[quote]Spike9726 wrote:
buffalokilla wrote:
Spike9726 wrote:
I agree on the breeding licenses. Otherwise it just strikes me as more government interference in private life. Also means bigger government and more taxes. Big Brother is watching you.
How do you mean? The child doesn’t know, and the parents are too stupid or lazy to help them lose some weight. If the government (local, state, whatever) doesn’t do something, who will?
Aside from the fact that it’s probably unconstitutional (Troxell v Granville), it’s an extremely slippery slope. I really don’t want the government in my living room telling me how to feed my kids.
How much of your freedom do you wish to give away? Some say video games are bad for you but I’ll be darned if the feds are gonna regulate my PS2. Some people think that Christianity, or religion in general is a bad influence. Would you like the government to tell you what you can teach your children?
The reality of a free society is that you may not like the choices others make.
And how much more would you like to pay in taxes? This all encompassing utopian mother figure of a government that some seem to favor is far from free.[/quote]
I understand what you’re saying, and I generally agree with you that big government interfering in the affairs of the people is bad. But, repeating what an earlier poster said, the one time I can understand and applaud it is when the people are kids who are at the mercy of parents acting without the best interest of the child in mind. Regarding the constitutionality of it, I don’t think Troxell v. Granville applies. The decision stated that fit custodial parents have the final say in child rearing decisions. In the cases the article was referring to, the children were being placed on the list of children at risk for abuse. I don’t see how a parent can be considered a fit custodial guardian when they are physically abusing their child. Whether sexually, through violence , or through gross negligence (such as not looking out for the child’s health by providing a healthy diet).
The feds are already trying to regulate your PS2 btw. And religion, that’s regulated too. Sure, you can teach your kids about Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Wicca, Mormon, etc… but do you think you’d be allowed to raise your kids Rastafarian? Sorry, smoking ganja is illegal, even as a part of your religion. Or what about the church of Satan, not nearly as bad as everyone thinks, but I bet you child services would have a fit if they heard you were teaching your kid to worship Satan.
As for the cost in taxes, you’re thinking too short term. Yes, it would be expensive immediately, but think about 20+ years from now. After 20 years of parents feeding their kids healthy food or risking losing them you’ll have a generation that’s grown up healthy. Another few years and they’ll be having kids, who they’ll raise healthy. Healthy people don’t get sick as often and don’t cost as much money in health care. Yes, I’m exaggerating a bit for the sake of argument, but it’s true, making the country healthier in the long run will save everyone money.
Cheers,
Jay