Foundation for Moral Law's brief supporting a local ordinance against public nudity before the SCOTUS.

There is no end to the total insanity and depravity of the American left and their allies. Of course, the LBGTQ crowd has been getting away with this and other public acts of extreme lewdness for decades now, but apparently the whole leftist crowd thinks being nude in public is somehow now "speech" in need of protection.

(Image courtesy of sfchronicle.com.)

Check this out:

=======

MONTGOMERY, AL: The Foundation for Moral Law, an Alabama-based nonprofit organization dedicated to the defense of traditional family values and the strict interpretation of the Constitution according to the intent of its Framers, filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court in support of a Laconia, New Hampshire, anti-nudity ordinance.

In the case of Lilley v. New Hampshire, Lilley and two other petitioners had been convicted of public nudity and challenged the constitutionality of the Laconia ordinance, arguing that it violated the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of speech and the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection because the ordinance's definition of nudity included toplessness for women but not for men. The New Hampshire Supreme Court rejected their appeal, and they petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review. The Foundation's amicus brief opposes their petition.

Foundation President Kayla Moore observed that "When the Framers of the Bill of Rights included protection of free speech, they certainly did not consider nudity to be a form of speech. As in so many areas like abortion and same-sex marriage, advocates of the 'Living Constitution' are trying to read into the Constitution 'rights' which simply aren't there and which the Framers would have thought abhorrent."

Foundation Senior Counsel John Eidsmoe added, "By the petitioners' reasoning, all anyone has to do to escape prosecution for nudity is to say, 'I'm protesting clothing.' And the Laconia ordinance defines nudity differently for men and women for a very obvious reason -- men and women are different. The New Hampshire decision rests on solid legal ground, and we hope the U.S. Supreme Court will not disturb it."

(Image courtesy of sfexaminer.com.)

========

I couldn't agree more with Kayla and Roy Moore. I hope they are able to get this case sent down in blazes at the Supreme Court, as it so richly deserves. Of course, this will be another good test of the new "conservative majority" Trump has in place.

Keep a special eye on how Kavanaugh and Gorsuch handle this. We need as many early"markers" on where those two clowns are taking us as we can get, before they start ruling on gun control, abortion, etc.