Glamour model opposes topless picture demise in The Sun

[d000hg]

Why would someone have a right to dip into my pocket to fund the NHS against my will?

Because it's the law that the state is entitled to tax you. It's not the law that you can appear topless in a privately owned company's newspaper.

Sheesh.

[VectraMan]

If Page 3 goes, it's a purely commercial decision by Murdoch and his lackeys.

WHS. It's just like the hoo-haa over OUP banning sausages in their books. It's a commercial decision; they can design their products to suit their market in whatever way they want. It's nothing to do with rights or freedom of speech.

[SpontaneousOrder]

WHS. It's just like the hoo-haa over OUP banning sausages in their books. It's a commercial decision; they can design their products to suit their market in whatever way they want. It's nothing to do with rights or freedom of speech.

I doubt much at all those leftie accademics do has to do with business.

[EternalOptimist]

WHS. It's just like the hoo-haa over OUP banning sausages in their books. It's a commercial decision; they can design their products to suit their market in whatever way they want. It's nothing to do with rights or freedom of speech.

Ho Ho.
Just you try selling no-gay B&B rooms in pounds and ounces

[GlenW]

Ho Ho.
Just you try selling no-gay B&B rooms in pounds and ounces

I've never understood why that B&B owner didn't just decorate all their rooms in clashing colours, that would have got rid of the prospective gay guests in a flash.

[Dactylion]

Because it's the law that the state is entitled to tax you. It's not the law that you can appear topless in a privately owned company's newspaper.

Sheesh.

Sorry to be pedantic but:
There isn't a law that specifically says that you can't. Therefore it is the law that you can appear topless in a privately owned company's newspaper.

That doesn't mean either that you must or that they must let you.

hth

[SpontaneousOrder]

Because it's the law that the state is entitled to tax you. It's not the law that you can appear topless in a privately owned company's newspaper.

Sheesh.

Well, all you did was just rephrase the question to say "why is it legal..." instead of "why does one have a right..". Just saying - so long as they're completely arbitrary, it doesn't make much sense to wonder why someone would suppose that had a right to <any random thing>. Not important to the point at hand.

Ofcourse, *I* would say that of course she doesn't have a right. But like I said, I think she really meant that other people shouldn't be campaigning to get her career shut down on some kind of moral basis.

[darmstadt]

Who cares, you've still got the Daily Star (Or Morning Star for hard core lefties):

[Flashman]

It's back



Haters gonna hate.