She never once validated that this was indeed sexual assault. As a man calling into the Young Women’s Christian Association, it’s tough to think that my gender did not play a role in this woman’s response. It was incredibly frustrating that an organization known for warning against victim-blaming in the case of women had no problem jumping straight to this tactic against a male victim when the tables were turned.

A few days after my encounter with the YWCA, I was able to meet with staff at the SARA Office. I explained the same story to the director and feared that I would experience the same victim-blaming that occurred with the YWCA. Instead, she immediately answered my question. Yes, what I described does count as sexual assault.

From there she provided me with a multitude of resources, from Counseling and Psychological Services for psychological help all the way to instructions for entering the judicial review process if I wanted to press charges. My experience with the SARA Office was wholly positive, as the director took the time to see me not as a victim, not as a male, but as a person with a tough question that needed an answer.

***

While Stanford has a concrete definition of sexual assault, the SARA Office affirmed that before even consulting legal definitions, it is first up to the survivor to define what happened based on how they feel. I personally do not want to press charges; we both strayed blindly into grey areas that night. Luckily, I came out the other side without any traumatic emotional scarring or depression. However, not everyone may be so lucky if put in this situation.

Never once have I called this woman my “attacker” or “assailant” because I didn’t emotionally respond as though it were an attack or an assault. To me, she’s just a student that made a mistake. However, she does deserve to know that what she did is defined as sexual assault.

What she does not deserve is expulsion. We need to understand that we can’t solve these grey issues with black and white statements and punishments.

By demanding a “strong presumption in favor of expulsion” through last quarter’s ASSU Task Force Proposal, we begin to force the hand of the administration in cases where they should instead be using a discerning eye. Under the proposal, the only mitigating factor that can be brought forth to fight expulsion is the presence of a “pertinent, acute mental illness.” Mistaken consent, cooperation with the judicial review process and evidence of a lack of malicious intent are all outlined as factors that are inadequate to bring forth an argument against expulsion. It is completely understandable why the ASSU would deem these as inappropriate, but in practice this results in harsh punishments that fail to account for the differing degrees of sexual misconduct and rape.

In my case, I don’t believe she had any especially malicious intent during the incident and her presence on campus does not present any imminent danger to me. Despite these factors, under the above policies, she would still fall under the category of recommendation for expulsion. She deserves to be educated about her mistakes, but this education remains unavailable to her as a result of the punitive approach proposed by the ASSU. The burden of providing her with this education should not fall onto me simply because I disagree with the recommendation for such a harsh punishment. There is definitely a time and place where expulsion is necessary and we need to ensure that the University is able to apply it to keep students safe. However, in cases where education is all that is necessary to ensure a safe learning environment, overreactions like expulsion begin to look less as a decision to ensure student safety but more as an attempt to deliver retribution for emotional distress, which should never be the goal of punishments.

We need to create a better space where everyone can speak constructively about this issue, as this can happen to anyone. Yes, sexual assault happens significantly more often to women than men; however, when we gender these conversations, it marginalizes the already silent population of male victims even further. It reinforces the idea that as a man, you won’t be assaulted. Therefore, when it happens it’s seen as a joke or an issue raising questions surrounding the man’s sexuality instead of his assault. Stripping gender from these conversations is necessary to constructive conversation because its presence provides no benefit outside of reinforcing a statistical fact that we all should already understand. Gendering these conversations often leads to victim-blaming of women and the demonization of men, which simply divides us on an issue we already stand hand-in-hand against.

Ensuring safety for everyone is our priority when fighting sexual assault, and it’s important to remember that while we may disagree on the path, we’re all envisioning the same goal. I’m extremely excited that we continue to hear from voices that have been previously marginalized and silenced when these issues arise. However, we need to ensure that we do not marginalize and silence those that may be fighting alongside us in the process.

Emphasis mine, in bold.

This is just like with a large chunk of female victims of sexual assault: Mr. Brown opposes expelling his rapist and instead wants her to learn about boundaries and consent.

