Don't chill the champange yet, Kathy!
You opined:

> But frankly, I settle for having to nurse the over 3 year
> olds in private!  They probably want to make it not OK for adult men
to suck
> on women's breasts in public

Now is when I rue Linux's lack of a universal clipboard, so here I will
type the proposed wording as the bill was introduced, and then the
"politicianized" wording.

<ah-hem>

MGL ch 272: Crimes against chastity, morality, deceny and good order
Section 16: Open and gross lewdness and lascivious behavior.
A man or a woman, married or unmarried, who is guilty of open and gross
lewdness and lascivious behavior, shall be punished by imprisonment in
the state prison for not more than three years or in jail for not more
than two years or by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars.
[The proposed amendment would add the following language: "The act of
breastfeeding a child shall not be considered a violation of this
section."]

Section 53: Penalty for certain offenses.
Common night walkers, common street walkers, both male and female,
common railers and brawlers, persons who with offensive and disorderly
acts or language accost or annoy persons of the opposite sex, lewd,
wanton and lascivious persons in speech or behavior, idle and disorderly
persons, disturbers of the peace, keeps of noisy and disorderly houses,
and persons guilty of indecent exposure may be punished by imprisonment
in a jail or house of correction for not more than six months, or by a
fine of not more than two hundred dollars, or by both such fine and
imprisonment.
[The proposed amendment would add the following language: "The act of
breastfeeding a child shall not be considered a violation of this
section."]

The proposed amendment would also add the following section, Section
98D:
Notwithstanding any other provisions of the law, any person who is
breastfeeding a child shall be entitled to any and all accommodations,
advantages, facilities and privileges of all public conveyances, public
amusements and places of public accommodations, within the Commonwealth,
to which other persons are entitled.  Whoever deprives any person who is
breastfeeding, of any right conferred by this section shall be punished
by a fine of not more than three hundred dollars and shall be liable to
any person aggrieved thereby for such damages as are set forth in
section five of this chapter one hundred and fifty-one B; provided,
however, that such civil forfeiture shall be of an amount not less than
one hundred dollars.

Me again.  Now, add the term "child less than three years of age."  [The
proposed amendment would add the following language: "The act of
breastfeeding a child less than three years of age shall not be
considered a violation of this section."]

As you can see, the original proposal did specify that were were talking
about a breastfeeding *child.*  Then the change is clearly not to
protect the public from erotic acts between adults but to protect them
from the sight of a nursing toddler or preschooler.  Worse, it moves
nursing toddlers from a gray area to definitely *not* protected and
perhaps to definition as lewd and lascivious.

Hope this clears things up (stirs them up, more likely!)  And, thanks,
we will puruse the LLL site for more info.  ;-)

>:-\
--
Beth Johnson
Perinatal Educator, Doula
Springfield, MA USA

"Breastmilk: anything else is less."

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html