• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Swinging New Years party, legal?

Should customers be infomed of immoral events?

  • YES, businesses should be legally obligated to inform customers of immoral events taking place

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NO, Tolerance is a virtue and Buyer Beware

    Votes: 6 50.0%
  • Customers should be informed but it's inconcievable to make it a legal matter

    Votes: 6 50.0%

  • Total voters
    12

Blind man

Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2005
Messages
77
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10694292/

ORLANDO, Fla. - Some teenage soccer players and their parents saw more sights than they wanted when they stayed at a hotel where about 200 swingers were having a New Year’s party.

Over New Years Eve a hotel in Florida found itself host to both a Swingers convention and a "youth" soccer torunament. While the Police were on site, and have stated that nothing illegal occured, some parents were furious.

The question is : Should a hotel/ cruise line inform, customers that "abnormal" guests will be in attendance?
 

shuamort

Pundit-licious
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
7,297
Reaction score
1,002
Location
Saint Paul, MN
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I couldn't answer the poll, it pre-supposes a subjective quality of what is "immoral" or "abnormal". A vegetarian would think that a meat convention is immoral for example. The problem with the situation in the newslink is the folllowing:
The families said the sexually adventurous partygoers sometimes flashed breasts and bare buttocks in front of the children as they sashayed through the hotel atrium.
Those are the actions that need to be censured and have the partygoers disciplined. It's a small world and we all have to live in it, and those people crossed a line by doing the flash in front of children.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
shuamort said:
I couldn't answer the poll, it pre-supposes a subjective quality of what is "immoral" or "abnormal". A vegetarian would think that a meat convention is immoral for example. The problem with the situation in the newslink is the folllowing:
Those are the actions that need to be censured and have the partygoers disciplined. It's a small world and we all have to live in it, and those people crossed a line by doing the flash in front of children.

I could not agree more. Its not on the company doing business to report the possible immorality of a group using their facilities. However, it is the responsibility of every person to act with a level of decency and respect when they are in public.
 

GunshySlycat1

New member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I think it's good for the business to tell its customers about it and prevent any illegal behavior, but it shouldn't be the hotels fault that it happened... It should be the swingers faults if they were conducting any illegal activities in the area like...indecent exposure?
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
It's really strange the reaction some people have. I was in Key West for Fantasy Fest this year. It was scheduled for Oct. but due to hurricane Wilma it was rescheduled for Dec. I ended up in Cocoa Beach in Oct/Nov. Then went back for FF in Dec. Because the event (which was really wild- naked people and all) was delayed a cruise which docked had some surprised passengers. Some were extremely upset, other were walking the streets with their toddlers in tow.

Personally I'm all for a party, but I would never take a kid to something like FF. I'm sure the ship had plenty for the kids to do, they could have stayed on board. In my opinion they should have stayed on board.
 

GunshySlycat1

New member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Yeah, I guess what i'm saying is... If i'm in the party I don't care but if i'm not...call the police! heh
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
jallman said:
I could not agree more. Its not on the company doing business to report the possible immorality of a group using their facilities. However, it is the responsibility of every person to act with a level of decency and respect when they are in public.


Maybe there should be an option on the poll for:

Should adults be held responsible for their actions if they're illegal?
 

GunshySlycat1

New member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Was there indecent exposure? Theres alot of minor laws they couldve been arrested for. It should've been the fault of the people doing it.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
The question I must ask here is why are the parents so upset about their children seeing naked body parts? Seems like a silly thing to be worried about.

Also, I do not believe that there needs to be a law regarding this situation. If the parents are so concerned about what their children see then they should be the ones to make sure the kids do not see it. It is not any other person's responsibility to care for or protect someone else's child.
 

Pacridge

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Messages
3,918
Reaction score
9
Location
Pacific Northwest US
alex said:
The question I must ask here is why are the parents so upset about their children seeing naked body parts? Seems like a silly thing to be worried about.

Also, I do not believe that there needs to be a law regarding this situation. If the parents are so concerned about what their children see then they should be the ones to make sure the kids do not see it. It is not any other person's responsibility to care for or protect someone else's child.

