Geoff Flight wrote:

Hi Geoff!

It certainly doesn't take anything to get you into ad hominem outrage.

Australia, and any country that bans private ownership of handguns by 
law-abiding citizens, is a dictatorship. It may be dictatorship by 
committee, but it is dictatorship nevertheless.

It is interesting that you seem to think that a person "once a doctor", 
as you put it, should have some ethical restraint on his or her opinion 
of dictatorship and freedom.

In addition to having been once a doctor I was once a professional 
photographer. Unless the law has changed, and I have not heard that it 
has, it is OK to photograph underwear wearing persons. If they are 
recognizable you have to have their permission to publish the pictures 
but not to take them. It is tasteless, but not "not OK".

> You have an interesting description of 'dictatorship' and 'freedom'. I
> believe you were once a doctor. Perhaps you should review the professional
> ethics section and see if it gives you any advice on these matters.

>> Breaching privacy but not being identifiable is hardly ok. Some things are
>> just wrong - such as this. The camera sound idea tho is just absurd.

> Perhaps if you live in a dictatorship such as Australia or anywhere in 
> the UK, but we have freedom of the press here. Thus, underwear pictures 
> per se are not banned. It is tasteless, however.
> 
>> If the skirt wearer has clean underwear on and is not recognizable in 
>> the picture then it is merely tasteless.
-- 
Regards,

Pete
http://pete-theisen.com/

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/497f9cff.7000...@verizon.net
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to