If any more evidence were needed that many ruling elites are literally insane – that is, unable to perceive reality the way normal people do – yet another federal judge has provided it.
Chief Judge Roger L. Gregory of the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals last Wednesday indicated that he can’t discern any meaningful difference between topless females and topless males. Noting that times had changed, he quipped, “We’re not in the same Neanderthal-type environment” as before.
At issue is Ocean City, Maryland’s ordinance barring bare-chested women in public. Violators are subject to a fine of $1,000. Officials of the family-oriented, ten-mile-long beach resort had thought this issue had been put to rest last year when federal District Judge James K. Bredar upheld it. He cited precedents and community moral standards.
“Protecting the public sensibilities from the public display of areas of the body traditionally viewed as erogenous zones – including female, but not male, breasts – is an important government objective,” he wrote.
Ironically, the sensible Judge Bredar was appointed to the federal bench by Barack Obama, who is even now lending his considerable clout to the unholy cause of sexual anarchy.
As for Gregory, he was a Bill Clinton recess appointment in 2000, re-affirmed by George W. Bush the next year.
The women who want to, uh, go free in public, filed an appeal of Judge Bredar’s ruling, citing the Equal Protection Clause. Their attorney, Devon M. Jacob, insisted that the law unfairly imposes “sexist ideologies of a very small group of people on the masses.”
Where does he do his research, the Sunny Buns Nudist Camp?
In any case, whenever someone starts talking about the interests of “the masses,” you know we’ve got a disciple of Marx and Lenin on the loose, plus, in this case, at least one of the Three Stooges. Nix that. Moe, Larry and Curly did some comic drag, but never confused men with “dames.”
Nor did our nation’s armed forces, until our woke president, Joe Biden, got into the act.
There’s little doubt that the publicity-seeking, beachy women who prompted the challenge have been emboldened by the cultural success of the LGBTQ movement, and most recently the transgender blitzkrieg. If libraries host Drag Queen Story Hours for small children, and California Republicans can seriously consider “Caitlyn” Jenner for governor, anything can happen. So, they’re taking another grab at the brass ring of public nudity.
As for Judge Gregory, I’d like to think Mr. Bush is kicking himself for this one, much like Dwight Eisenhower publicly regretted appointing the ultra-liberal Earl Warren to the Supreme Court. But I’m not so sure anymore.
Regardless of his bipartisan support, Gregory seems determined to carve out a niche as a far-left jurist.
In 2017, he dissented from the majority’s ruling in American Legion v. American Humanist Association that upheld the Bladensburg Peace Cross Memorial from World War I, which atheist activists were trying to tear down. Erected in a traffic circle in 1925 to honor Maryland’s fallen in the Great War, the 40-foot cross was said by the plaintiffs to violate the Establishment Clause. In June 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the atheists could take a hike and the cross could stay.
Also in 2017, Gregory wrote for the majority in an en banc opinion upholding an injunction blocking President Trump’s travel ban from several terror-prone nations. Although the U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 upheld Mr. Trump’s common-sense measure in a 5-4 ruling, Joe Biden quickly reversed it with an executive order. Thanks, Joe. The next terrorist attack is on you.
In 2014, Gregory was part of a three-judge panel’s majority opinion in Bostic v. Schaefer, striking down Virginia’s voter-approved constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.
Well, why not? If men and women aren’t physically distinguishable in any meaningful way, why not eject an entire sex from the marriage formula? It’s all in your head, anyway, we’re told by the woke chorus that’s bent on drowning out common sense and the liberty to disagree.
About the only good to come out of this topless case for the citizens of Ocean City is the publicity factor. Is it May already? Why, that can only mean that we’re on the cusp of summer and 300,000 people heading to the beach. Paint that wall. Dust off that merry go round. Where are those crab pots?
Of course, if the case goes the wrong way and can’t be remedied, thousands of families might head north instead to Ocean City, New Jersey. That’s the Methodist-founded resort where nudity is not only banned but also the alcoholic drinks that might inspire some to test that ordinance.
As someone who once edited The Maryland Coast Press (since succeeded by the Maryland Coast Dispatch), I’m rooting heavily for Maryland’s Ocean City to prevail against the loosened female plaintiffs.
I don’t care if these women have no shame or sense of decency. They have no business flashing everybody, including children. Any judge who doesn’t get that doesn’t deserve to sit on the bench.
On the other hand, he might be the perfect candidate for Joe Biden/Kamala Harris when they’re handed an opening on the Supreme Court.
Robert Knight is a contributor to The Washington Times. His latest book is “The Coming Communist Wave: What Happens If the Left Captures All Three Branches of Government”. A version of this column ran originally in The Washington Times.
—-
Copyright American Family News. Reprinted with permission.
If you let women go topless , men will look. Then these same women will cry sexual harassment. I promise I won’t complain if they go topless lol
JUST be wary about who you say CAN go topless. There are PLENTY of land whales and neanderthal rejects in the lefits feminazis population, i would even LET YOU PAY me to see topless…
LET alone fully naked.
In Europe most beaches are topless.
There are Big boobies, little boobies, saggy boobies and perky boobies.
After about a week over there it becomes no big deal.
Maybe over here in the U.S. the cancel culture will try to cancel boobies or maybe the WOKE will try and accuse White boobies as being racist?
If Boobies are the only thing your have to be concerned about in your life,
you have a blessed life.
IMO that’s cause in europe, for the most part, nudity isn’t seen as Scandelous, like it still is here..
The way the Left sees it, the greater the shock value, the more wrothy the cause.
So, we are inundated daily with news of sexism, sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, sexual predators—anything and everything sexual. And women are invariably the victims. And to help curb that, we are to allow as little clothing as possible and pretend that it is the fault of men should they become victimized. There are nude beaches where these two women could go—they can go bottomless as well as topless. But no, they choose to attack the public beach where moral guidelines are in place—it cramps their style. Just like the gay couple who wants their wedding cake made by a Christian baker rather than one of a number of others who are not Christian but who would make their cake for them. Let’s not go where we CAN—let’s go where we can create a spectacle.
Morality”” What’s that. The left sees no morality.
Where are the 3 stooges when you need them? Moe, Larry and Curly would fit right in as Federal Court judges. It would actually be refreshing to have some judges with common sense for a change.
More and more, it seems like Common sense is not just an endangered species, but FLAT OUT extinct, especially when it comes to judges and politicians..
OK, just change the law to say that if the protrusions on the chest of any human are more than say 1/8″ or maybe 1/4″ that the human needs to wear a shirt. If a female is that flat chested she can go topless. If a male has ‘man boobs’ then he needs to wear a shirt. It will be a blessing for everyone.
Well, if they can show their female parts, why not say they want to go naked. That will be next. Big boobs are usually a female attribute (at least they were). If they can show their boobs, why not the other part too? Everybody can just run around naked. The clothing industry might not like that but we could save lot of money. That would show those Hollywood elites we don’t need them. After all, we are not men and women anymore. We are whatevers.
Well, seeing the amount of nudity that has gone on, in some of the LGBTQ Pride parades, i can FULLY expect them to say “we want full public nudity to be allowed” next.
On the one hand we have women going to court for the right to flaunt their bare boobs in public. On the other hand we have women running to court to hyperventilate about a man’s unwelcome hand on their shoulder 30 years ago. Have these women ever met? Will men be able to sue for their eyes being traumatized by the unwanted sight of jiggling breasts in public spaces? America’s enemies must be laughing themselves silly at what US judges waste their time on.
No.. MEN WILL never have the power to do that..
Being female I will say, You want to act like a hoe, you will be treated like a hoe. I don’t want to see or hear the first whining story about any of these women who are that damn dumb and immoral crying the blues when they get raped. It will be YOUR fault.
Stupid, they wouldn’t let me put the common word you can find in the bible for crying out loud. Had to go street. wow W***e