When you think about it we're kind of a weird country when it comes to nudity. These same parents who were so freaked out about their kid seeing a naked breast probably have no problem if their child sees the latest, violence filled, horror flick. Nudity, even sex, is a normal human behavior. Cutting people up with a chainsaw...not so normal.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2005
Messages
845
Reaction score
305
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I work nights at a hotel, and I can tell you that just about all the customers I see are “abnormal.” When people check in, it’s kinda implicit that they’re gonna be doing whatever in their rooms, but we know better than to ask questions (mainly for fear they’ll actually answer *cringe*) When the fun starts leaking out of their rooms, we tell them to be courteous towards the other customers, and then call the police if it gets too out of hand.
Hotels turn a blind eye to the vast majority of the “immoral” stuff that is going on. Legally requiring them to investigate all that stuff, and then inform other customers as they check in would be detrimental to the entire hotel business. “Ok, before you check in….there’s a regular who is cheating on his wife three doors down from you, a drunk on the other side of the building from you, an old couple on Viagra beneath you, some stoners above you, and the guy right next to you is masturbating to gay porn. Have a nice stay!”

Reading the article, it sounds like the swingers were paying so much money that the hotel decided to overlook their indiscretions. Working for a cheap bastard who tries to squeeze every penny he can, I can understand why they didn’t tell their other customers about it. The hotel should have kept them out of sight, in a conference room or something, and kicked out the people who were having sex in public.

Swingers! Why can I be so lucky?!? The only groups I ever see are high school sports teams and old ladies with cats.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
alex said:
The question I must ask here is why are the parents so upset about their children seeing naked body parts? Seems like a silly thing to be worried about.

Also, I do not believe that there needs to be a law regarding this situation. If the parents are so concerned about what their children see then they should be the ones to make sure the kids do not see it. It is not any other person's responsibility to care for or protect someone else's child.


It all depends on the culture. Even nudist camps don't want their members boinking in the bushes. Being naked is one thing, acting like a wanton drunken slut in front of kids is a dfferent matter.

Would the sight of a naked breast upset a pre-teen? Not if nudity was a public norm. The situation encountered was not a healthy one for kids.

But, for example, Disney should have the decency to inform it's theme park visitors, in advance, about their annual Gay Day. While I don't care what they do, I don't want to drive all the way over to Anaheim to discover that the Happiest Place on Earth is temporarily the Gayest Place on Earth.

It's bad PR for them to risk exposing my kids to what they know I would think is unacceptable public behavior.

So what do we do, force hotels to follow a rating system like they do TV shows? "C" for "Classy", no public misbehavior tolered to "X" for motels that rent rooms by the hour?

I would oppose any legislation regulating that, but the hotel industry certainly has an opportunity to voluntarily create a network of "family friendly" hotels that could promote their policies regarding their level of tolerance for certain behaviors.

People looking for a place to have a party would appreciate it, too, since most reasonable people want to enjoy their party, not get involved in confrontations.

But the key word is "voluntary", as always.
 

vergiss

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
2,356
Reaction score
1
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Besides, is swinging any more immoral than pre-marital sex? If both partners in the marriage and any extra sexual partner(s) are fully informed and okay with it, what's the big deal?

Especially compared to the inevitable liasons with prostitutes and secret affairs that would go on in a hotel.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
It all depends on the culture. Even nudist camps don't want their members boinking in the bushes. Being naked is one thing, acting like a wanton drunken slut in front of kids is a dfferent matter.

Would the sight of a naked breast upset a pre-teen? Not if nudity was a public norm. The situation encountered was not a healthy one for kids.

But, for example, Disney should have the decency to inform it's theme park visitors, in advance, about their annual Gay Day. While I don't care what they do, I don't want to drive all the way over to Anaheim to discover that the Happiest Place on Earth is temporarily the Gayest Place on Earth.

It's bad PR for them to risk exposing my kids to what they know I would think is unacceptable public behavior.

So what do we do, force hotels to follow a rating system like they do TV shows? "C" for "Classy", no public misbehavior tolered to "X" for motels that rent rooms by the hour?

I would oppose any legislation regulating that, but the hotel industry certainly has an opportunity to voluntarily create a network of "family friendly" hotels that could promote their policies regarding their level of tolerance for certain behaviors.

People looking for a place to have a party would appreciate it, too, since most reasonable people want to enjoy their party, not get involved in confrontations.

But the key word is "voluntary", as always.

The hotel is not responsible for your kid's moral well being. You are. If you go somewhere and do not want your kid to be exposed to something (which I think is the worst kind of parenting, by the way), then it is your responsibility to make sure it is not there.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
alex said:
The hotel is not responsible for your kid's moral well being. You are. If you go somewhere and do not want your kid to be exposed to something (which I think is the worst kind of parenting, by the way), then it is your responsibility to make sure it is not there.

