Hate crime laws and Naturism- a balanced view.
I took to the idea of writing this essay as a balanced analysis between protection of individual expression and highlighting the dangers of State controls that seek to limit freedom of expression.
In a true democracy Naturists, like everyone, should be able to go about their activities as consenting adults without fear of police and public harassment. I am obviously supportive of the idea of preventing abuse against Naturists in principle and practicality. It doesn't stop there- a problem with any kind of prevention is it allows the State a green light to legislate further restrictions on liberty- a knee jerk reaction, if you will. I've been monitoring the UK Government's recent miserable record- every current Bill being pushed in the Commons is about restricting freedom of expression, as opposed to allowing and advancing democracy. Paradoxically, unconsciously even , broad minded Naturists wouldn't want to contribute to such a scenario which may well create further resentment in the population.
Preventing hate is well and good, so long as it doesn't reach the point where constructive criticism in itself becomes a crime. I witnessed first hand on last year's Clacton ride, the beginnings of physical violence against the riders. Fortunately it was averted and I felt we deescalated a potentially volatile situation. It provides evidence that physical violence is always going to be far more damaging to health than the occasional expletive. This doesn't, however, justify virulent abuse of riders that can easily move into physical threats. Ir depends on what one interprets as 'Hate', and what one defines as 'crime.'To my mind, Naturism is about the individual's right to be themselves, while accepting there'll always be some objections. If two opposing forces can co exist side by side, that's 'Democracy At Work.'
As an advocate of freedom of speech and expression, I believe that nothing should be beyond criticism to a point where the very notion of objection becomes criminality. 'Freedom of speech and expression ' in themselves, should be protected by law. Such would allow all and sundry to go about their lives without State intrusion and intimidation. Believers of freedom should always be aware of the dangers of impending absolute State control. Every repressive law restricting freedom is a precursor for yet another repressive Bill. To reiterate, once again, a written constitution including an First Amendment similar to that of the United States would protect liberties being eroded by the State.
It would be an irony of the high order if Naturism- often described as the Canary in the coal mine of free expression- were to sleepwalk into a situation where protecting their own rights contributed to a State preventing the rights of others.
