it should be against the law for women to be topless in public

I will first address my opponent's 3 scenarios put into perspective with the subject at hand (female upper body nudity): 1. I would argue that the freedom for women to be topless in public doesn't noticeably improve anyone"s life (discounting young boys). 2. As I have stated my argument in round one (against which my opponent has made no rebuttal), female breasts are widely considered sexual/pornographic in nature. There are of course many people, especially parents of young children, who do not wish those things to be on public display. It is a whole other subject as to whether or not sexual content are harmful towards certain parts of the population but since it is universally prohibited for children under a certain age, one can safely assume that it has some sort of negative effect. A quick search produces these articles published by State Universities (which often have high degrees of creditability) : Effects of Pornography on Relationships(Utah State University): http://extension.usu.edu... Excerpt: "Pornography can have negative consequences for both the user and his or her intimate partner." The Social Costs of Pornography (prepared by the Director of the Sexual Trauma and Psychopathology Program at University of Pennsylvania, ranked number 8 top Universities in the US by USNews (this is what the overwhelming majority of high school seniors use in the college search)) http://www.winst.org... "Today's consumption of internet pornography can harm children in particular." "Today's consumption of internet pornography can harm women in particular." "The consumption of internet pornography can harm its consumers." "The fact that not everyone is harmed by pornography does not entail that pornography should not be regulated." Note that pornography contains both softcore and hardcore porn, the former often contains numerous contents that only feature the female breasts. 3. This is assuming that viewing exposed breasts (sexual in nature, pornographic to a low degree) harms absolutely nobody, which I have proven to be false. Also this would only be the case if indecent exposure results in jail time and extensive trials which is obviously not the case. Indecent exposures often mean a nice fine sent to your mailbox, ending in a surplus for the police department. I would also like to remind the opposing party that the government, especially law makers, are put in place as a projection of the people"s will and should always act in society"s best interest. Were there any demand to allow female toplessness there would already have been a Whitehouse petition; in which case it would likely pass the signature threshold almost instantaneously and went up into congress. In conclusion, my opponents argues that viewing female breasts not only not harm anybody but would in fact be beneficial; both of which I have proven to be false assumptions. Thus party also proposes that laws should be based upon some unclear arbitrary standard (unwritten) as opposed to my view which is to serve the will of the people whilst still allowing all them of all civil and political liberties. The evidence I have put forward heavily suggests that public female toplessness is against popular moral conduct, potentially if not fully harmful towards certain demographics and unwanted by many. Therefore, it should not be made legal.