Individual Vs. Community Rights

This story out of Boulder, Colorado, is pretty interesting. The interesting part is that it concens a clash of rights -- individual rights versus community rights. Is one more important than the other?

It seems that Robert and Catharine Pierce like to do a little gardening. The problem, as far as their neighbors are concerned, is they like to do that gardening while nearly nude. They both wear thong underwear, and Catharine wears pasties. They are in their fifties.

That has the neighbors upset, because as one neighbor says, "There are so many parks around here, and there are lots of kids around. They're on the corner lot right across the street from the community gardens and the Waldorf school. The whole street is lined with kids."

The neighbors have tried calling the police, but the police say there's nothing they can do as long as the Pierces keep their genitals covered (which they are minimally doing). The landlord, Boulder Housing Partners, is now claiming the Pierces are a "nuisance", and is threatening to evict the couple if they continue their nearly nude gardening.

For their part, the Pierces are claiming discrimination. Robert Pierce says, "We want our freedom. We want exactly what the law gives you, and we don't want to be harassed about it."

So, who is right? Should the minimal compliance of the Pierces with the law protect them from eviction? Does the landlord have the right (or obligation) to protect the neighborhood children from witnessing what many of the parents consider "lewd gardening"?

Personally, I could care less how the Pierces dress (or undress) to garden, but then, I don't have to live in that neighborhood. I really don't see why this should have to wind up in a courtroom though. It sounds like a nice tall fence would solve the problem for everyone.

Instead of making enemies of their neighbors, the Pierces should put up a privacy fence. And just to show they respect the rights of their new "gardeners", maybe the neighborhood should take up a collection to help defray the cost of that fence. That's a compromise that could let everyone come out a winner and preserve the goodwill among neighbors.

The only alternative I see is a nasty court fight that creates last ill will among neighbors -- no matter who wins. Sometimes a reasonable compromise is preferable to a court fight -- even where rights are concerned. What do you think?