Well now hold on...it IS the responsibility of the patrons of that hotel to maintain a sense of public decency when in the public areas of the hotel. You may enjoy seeing the nude form but a parent may not wish their children to be exposed to that at this point in their development. Your right to be nude and enjoy the nude form ends where that parents right to morally guide their children begins. As for the Disney Gay Day thing...so what...its some homos on the Its a Small World ride...so long as they arent being indecent, there is absolutely no reason to raise an objection.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
jallman said:
Well now hold on...it IS the responsibility of the patrons of that hotel to maintain a sense of public decency when in the public areas of the hotel. You may enjoy seeing the nude form but a parent may not wish their children to be exposed to that at this point in their development. Your right to be nude and enjoy the nude form ends where that parents right to morally guide their children begins. As for the Disney Gay Day thing...so what...its some homos on the Its a Small World ride...so long as they arent being indecent, there is absolutely no reason to raise an objection.

Define indecency. Swingers obviously have a different sense of it than you do. What makes your definition have more weight than them?

Children could not care less about decency. They accept and enjoy all people. It is because of this that I believe parents abuse their rights as parents to gain what they want themselves. They do not want to be exposed to certain things and they say they want it removed to protect their children.

Why would you shelter your child from life? That is horrible parenting. Explain exactly why you feel you must protect your children from what you consider indecent. What harm is there is seeing a naked body? I believe that most people are told that good parents protect their child from this so they do it. Think about it yourself. Exactly what are you protecting them from?
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
alex said:
Define indecency. Swingers obviously have a different sense of it than you do. What makes your definition have more weight than them?

Mismatch definitions of decency are not the core issue here. What is at stake is a common practice from which to launch all public interaction. It so happens that it is tradition to be clothed in front of strangers and friends whom you are not so intimate with...except in certain marked areas that are open to alternative practices. There is a central core value in society of how to behave and how to present yourself when in the company of others. Now you are free to express a different set of values, but in choosing that divergence with common practice, you must designate a place and give warning to any who enter that this is an atmosphere of different or alternative behavior.

Children could not care less about decency. They accept and enjoy all people. It is because of this that I believe parents abuse their rights as parents to gain what they want themselves. They do not want to be exposed to certain things and they say they want it removed to protect their children.

But it is a parent's rights to instill the values and behaviors in their children that they see fit. Unless the child is going to come to direct harm or mental anguish, then who are we to force our values through intrusive abuse of our right to expression? We have rules for public interaction for this reason...there are guidelines and parameters to our presentation and expression that are well established. When you are at home or in private or among like minded individuals, you may change those parameters however you please.

Why would you shelter your child from life? That is horrible parenting. Explain exactly why you feel you must protect your children from what you consider indecent. What harm is there is seeing a naked body? I believe that most people are told that good parents protect their child from this so they do it. Think about it yourself. Exactly what are you protecting them from?

I personally would not shelter my child from life. I feel that children need guided exposure to the whole spectrum of situation so that they are well equipped to make good decisions when they are on their own. However, I also feel that I would want to be the one to decide when and where certain potentially confusing situations are presented. Thats is proper parenting.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
alex said:
The hotel is not responsible for your kid's moral well being. You are. If you go somewhere and do not want your kid to be exposed to something (which I think is the worst kind of parenting, by the way), then it is your responsibility to make sure it is not there.


Yeah, I'll get out my divining rod and determine when Disney has it's next informal yet annual Gay Day. Fact of the matter is, if they don't tell us what day that is, and they do know, how the hell am I supposed to know? Ditto for hotels. I don't know what parties they have there. Hotels and other businesses that care about public opinion should, as a responsible member of the business community, inform their patrons of things that might be questionable.

Am I demanding government action? I am not. Would a voluntary system be appreciated? It certainly would, and it would harm no one and the costs of such a system, minimal, would likely be recouped in customer satisfaction.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
jallman said:
As for the Disney Gay Day thing...so what...its some homos on the Its a Small World ride...so long as they arent being indecent, there is absolutely no reason to raise an objection.

If it was just guys holding hands, that wouldn't be a problem. Kids don't pay that much attention. But the behavior of some - some - at that annual event approaches those stupid parades, with public fondling and kissing and other behavior most parents don't want their kids seeing when heteros are doing it.

