Jefferson was a utilitarian, was he not? Greatest good for greatest number. As such he might have been against naturism!!
Thomas Jefferson wrote about religion, "it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg." That goes for demanding clothing too. If I am not wearing clothes it neither picks the pocket nor breaks the leg of my neighbor. It is not his right to demand my conformance to his religious standards....
...In that nudity might be your religion, Bob 
I entirely agree with those Jeffersonian and Bobknowsian sentiments!
John
T.J. wrote the Bill of Rights, which protects the minority and individual from the dictates of the majority. He was a renaissance man, who loved correspondence with others and the liberation brought to knowledge and education. He often enjoyed change. He feared the ignorant emotional masses and majorities, in a democracy. That was much of his rational for universal education and higher educational opportunities, free speech and public libraries.
Like anyone else, his opinions and outlook changed/evolved over time. I'm sure that his statement about a revolution is good from time to time reflected the spirit of the times, but he did organize the constitution to be a tool of flexibility for change to occur without violence.
As for this Sally Hemmings controversy. It is unfounded misrepresentation of history by a resentful 20th century outlook. He was a gentlemen of the times, aristocratic and raise as such, and among his peers. The culture was established and like so many things still today, most people didn't question it. At that time, slavery was accepted norm. It wasn't questioned. Most people actually believed that there was an inferior race and many other prejudices with little question. How many assumptions still exist today as norm and trusted? They didn't have access to alternatives statistics, or media. The world was generally ignorant, but for the influences provided in local areas. If someone was raised in such circumstance then I can’t blame them, or hate them, or point my finger at them for participating, or approving of it. “Forgive them for they no not what they do, “ someone once said. Jefferson actually was aware and wrote in concern and questioned the issue. He considered liberation. He had dilemma with the idea of freeing his slaves. He had a relationship with Sally that we can only speculate about. The evidence showed a very caring lover in a conflicting social moral conundrum of those times. He didn’t grow up in these times where it is easy to dismiss the norms of 250 years ago. These so called intellectuals and the liberals with chips on their shoulders kinda alarm me when they expect people of another era to behave the same as today's common sense allows and then show the stupidity to demonize historic people, to top it off.
Our bodies are persecuted by the current ignorance. People don’t question it and there are degrees of that and opinions change over time. We are victims of a democratic process years ago, that created the laws, and is supported by ignorance. T.J. would have defended us. In his times, the many families lived in a very small tight homes, or a cabin. Separate bedrooms were for the rich, often. There had to be some family nudity to be practical. There were the famous revolutionary forefathers who skinnydipped, grew up without swim suits, and expounded airbaths. Society was probably less uptight than today about such things generally, particularly for males. Remember, we must put an 18thcentury women’s place into the context. We need to apply that thinking and social norm to the Sally issue, too.
With all of this in consideration, I believe that T.J. would certainly lend support to us to a great extent. If he had been able to join this forum with us, he probably would agree with us. The guy was complex and wrote volumes for decades. His opinions changed, he couldn't always be on foolproof target, but he always sought the truth and did his best to get behind it.
Jbee
