e-Claire

A Post Millennial Consideration of Our Interconnection
by a simple tootsie from The Countryâ„¢...




If comments are closed, please email me: Claire AT e-biscuit DOT com




MAIN PAGE HERE





Dept. of Secret Messages

Quote meon an estimate et non interruptus stadium. Sic tempus fugit esperanto hiccup estrogen. Glorious baklava cheesecake ex librus hup hey yo ho ho ad infinitum. Non sequitur as usual, condominium facile et geranium incognito. Hoo-Ah! Betcha didn't know that!

Stuff by the Month

Most Recent Stuff

Syndicate

This page has been viewed 3056961 times

Referrers

Powered by ExpressionEngine

CA Legislature Decrees CA Parents Superfluous [again]

Assembly passed a bill by Assemblyman Joe Nation, D-San Rafael... AB2193, which passed 42-26 and heads to the Senate, [the bill] bans minors from the tanning booths with ultraviolet rays -- ...Under existing law, children age 14-18 may use tanning salons only with parents' written consent.

Ok - as it stands today, parents decide whether or not their children may tan in salons. Joe Nation, [tell me that pretty-boy doesn't tan...] and 42 out of 68 Assemblysocialistsnannies have now decided that you are too stoo-pud to make that choice for your children and that they, knowing better about everything as we know they do, will henceforth make this choice for you. Now, aren't you grateful, dumbass? Maybe next week, they'll legislate what your children can eat. And watch. And read. ...oh, they already do that...

Posted by Claire on 05/21 at 10:56 AM
  1. Get out of Cali! Can’t you see it? The wines, the beaches, the anti-business legislation, the socialist government…

    It’s turning into France!

    Posted by Jim  on  05/21/04  at  11:23 AM
  2. there is not one “significant” reason that a child should tan.  there are lots of reasons that a child should not tan.  this seems pretty straight forward.  do you think that helmet laws for children are dumb too?  when would be an appropriate time for a parent to decide that their child does not need a helmet?

    now, art among other things is different.  a child might watch an “R” movie or read a “graphic” book and be enriched.  a particular child might benefit from any number of experiences that most children would not and so those experiences should be left up to the parent, not the government.  tanning is not one of those experiences.

    Posted by  on  05/21/04  at  11:38 AM
  3. So, in effect, Germanicus, you don’t mind the State making choices for your child instead of you.  As it stood, parental consent was needed for children under 18 to tan.  What was wrong with that?

    Now, the State Legislature is in charge of tanning. *getting out the big purple crayon* What will they decide they know better than you next?

    Will they decide that I cannot teach my own child to shoot properly and well?  What will the penalty be if I feed my child Mac’yDs?  [That is baaaad for you, too....] or too many chocolate donuts? 

    Although I *am* in favor of big, BIG penalties for parents who allow their children to wear those ass-crack pants.

    Posted by Claire  on  05/21/04  at  12:33 PM

<< Back to main

Ponderables




moon phases
 




Fighting Fusileers -- Donate ! !

image

Site Meter