Dear AANR Members, Club Owners and friends:

Yesterday, Delegate Carrico of the Virginia General Assembly
introduced HB 2806, further restricting nude recreation for all
juveniles in Virginia. This message is to provide you with a
summary of the bill and to let you know what we are doing about it.

Last year you may remember that Representative Jack Reid introduced
and passed HB 158. That bill prohibited issuing a license to any
hotel, campground or summer camp conducting a "nudist camp for
juveniles." A "nudist camp for juveniles" was defined as a hotel,
campground or summer attended by openly nude juveniles without their
parents also being present.

When HB 158 was considered on the house floor, Representative
Carrico was the lone NO vote. Carrico later explained that he
didn't feel HB 158 went far enough. Now Carrico's bill would delete
the current law's limitation to cases where youths are present
without their parents.

Thus, it broadens the definition of nudist camp for juveniles to
include all hotels, campgrounds and summer camps with openly nude
juveniles, regardless of whether the juvenile's parent or legal
guardian is also registered and present or not. The bill
effectively bans minors from being present at nudist resorts in
Virginia.

AANR and AANR East, along with AANR East legal counsel, are
currently lining up a lobbyist and conducting research to assess the
bill prospects and plan our defense. We ask you do take no action
at this time but to be ready to do so when it is appropriate.

HB 2806 may be unwelcome news, but it does prove a point that we
have long been making. That is, that there are members of the
Virginia Legislature that are unconcerned with tramping on the
rights of parents to make decisions for their families. Now the
freedom they wish to take away is our right to bring our family with
us when traveling to AANR parks in the state.

We appreciate all you do to help us protect nude recreation in North
America.

Bob Roche

AANR East President

Erich Schuttauf
Executive Director

From:	El Dorado Hot Springs
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 05:59:05 GMT

Dear Mark,

We don't believe this clucking schidt.

Where can one read the text of HR 2806?

We must all band together or be banned altogether.

Camilla Van Sickle & Bill Pennington

"Mark" wrote in message
news:3FSHd.1947$cZ1.83@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> Dear AANR Members, Club Owners and friends:
>
> Yesterday, Delegate Carrico of the Virginia General Assembly
> introduced HB 2806, further restricting nude recreation for all
> juveniles in Virginia. This message is to provide you with a
> summary of the bill and to let you know what we are doing about it.
>
> Last year you may remember that Representative Jack Reid introduced
> and passed HB 158. That bill prohibited issuing a license to any
> hotel, campground or summer camp conducting a "nudist camp for
> juveniles." A "nudist camp for juveniles" was defined as a hotel,
> campground or summer attended by openly nude juveniles without their
> parents also being present.
>
> When HB 158 was considered on the house floor, Representative
> Carrico was the lone NO vote. Carrico later explained that he
> didn't feel HB 158 went far enough. Now Carrico's bill would delete
> the current law's limitation to cases where youths are present
> without their parents.
>
> Thus, it broadens the definition of nudist camp for juveniles to
> include all hotels, campgrounds and summer camps with openly nude
> juveniles, regardless of whether the juvenile's parent or legal
> guardian is also registered and present or not. The bill
> effectively bans minors from being present at nudist resorts in
> Virginia.
>
> AANR and AANR East, along with AANR East legal counsel, are
> currently lining up a lobbyist and conducting research to assess the
> bill prospects and plan our defense. We ask you do take no action
> at this time but to be ready to do so when it is appropriate.
>
> HB 2806 may be unwelcome news, but it does prove a point that we
> have long been making. That is, that there are members of the
> Virginia Legislature that are unconcerned with tramping on the
> rights of parents to make decisions for their families. Now the
> freedom they wish to take away is our right to bring our family with
> us when traveling to AANR parks in the state.
>
> We appreciate all you do to help us protect nude recreation in North
> America.
>
> Bob Roche
>
> AANR East President
>
> Erich Schuttauf
> Executive Director
>
>

From:	Bill S
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 02:37:48 -0700