Again, though, what do I ask? A mere notification that such an event is scheduled, nothing else. I would think that simple bit of courtesy would aid the goal of mutual respect the "gay community" seeks.
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I had a class last year where a very heated debate occurred. A man stated that he took his children somewhere and they saw posters and protest pictures that included images of what aborted fetuses looked like. He was angered that his children were exposed to this. He stated, "I do not want to have to explain this to my kids." Now, this is a good example of the point I am trying to make. Should free speech be impaired just because a parent is too lazy to explain to their children something that they saw? I believe the right of free speech overrules any exposure that may occur, being with children or not. Parents must accept the fact that their kids will be exposed to a wealth of ideas and that they will not always agree with those ideas. It is in the power of the parents, however, to explain to their kids what they saw, and that all people tend to have different ideas and some will be agreeable and some will not. I was infuriated that this man was a parent but did not want to talk to his kids about something that they will inevitably be exposed to. My rights should not suffer because other people have children.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
alex said:
I had a class last year where a very heated debate occurred. A man stated that he took his children somewhere and they saw posters and protest pictures that included images of what aborted fetuses looked like. He was angered that his children were exposed to this. He stated, "I do not want to have to explain this to my kids." Now, this is a good example of the point I am trying to make. Should free speech be impaired just because a parent is too lazy to explain to their children something that they saw? I believe the right of free speech overrules any exposure that may occur, being with children or not. Parents must accept the fact that their kids will be exposed to a wealth of ideas and that they will not always agree with those ideas. It is in the power of the parents, however, to explain to their kids what they saw, and that all people tend to have different ideas and some will be agreeable and some will not. I was infuriated that this man was a parent but did not want to talk to his kids about something that they will inevitably be exposed to. My rights should not suffer because other people have children.


The right to free speech does not include the right to force, by intrusive expression, situations unsolicited. It is not in the interest of society, as a whole, to abandon common rules of engagement for the indulgence of shock speech and deliberate impediment of others' peaceful enjoyment. In fact, I would put forth the absolute ideal that it is this peaceful enjoyment that must be protected above all else. Part of this idea of peaceful enjoyment is the maintenance of the family unit and the willful guidance of the children in a direction that the parent feels is best. Timely exposure to what you call the inevitable is still the right of the parent to determine. I am in agreement with the gentleman in your class...I would not want to be forced to explain potentially disturbing situations to my children without it being on my terms. I think part of the problems youth face today is that their guidance comes from outside influences before the parent has the opportunity. Free expression is a luxury of those who have already been given guidance and brought to maturity. Free expression, however, is no substitute for that formative guidance.
 

jallman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Messages
36,913
Reaction score
11,282
Location
Los Angeles, CA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
If it was just guys holding hands, that wouldn't be a problem. Kids don't pay that much attention. But the behavior of some - some - at that annual event approaches those stupid parades, with public fondling and kissing and other behavior most parents don't want their kids seeing when heteros are doing it.

Again, though, what do I ask? A mere notification that such an event is scheduled, nothing else. I would think that simple bit of courtesy would aid the goal of mutual respect the "gay community" seeks.

Well if that is the case, then I share your indignation. You are preaching to the choir when it comes to those parades. And I am painfully aware of how some gay men behave when you put them together in a herd. So, in light of this, true...I think there should be some notification when this annual event is going on. Either that or Mickey and Donald should do some serious ass kicking when they see these unseemly behaviors taking place. Its kind of funny...if heteros were acting like you describe, there could very well be an public indecency charge...
 

Alex

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
855
Location
Milwaukee, WI
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
jallman said:
The right to free speech does not include the right to force, by intrusive expression, situations unsolicited. It is not in the interest of society, as a whole, to abandon common rules of engagement for the indulgence of shock speech and deliberate impediment of others' peaceful enjoyment. In fact, I would put forth the absolute ideal that it is this peaceful enjoyment that must be protected above all else. Part of this idea of peaceful enjoyment is the maintenance of the family unit and the willful guidance of the children in a direction that the parent feels is best. Timely exposure to what you call the inevitable is still the right of the parent to determine. I am in agreement with the gentleman in your class...I would not want to be forced to explain potentially disturbing situations to my children without it being on my terms. I think part of the problems youth face today is that their guidance comes from outside influences before the parent has the opportunity. Free expression is a luxury of those who have already been given guidance and brought to maturity. Free expression, however, is no substitute for that formative guidance.

Then that is lazy parenting and children can only suffer from it. My sympathies.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
alex said:
I believe the right of free speech overrules any exposure that may occur, being with children or not.

Oh yeah? How about if a pervert walks up behind your ten year old daughter and starts making rude, graphical, and four-letter comments on her rear view, including what, specically he'd like to do with her, and with which particular parts of his body he'd do them with.

That okay?

No, that's harmful to the child, who doesn't have the maturity to recognize illness and prevent it from being absorbed by her.

So some forms of speech have limited venues of expression. Personally, I'd consider it an assault on my child and get rude in my own special way. Not a jury would convict me.
 

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
alex said:
Then that is lazy parenting and children can only suffer from it. My sympathies.

No. It's a fact of life. No matter how excellent a parent you are, if your child is three, she can't absorb content meant for a thirteen year old. And age-inappropriate images and witnessed behaviors can be as emotionally damaging as physical abuse.
 
Top Bottom