Yahoo! News reports:
California motorists will risk fines of up to $100 next year if they are caught smoking in cars with minors, making their state the third to protect children in vehicles from secondhand smoke.
Yes, I know-- this new restriction on people's conduct seems so, well, reasonable. Unless you're a smoker--but then, who cares about them?
The nefariousness of this law lies precisely in its seeming reasonableness. Who is better to set the rules -- the State or the kids' own parents? Apparently not the parents,at least if they are part of a despised group like smokers.
So down the slippery slope we go-- if the State knows better than certain parents how to raise their children, we may slowly get to the point where the State's superior knowledge will be able to say to certain despised groups of parents that (to protect the kids, of course)the parents shouldn't be allowed to allow their children to watch certain TV programs or listen to certain radio shows-- or even be allowed to have children. Inch by inch, freedom gets taken away, until Big Brother is in your home. Overtime, the cure proves worse than the disease.
If parents are poisoning their children, then yes, I would agree that the state is in a better position to set the rules. Just like if parents are sexually abusing their children, then the state is in a better position to set the rules. Irresponsible parenting is what it is. Would you feel the same way if the parent were sniffing glue and sharing it with a child? Knowingly exposing others to deadly toxins should be illegal. I don't even understand why this is controversial.
Posted by: Ian Turner | December 20, 2009 at 08:12 PM