Taste and propriety and the law

This has been bubbling through the local media for some months now. It centres on one man - an self-promoted "pornographer", his annual trade fair and the proting "street parade" otherwise known as "Boobs on Bikes".

The City Fathers (or perhaps that should now be "Mothers") have gotten themselves painted into the corner marked "Moralism and Propriety". Nothing wrong with that, I hear you say and I might agree.

Granny Herald reports this morning that the City Mothers do not have the right to stop the "BoB" parade.

Judge Nicola Mathers yesterday dismissed Auckland City Council's case for a court injunction to stop pornographer Steve Crow holding the event.
...
Judge Mathers said it was not a court of morals and it was her job to stick to the law.

The case boiled down to a new council bylaw and a council decision to turn down a permit for the parade on the grounds it was "offensive".

Judge Mathers said she took into account the attitude of the police in not opposing the parade, the lack of any public disorder and the fact 80,000 to 100,000 had voted with their feet and watched the parade.

"[That] leads me to the view that the bylaw is uncertain and or unreasonable in the way it refers to offensive," she said.

That's right, the ruling against the City Mothers was made by a woman.

It is not the ruling that is the problem here, nor is it the parade itself (I will NOT be going BTW - it is not one bit a probligo thing; tasteless in my opinion).

There is a forked tongue in here. There are two standards being applied.

The leading light against the parade is one Cathy Casey.

I wonder if she would support women breastfeeding their babies in a cafe or restaurant as fervently as she opposes the BoB parade?