Hey C&B,

Try

http://legis.state.va.us/

I tried to enter hb2806 in their search engine but the system is currently
off-line. If what is posted is true, there will be a battle but it's time
to get this nonsense stopped once and for all. The question will eventually
go to the courts, do parents have the right to raise their child with their
own beliefs, be that religion or lifestyle choice, without unwarranted
government intrusion and interference? Years ago, a county in Florida
tried to enact a law making it illegal for a parent to allow a female adult
in the home (as in a guest) to bare her breast in view of the children that
lived in the home. So one could not allow a female friend to come over and
sunbathe without a top on, in the privacy of one's domain if the kids of the
house were present. That's nuts, and this attempt in Virginia to regulate
how parents raise their kids is just as crazy.
Bill S in Goodyear, AZ

From:	Sylvia
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:01:14 +1100

Bill S wrote:

> I tried to enter hb2806 in their search engine but the system is currently
> off-line. If what is posted is true, there will be a battle but it's time
> to get this nonsense stopped once and for all. The question will eventually
> go to the courts, do parents have the right to raise their child with their
> own beliefs, be that religion or lifestyle choice, without unwarranted
> government intrusion and interference?

I don't want to seem a wet blanket here, but I can't see anything in the
US constitution that guarantees parents the freedom to bring up their
children as they see fit. I haven't looked at Virginia's constitution.

Freedom to peacefully assemble? All the government's done is said that
if you want to assemble with your children, they must be clothed. I
can't see the Supreme Court objecting to that.

On the other hand, the legislative approach seems odd. It appears that
the requirement for licences generally has been introduced for the
specific purpose of prohibiting venues where juveniles can be nude. Why
the roundabout approach? Why not simply make it unlawful to run such a
venue? Were the legislators aware that the latter approach would be
vulnerable to attack in the courts? If so, I doubt the licence approach
would survive an attack on the same grounds (whatever they might be).

Sylvia.

From:	Sylvia
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Sat, 22 Jan 2005 09:35:04 +1100

Havine further researched this, it does seem that the Supreme Court has
found that there is a consitutional right for parents to decide on the
upbringing of their children.

It is not an unfettered right, and the state can intervene if the
children are being harmed or there is a risk of their being harmed.

In the Virginia case, the state is not so much imposing on parental
rights as simply seeking to make certain types of venue unavailable. I
can't see that it would prevent groups of parents coming together to
hire a venue (or even use their own homes) at which they and their
children could be nude.

A constitutional challenge might be worthwhile, on the grounds the
licence requirement has as its sole purpose the limitation of parental
rights, but I'd say the outcome is far from certain.

BTW, I see fundamental differences between this situation and the Hippie
Hollow case, but I'll leave that for now.

Sylvia.

From:	Bill S
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Sat, 22 Jan 2005 11:42:57 -0700

Thanks for sharing your research; the US legal system isn't easy to follow,
especially when state law and federal law come into play with civil rights.
Bill S in AZ
"Sylvia" wrote in message
news:41f18399$0$2195$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Havine further researched this, it does seem that the Supreme Court has
> found that there is a consitutional right for parents to decide on the
> upbringing of their children.
>
> It is not an unfettered right, and the state can intervene if the children
> are being harmed or there is a risk of their being harmed.
>
> In the Virginia case, the state is not so much imposing on parental rights
> as simply seeking to make certain types of venue unavailable. I can't see
> that it would prevent groups of parents coming together to hire a venue
> (or even use their own homes) at which they and their children could be
> nude.
>
> A constitutional challenge might be worthwhile, on the grounds the licence
> requirement has as its sole purpose the limitation of parental rights, but
> I'd say the outcome is far from certain.
>
> BTW, I see fundamental differences between this situation and the Hippie
> Hollow case, but I'll leave that for now.
>
> Sylvia.

From:	Mark
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:30:56 GMT

Full text of the bill with proposed modifications (strike-throughs ARE the
proposed modifications):

055462264

HOUSE BILL NO. 2806
Offered January 18, 2005
A BILL to amend and reenact § 35.1-18 of the Code of Virginia, relating to
nudist camps for juveniles.
----------
Patron-- Carrico
----------
Referred to Committee on General Laws
----------
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:

1. That § 35.1-18 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as
follows:

§ 35.1-18. License required; name in which issued; not assignable or
transferable.

