Conference moira::naturism

76.0. "This looks like a worthy cause." by SANCHO::GAFFNEY (Paul) Sun Jun 26 1988 00:39

           <<< MOIRA::SYS$SPECIFIC:[NOTES$LIBRARY]REC_NUDE.NOTE;1 >>>
                     -< Postings from USENET net.rec.nude >-
================================================================================
Note 424.1                   Chincoteague Nude Beach                      1 of 1
MOIRA::FAIMAN "ingersoll!sxn"                        67 lines  19-JUN-1988 00:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.nude
Path: decwrl!labrea!eos!ames!oliveb!sun!ingersoll!sxn
Subject: Re: Chincoteague Nude Beach
Posted: 17 Jun 88 16:13:05 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mountain View
Summary:
Expires:
Sender:
Followup-To:
Distribution:
 
In article <604@jolnet.UUCP> hay_nude@jolnet.UUCP (Gary stirk) writes:
>Does anyone have current information on [Chincoteague] or other beaches in the
>Washington DC area (or eastern Shore)
 
National Captital Naturists are still pursuing the legal channels to challenge
this ordinance.  A Virginia state judge ruled that the ordinance was okay, and
NCN is appealing to the federal level.  They actually wanted this to happen,
because if they were to win on the state level, the ruling would have little
national effect.  Here's a note from the NCN newsletter:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               Legal Brief
 
We are waiting (sound familar?) for [Federal court] Judge Kellam to place us on
the docket for hearing, hopefully sometime in May or so [this is from the April
Newsletter; haven't heard if it got on yet].  While it seems frustrating to
those not intimately familiar with the goings-on in the case, that is probably
the response our opponents hope to engender: they realize we have a strong case
and are, therefore, attempting to place numerous legal obstacles in our path,
hoping to wear us down and give up.  Guess again!  We are hanging in there the
whole way.
 
The recent generosity of various contributors has been very heartening!!  We
cannot begin to thank you enough.  These badly needed dollars will help us pay
back legal bills, but we still need ongoing support, particularly as we
approach the more tedious levels of the upper court systems, where historical
research of precedent, etc., consume much time ($$$).
 
Speaking of historical research, our position would advance tremendously if we
could document several cases of nude use of the Chincoteague beach prior to,
say, 10-15 years ago.  This would lend more credibility to our point that the
beach was traditionally a nude use beach, countering what our opponents claim.
ANYBODY who would be willing to testify, in person or in writing, or who has
documentation, such as a newspaper article or photograph of early nude use of
Chincoteague, PLEASE contact John Kyff [at address below].  This could prove to
be a key issue in our legal case.
 
Don't forget our address:
 
    NCN Legal Support Fund
    P.O. Box 3122
    Fairfax, VA   22038
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
[For those who haven't heard of this case, the County of Chincoteague passed an
ordinance in 1984 that explicitly forbade nudity (except in certain situations;
the ordinance mentions theater and free speech).  The "justification" for this
ordinance was to protect the citizens' "health, safety and welfare" -- and no,
they weren't worried about sunburns: Chincoteague in located in Tidewater
Virginia, part of the bible belt.  The free beach was located in a remote part
of the Federal Wildlife Reserve on Assateague Island, which is located on
Chincoteague.  Rather that telling the County that it had no jurisdiction over
Federal land, the Reserve went along with the ordinance and posted signs
forbidding nudity when the ordinance went into effect.]
 
Steve Nahm                              sxn@sun.COM or sun!sxn