It’s obvious that the rapist has problems with consent that otherwise would be rightfully condemned if she was the victim instead of the perpetrator and if her victim was the perpetrator instead.  Yes, it’s absolutely true that everyone with a vagina is marginalized and oppressed in our nation.  However, that does not excuse the actions of the woman who raped Mr. Brown.  Or, for that matter, the actions of the other women who have raped men.

Mr. Brown also brought up an issue that needs to be talked about because for far too long, the voices of male victims, as well as those who support male rape victims, have been silenced in numerous ways, with the most egregious tactic being deflection on the part of women on the topic of male rape.

Until January 6, 2012, female-on-male rape was excluded from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports.  (NOTE: Male-on-male rape was included in the FBI’s UCR in 1994.)  In other words, some men who were raped prior to 2012 were entirely excluded from the definition of a crime victim due to the outdated definition of rape that the feds used, because their perpetrators were women.

Although only 16% of all men are victims of rape, peer-reviewed report after peer-reviewed report in 2014 showed that women are the primary perpetrators of male rape, totally discrediting widely reported claims by women (including some feminists) that most men are raped by other men.

Ladies, if you truly believe male rape victims, the least you can do is sit down, shut up and listen to what he’s saying when he is talking about being sexually assaulted.  Chances are, he’s right when he says he was raped by a woman.

Stanford Daily

Time for a Constitutional Convention, South Carolina: York County woman nudist, illegally arrested for being topless two times, is illegally jailed for 90 days

YORK — A York County woman nudist who was illegally arrested two times has now been sent to jail after the county basically persecuted her for her beliefs.

Jeannie Jonas, 55, pleaded guilty to indecent exposure charges, even though she did not violate the statute even once.

Her lawyer correctly pointed out that if she was a man, she would not have been arrested even once, let alone jailed for any amount of time.

Persecutors noted that Ms. Jonas was exercising her legal right to be naked in public since late 2006, when the legislature repealed its statewide public nudity ban as part of a modification of the indecent exposure statute that exempts mothers breastfeeding in public areas in the state (NOTE: some municipalities in South Carolina still have a ban on breastfeeding in public via enforcement of public indecency ordinances and public nudity bans that were made law prior to July 1, 2006).

She was illegally put on probation 19 months ago, and then threatened by persecutors with more severe punishments for exercising her legal constitutional rights once this unjust jail term ends.

If this was a woman or a man I knew who was arrested for being naked in public, I would tell her or him to file a civil lawsuit against the municipality, the police force and any other party involved.  Public nudity is a civil right in South Carolina, just like it is elsewhere.  Public nudity is protected under the First Amendment per the free expression and freedom of beliefs clauses, the 9th and 10th Amendments under the rights reserved to the people clauses in each amendment, the 13th Amendment right against involuntary servitude and the 14th Amendment right of equal protection under the laws.

This is why we need to let the Constitutional Convention commence in South Carolina.  I know conservatives called for one about 13 months ago for a completely different reason, but we finally got a legitimate reason for calling a convention.  Under the constitutional convention, we would make it legal for citizens and nudist organizations to file civil lawsuits against local and state government for violation of civil rights of nudists and naturists.  Public nudity would be legal statewide, and neither the state nor municipalities would be allowed to restrict public nudity unless a legitimate safety or health issue arises (such as jigsaws at SCDOT).  Nudists would be allowed to start colonies and the state and municipal governments would be prohibited, except for doling out penalties for not going through the proper channels, from charging nudist colony leaders any amount above $50.00 for an annual fee.  And finally, it would be illegal for schools and other businesses receiving state or federal aid of any kind (including tax cuts/tax credits) from punishing nudists for their beliefs.

We need to call a convention, because some persecutors like Erin Joyner feel that it’s ok to persecute nudists and naturists for their beliefs just to appease extremist Muslims and Christians who are joining forces in waging jihad against nudists.

WBTV-DT News 3
Rock Hill Herald

%d bloggers like this: