Tuesday, February 6, 2007
State Bill Impose Into the Home
I am in the process of preparing for the next podcast, and one thing I am working on is why I am a conservative. Now outside of the fact that I hold to a certain set of values, values I was raised with, my view of government shapes this reasoning as well. One view that I hold strongly to is that government should be limited in it's power over the people. There is a certain freedom that we are granted that is continuously ignored by government. In California, it was the spanking issue. Now, in the Lone Star state, Republicans are seeking to fine parents who miss a parent teacher meeting. The fine will cost you $500 dollars and will go to a criminal record as well. Part of me thinks this could be a good idea. I believe that parents should be completely involved in what is going on in the child's life, including school. At the same time, I have to disagree with making it a crime to not meet with the teacher. While not a trivial matter to be sure, it is not as if the parent is neglecting the child of food, clothing, or those things which we must have for survival. You can't force good parenting on people. A parent whose concern for their children will not change if institute laws to change that lack of concern. There is a reason the term deadbeat-(insert your favorite word here) came about. These parents just don't care. You can't force it on them, and this law will only raise the crime rate and increase additional funding required by tax payers to enforce this law. In the end, what seems like a good idea, doesn't once you think about it. You can't legislate good parenting no matter how hard you try.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I completely agree with you. It's ridiculous for it to be illegal to not be a GREAT parent. Where do they draw the line? Are they going to micromanage us at our homes to make sure we abide by the "Back to Sleep" campaign (since current studies prove that having a baby sleep on their back is safer)?? I'd like to think that I am a good parent by choice, not because I have to be. I choose to keep my baby rear-facing in her car seat because of common sense. Many idiot parents out there ruin things for the good parents. Amongst my circle of friend's we've had the recent discussion (and debates) about the government making decisions about our parenting. For example, with the recent major issue of Merck's money-making scheme the Gardisil vaccine, I have several thoughts on that one, (speaking of attempts being made to make NOT getting your daughter the vaccine when she's 10-11 years old illegal). As a mother of 3 young daughters I would do anything to protect their health & safety b/c I'm their mother. I am glad that the vaccine exists. I am not glad that they're trying to make it illegal to not have your daughters vaccined. Would I choose to have my girls vaccinated for the HPV/cervical cancer vaccine? YES! Do I think it should be the government's issue? NO way! No law should tell me what chemical to put in my girls' bloodstream! I think that any vaccine available to potentially save a life is a good thing for a PARENT to choose for their children. I don't understand the controversy behind the "moral" issue of the vaccine though. Cervial cancer is not caused only by sexual promiscuity. I suppose if you say to your 16 yr old daughter "this shot will help you dodge HPV & cervical cancer so you can be a whore". I suppose if you don't raise your daughter with morals & if you present it like that then yes, the message that the parent says could help promote promiscuity. But the morals we instill in our children DO count for something. Also, they say the best time for a girl to get the vaccine is at age 10-12. Well, when I take my daughters to their normal childhood checkups with shots included, I don't discuss the specific vaccinations. I don't say "this one is an MMR" ..."this is for Rubella", "Dtp", etc. Just point blank..."you have a doctor appointment with some vaccinations to help keep you healthy". I'm furious about the gov't trying to own our children, but I also think that allowing a girl to get the vaccine will not mean that you "condone" sexual promiscuity. There's other consequences of sexual promiscuity besides HPV, so it's still important for girls to be raised with morals. Bottom line is, I agree with you!----Tonya in Virginia
I don't remember the name of the band but the name of the song was Pole Sitter which had a line that went: Been around the world and all the stupid people are breeding.
The thing I can't figure out is; which is it? The people having children and screwing up their kids, or the idiot "social servants" screwing up the parents that don't want to have a parent/teacher conference.
A $500 fine! So the parents have to listen to their opinionated teacher tell them how little Johnny is a screw up? What's next? A $500 fine because little Sally didn't get her way after a tantrum and have ice cream on the way back to the house?
Perhaps the law is to compensate the state for the teacher waiting on parents while sitting at a kiddie desk? How many companies have spent time and money on a proposal bid and not gotten the contract? Do the winning contractors compensate them? (I see a parallel)
Don't get me started on how California mandated a childrens bicycle helmet law. This whole thing is getting stupid.
Post a Comment