sexiest dress up

In March 5, 1935, the then head of the Catholic Church, Pope Pius XI said “The paganized life of today affects all open and attentive eyes, a life so specifically, so paganly dedicated to pleasure and the search for pleasure. It is a life so specifically wanton, it’s wantonness surpasses on many occasions that of the ancient pagan life. It is called – with a horrible word and with horrible blasphemy – the cult of nudity.”
In 1981, Cardinal Karol Woytyla, later Pope John Paul II, said "The human body can remain nude and uncovered and preserve intact its splendour and its beauty. Nakedness as such is not to be equated with physical shamelessness. Immodesty is present only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the person.The human body is not in itself shameful. Shamelessness (just like shame and modesty) is a function of the interior of a person." He also said "Because God created it the human body can remain nude and uncovered and preserve its splendour and its beauty."
With the two views being diametrically opposed, a minimum of one of them is wrong. Need I say more?
Thanks to Allnudist for flagging up the 1935 quote.

Is the naked body beautiful, aesthetically pleasing or is the opposite true, is the naked body ugly? A very good friend of mine thinks so, she said "nude, people are just not pretty".

Exactly what is beautiful or aesthetic is directly linked to conditioning, each society and time has its own idea of what is or what is not beautiful. In the past, artists would paint their ideal nude figures with somewhat more body fat than we are used to now. In times or areas of poverty and food shortages, a fatter person would be considered more successful, they would not understand the current size zero craze.

It is hard to understand why anyone would think that with the exception of a few of "the beautiful people", we are all so ugly that covering at all times is required and to run the risk of prosecution if we do not. If we were to follow the line of eugenics, the deliberate breeding of "the beautiful people", perhaps the idea would change, but I doubt it. In any case, such a scheme is universally recognised as being evil, quite right to.

Should someone with a facial disfigurement be forced to cover up their face because they do not conform to the idea of the beautiful people? Of course not, the very idea is repugnant. My mum suffered from just that problem. Although most people were kind and did their best to understand her very difficult speech, she did come across a few really nasty people who stared, made fun of her or simply gave up trying. It was deeply hurtful, but the person inside was the same beautiful mum as she was before her operation. This rings true with naturism, it is always a few vociferous people who make trouble, most people do not object to nudity where people currently wear swimsuits. www.savingfaces.co.uk

In the view of many naturists it is not acceptable to be forced to dress in circumstances where dress is not needed. It should be just as unacceptable as if my mum was forced to cover up her face.