The "big O" in Ohio...and "topfree"? (Columbus: to live, legal)

[Gaylenwoof]

This article (Seeking the big O in Ohio) gives some perspective on the liberal verses conservative aspects of Ohio (mostly related to alternative lifestyles in this case). What is your experience? On the surface it seems mostly conservative to me, but the more liberal sub-cultures do seem fairly active.

BTW, like the article mentions, I find it ironic that Ohio was the location of Spencer Tunick's first major photo shoot once it became legal for him to do his photos in the US. I also find it interesting that Ohio is, technically, a "topfree" state. None of this seems to fit with its conservative reputation. I wonder what would happen if lots of women really started to take advantage of this topfree freedom?

Overall, what would you say is more important to Ohio voters: individual liberty or moral conservatism?

[mdmagana]

Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof

Overall, what would you say is more important to Ohio voters: individual liberty or moral conservatism?

That's an unfair question. Most moral conservatives place a high priority on individual liberties.

What's interesting about Ohio to me, and probably what makes it such a swing state, is that there are more registered Democrats, but relatively few of them are liberals.

[strudel42]

So Cleveland has swingers. Just like any city of its size anywhere in the country.

Ohio is politically odd; while it is rather conservative I'd say there are few "moral" conservatives. Ohio conservatives tend to have more of a a libertarian bent.

[streetcreed]

Columbus abides by this top free law. Women do go top free. In Columbus' gay pride parade (one of the largest in the midwest and largest in Ohio) and other summer Columbus festivals women go top free in city parks, on the city streets, and in downtown. Police are fine with it and follow the law.

However, the city of Columbus is very progressive, and just past domestic partner health care from the city government last night. Columbus is socially progressive so it's no surprise. As far as the rest of Ohio, especially smaller towns and probably Cincinnati I am not so sure topless women is as common and as widely accepted.

[PhillytoCincy]

The NE part of the state tends to vote blue, as does Columbus. The NW Part of the state goes blue too, esp in Metro Toledo. The SE part of the state tends to swing, and the SW part (Springfield, Dayton, and Cincinnati metros) all vote red. The recent elections for governor were interesting. Franklin County (Columbus) was in a sea of red.

[Gaylenwoof]

Originally Posted by mdmagana

That's an unfair question. Most moral conservatives place a high priority on individual liberties.

Ok, perhaps this is a "teachable moment" for one or both of us. It seems to me that moral conservatives are the most obvious enemies of individual liberties. The point of individual liberties is to let people live how they want, so long as they don't interfere with the rights of others. Moral conservatives always have a particular code (almost always based on religious beliefs) that they want to impose on everyone because it is, in their view, the "right way to live."

Let's take female toplessness as one example. How can someone who truly favors individual liberties stand up in support of laws that restrict toplessness? Is there a valid issue concerning the conflict of rights here? If so, I need someone to explain what it is. So far as I can see, the moral conservatives simply don't like nudity, and want to make sure that everyone else abides by their preferences.

[Gaylenwoof]

Sorry, I was probably out of line getting into this issue here. I'm going to ask this question in the "Politics and Other Controversies" forum.

[streetcreed]

Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof

Sorry, I was probably out of line getting into this issue here. I'm going to ask this question in the "Politics and Other Controversies" forum.

I don't think so. This is an Ohio related issue. This is a webform for Ohio. If you are asking this in regard to the nation then yes go to the "Politics forum", but you are talking about how liberal/conservative/or free liberty the state is and applying it to a specific topic. If we only talk about housing this forum would be one dimensional.

I say ask away.

[Gaylenwoof]

Originally Posted by streetcreed

I don't think so. This is an Ohio related issue. This is a webform for Ohio. If you are asking this in regard to the nation then yes go to the "Politics forum", but you are talking about how liberal/conservative/or free liberty the state is and applying it to a specific topic. If we only talk about housing this forum would be one dimensional.

I say ask away.

I took the general question to the political forum, and it is going hot 'n' heavy over there. But if people want to discuss it here, I'm happy to do so.

[OhioIstheBest]

Originally Posted by Gaylenwoof

Ok, perhaps this is a "teachable moment" for one or both of us. It seems to me that moral conservatives are the most obvious enemies of individual liberties. The point of individual liberties is to let people live how they want, so long as they don't interfere with the rights of others. Moral conservatives always have a particular code (almost always based on religious beliefs) that they want to impose on everyone because it is, in their view, the "right way to live."

Let's take female toplessness as one example. How can someone who truly favors individual liberties stand up in support of laws that restrict toplessness? Is there a valid issue concerning the conflict of rights here? If so, I need someone to explain what it is. So far as I can see, the moral conservatives simply don't like nudity, and want to make sure that everyone else abides by their preferences.

It's liberals and more specifically, women, that have destroyed individual freedom in this state/country. Not moral conservatives.