No person shall own, establish, conduct, maintain, manage, or operate any
hotel, restaurant, summer camp, or campground in this the Commonwealth
unless the hotel, restaurant, summer camp, or campground is licensed as
provided in this chapter. The license shall be in the name of the owner or
lessee. No license issued hereunder shall be assignable or transferable. The
Board shall not issue a license to the owner or lessee of any hotel, summer
camp or campground in this the Commonwealth that maintains, or conducts as
any part of its activities, a nudist camp for juveniles. A "nudist camp for
juveniles" is defined to be a hotel, summer camp or campground that is
attended by openly nude juveniles whose parent, grandparent, or legal
guardian is not also registered for and present with the juvenile at the
same camp.

From:	Mark
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:34:57 GMT

Ooops....the "strike throughs did not show in the plain test format of the
newsgroup

"Mark" wrote in message
news:AR4Id.2941$rp1.2645@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> Full text of the bill with proposed modifications (strike-throughs ARE the
> proposed modifications):
>
>
>
> 055462264
>
> HOUSE BILL NO. 2806
> Offered January 18, 2005
> A BILL to amend and reenact § 35.1-18 of the Code of Virginia, relating to
> nudist camps for juveniles.
> ----------
> Patron-- Carrico
> ----------
> Referred to Committee on General Laws
> ----------
> Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Virginia:
>
> 1. That § 35.1-18 of the Code of Virginia is amended and reenacted as
> follows:
>
> § 35.1-18. License required; name in which issued; not assignable or
> transferable.
>
> No person shall own, establish, conduct, maintain, manage, or operate any
> hotel, restaurant, summer camp, or campground in the Commonwealth unless
> the hotel, restaurant, summer camp, or campground is licensed as provided
> in this chapter. The license shall be in the name of the owner or lessee.
> No license issued hereunder shall be assignable or transferable. The Board
> shall not issue a license to the owner or lessee of any hotel, summer camp
> or campground in the Commonwealth that maintains, or conducts as any part
> of its activities, a nudist camp for juveniles. A "nudist camp for
> juveniles" is defined to be a hotel, summer camp or campground that is
> attended by openly nude juveniles.

I removed the portions that were the strike-through modifications.

See the following from the VA legislative site:

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?051+ful+HB2806

From:	Jimbo
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:57:16 GMT

So, if I get this right, they removed the clause about "when parents not
registered or present" and have made it illegal for any facility to host
openly nude juveniles - period? Thus, the old fashioned YMCA, or any
school's locker room seems to fall under that.

I do see the ramifications of this. It is one step away from banning any
facility that has openly nude *anyone*, as well as destroying any
family-oriented facility. Maybe they are taking the "Virginia is for
Lovers" mantra to the extreme and want to make all naturist facilities in VA
swingers clubs... at least that would make Max happy. (sorry Max couldn't
help myself)

Jim

From:	Amanda B. Recondwythe
Subject:	Re: From AANR Gov't Affairs--Sad day for Family Nudism
Date:	Fri, 21 Jan 2005 10:55:33 -0500

On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 14:57:16 GMT, "Jimbo" wrote:

>So, if I get this right, they removed the clause about "when parents not
>registered or present" and have made it illegal for any facility to host
>openly nude juveniles - period? Thus, the old fashioned YMCA, or any
>school's locker room seems to fall under that.
>
>I do see the ramifications of this. It is one step away from banning any
>facility that has openly nude *anyone*, as well as destroying any
>family-oriented facility. Maybe they are taking the "Virginia is for
>Lovers" mantra to the extreme and want to make all naturist facilities in VA
>swingers clubs... at least that would make Max happy. (sorry Max couldn't
>help myself)
>
>Jim
>

I also hope folks hear Mr. Bush's oratory yesterday about "freedom is
on the march" and that "freedom will always win" - which, I guess,
does not apply to the freedom to wear or not wear what one wishes.

You sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind.