Green Mtn
location: Observing the Progressive madness with considerably less amusement.
listening to: Grandchildren, the best reason for saving the future.
registered: 2004.04.03
posts: 2617
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
Apart from government intervention, Apples and Asparagus Ed.
The sorts of laws you note disavow the entire concept of the age of majority.
Yet in the case of seat belts -which a significant portion of the time cause injury, including
death(which goes unreported mind you)- in many states it is 'primary law', meaning it's a legally
legitimate excuse for a traffic stop. In our state, seats belts are not primary law but one can be
ticketed if they are pulled over for something else. And of course, all of this(Click it, or Ticket) is
driven by the Feds. It's particularly telling here because a year ago the state did try to make not
wearing a seat a primary offense(who are we offending -oh yeah, the power hungry state(Feds
really)) and the people reminded the state of its promise a decade or so back, that it would never
become primary law. Nonetheless, the state has taken the Click it, or Ticket cooperative funds(nice
euphemism huh:), the signs are everywhere and the state polices' latest TV advertising is carefully
worded to briefly acknowledge you can't be pulled over for not wearing a belt while stating, quite
militantly, they're going to look for reasons to pull you over if you aren't wearing one. It's very
militant, because your safety is JOB ONE. Which is a crock: tyranny is always dressed up in altruistic
paternalism.
Short of rape, men and women willing engage in what amounts to a procreative act -
regardless of any birth control efforts, none are fool proof- the unintended to be child 'tissue' on
the
other hand hasn't, and is unable, to commit an act of volition, other than continue to develop into
an infant human being(if left unviolated).
Abortion is just a bill of goods for voluntary eugenics Ed. If one studied the origins of the
movement, including the likes of Margaret Sanger one would know that, and the other motivations
most folks would find reprehensible(mostly because most of humanity would qualify as unnecessary
and worthy of elimination).
It just goes to show you, when forced sterilization became publicly unacceptable(along about
the early 1970's), that even the most worthless and horrendous acts can be sold as something
noble
and decent, "It's a women body, and a women's choice", and people not only will buy but champion
murder of their own. [And of course, it's the males job to pay with no say in the future of their
progeny, should the women decide to abort or raise the child without him. Talk about a non
sequitur!]
Gotta Fly....
ps somewhat edited
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
G
Green Mtn
(view)
Apart from government intervention, Apples and Asparagus Ed.
The sorts of laws you note disavow the entire concept of the age of majority.
Yet in the case of seat belts -which a significant portion of the time cause injury, including
death(which goes unreported mind you)- in many states it is 'primary law', meaning it's a legally
legitimate excuse for a traffic stop. In our state, seats belts are not primary law but one can be
ticketed if they are pulled over for something else. And of course, all of this(Click it, or Ticket) is
driven by the Feds. It's particularly telling here because a year ago the state did try to make not
wearing a seat a primary offense(who are we offending -oh yeah, the power hungry state(Feds
really)) and the people reminded the state of its promise a decade or so back, that it would never
become primary law. Nonetheless, the state has taken the Click it, or Ticket cooperative funds(nice
euphemism huh:), the signs are everywhere and the state polices' latest TV advertising is carefully
worded to briefly acknowledge you can't be pulled over for not wearing a belt while stating, quite
militantly, they're going to look for reasons to pull you over if you aren't wearing one. It's very
militant, because your safety is JOB ONE. Which is a crock: tyranny is always dressed up in altruistic
paternalism.
Short of rape, men and women willing engage in what amounts to a procreative act -
regardless of any birth control efforts, none are fool proof- the unintended to be child 'tissue' on
the
other hand hasn't, and is unable, to commit an act of volition, other than continue to develop into
an infant human being(if left unviolated).
Abortion is just a bill of goods for voluntary eugenics Ed. If one studied the origins of the
movement, including the likes of Margaret Sanger one would know that, and the other motivations
most folks would find reprehensible(mostly because most of humanity would qualify as unnecessary
and worthy of elimination).
It just goes to show you, when forced sterilization became publicly unacceptable(along about
the early 1970's), that even the most worthless and horrendous acts can be sold as something
noble
and decent, "It's a women body, and a women's choice", and people not only will buy but champion
murder of their own. [And of course, it's the males job to pay with no say in the future of their
progeny, should the women decide to abort or raise the child without him. Talk about a non
sequitur!]
Gotta Fly....
ps somewhat edited
–--
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
“Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions.” Wm O. Douglas
posted 2008.05.22
posted on May 22nd 2008
G
Green Mtn
location: Observing the Progressive madness with considerably less amusement.
listening to: Grandchildren, the best reason for saving the future.
registered: 2004.04.03
posts: 2617
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
-
George W. has a couple of questions for Obama – dale on May 12th, 2008-
Re: George W. has a couple of questions for Obama – Eugene on May 12th, 2008-
It should all just stay in the family, right? – Andrea on May 12th, 2008
Re: Ed L. has a couple of questions for Eugene... – edlorah on May 12th, 2008-
Re: Don't take the bait Eugene... – dale on May 12th, 2008-
Re: Ed L. has a couple of questions for Eugene via his press secretary Dale... – edlorah on May 13th, 2008-
Re: Ed L. has a couple of questions for Eugene via his press secretary Dale... – Eugene on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Ed L. has a couple of questions for Eugene via his press secretary Dale... – edlorah on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Ed L. has a couple of questions for Eugene via his press secretary Dale... – dale on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Ed L. has a couple of questions for Eugene via his press secretary Dale... – pkjensen on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Michelle, my belle.... – dale on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Michelle, my belle.... – pkjensen on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Michelle, my belle.... – Baerwald on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Michelle, my belle.... – dale on May 14th, 2008-
Re: Michelle, my belle.... – Baerwald on May 15th, 2008-
Re: "I'd hit it." – dale on May 15th, 2008-
in the mean time – messybear on May 15th, 2008
Dale and Baerwald in 2038 – edlorah on May 16th, 2008
A First Lady apparently more to Dale's liking... – edlorah on May 15th, 2008
Re: George W. has a couple of questions for Obama – messybear on May 13th, 2008
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
