Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: servantoftheservant
It's quite sad to see the cliquish, mob mentality of vindictiveness toward this couple because they live according to different principles than most.

I respectfully disagree that that assessment regarding what I believe is the main point: this woman, by breastfeeding her baby WHILE she was driving is not safe. It doesn't take more than a few brain cells and a few years of experience to realize that the breastfeeding/carseat exemption was intended to address a mother who was not driving at the same time she's breastfeeding.

And even if the law doesn't explicitly say so (which I guess it should now, hmm?), I believe it is disingenuous to condone or excuse that behavior simply because the law does not state it. For instance, here in Kalifornistan, I can make a U-Turn (after being sure it's safe) if the sign does not say I can't. If I cut it too close, I'll be hit by oncoming traffic. If I have a child in the car on the side most likely to be hit by oncoming traffic, I will be EXTRA sure to be safe.

But this language-slicing is the kind of thing that leads to exactly the opposite of what we small-government supporters scorn: blow dryers that say on the instructions: "Do not use in bathtub", or hot curlers that say, "Do not use internally." Do we actually need someone to tell us not to breastfeed and drive at the same time, or can we just figure this out for ourselves?! Good grief.

And it is in no way being a sheeple to use the brain God gave us. I don't even agree that a baby should be held in an adult's lap on an airliner - and the only laws that apply are those of physics and your responsibility to that child. At least one "lap" child on the United Air Lines Sioux City crash became an instant projectile and died - flying from the anguished parent's arms - on impact. It was completely unnecessary. A lot of passengers lived in that crash, and if that baby had been in a baby seat, their chances would have been a LOT better than the zero percent chance of living that they had.

I don't think we need a full-color computer simulation of a mother breastfeeding while driving, having to slam on the brakes, whereupon the baby suffers - fatally - the inevitable result of the laws of physics. Let's not lose sight of the big picture here. How pro-life is that attitude, anyway?

563 posted on 06/21/2003 1:21:51 AM PDT by bootless (Never Forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | View Replies ]


To: bootless
You assume that stupidity is sufficient cause for state intervention.

It's stupid to have an emotional argument on a cell phone while you're driving. It's stupid to spill hot coffee on yourself while you're driving. It's stupid to reach back and break up fighting siblings while you're driving.

That doesn't mean it's any of the state's business.

You gave the example of a child flying from a mother's arms during a plane crash. Well guess what: I recently took a flight with my wife and infant daughter. We did not purchase a seat for our daughter. She travelled in our arms. THAT'S OUR CALL AS PARENTS. NOT YOURS. Life is dangerous. My kid is not your problem, responsibility, or business, and she certainly is not the state's.

569 posted on 06/21/2003 2:19:33 AM PDT by servantoftheservant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 563 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson