Do states ever represent the values of their constituents well? What about on a national level? Is there ever a time when a certain piece of legislation directly defies the values and wants of a large portion of the society? Empirically, it seems this happens quite often. The majority, those who make themselves appear as the majority, or simply people with influence get what they want, usually at the expense of everybody else.
Now, look at the market. Ever been to a corporate food-store? I don't care who you are: black, white, female, male, fat, or slim; chances are, your interests are going to be represented at the food-store. Variety tailored to the individual is commonplace. This can be seen in the vast majority of developed markets. Why? Because, to the extent one group's interests are satiated, another group's interests become increasingly profitable, so in the end, even minority interests are satisfied. The market process does not discriminate on arbitrary grounds.
Law is a good like any other, and so separating it from the market process is necessarily separating it from the desires of individuals.
I saw a serious proposal that children be given the franchise but the parents be allowed to excercise it until age 18. Thus a family of 5 gets 5 votes with the parents getting one each and jointly deciding how to cast the other 3.
Never mind just a pregnancy test; I think all women of childbearing age who live in Georgia or have passed through Georgia should be required to preserve all monthly evidence to facilitate the required investigation of whether any little Georgia citizens have met an untimely demise during that month, and, if so, to permit state funerals to be scheduled. I know that some women are planning to send photos of such monthly evidence to this gentleman, out of a sense of civic duty. And are seeking advice on the proper attire for a funeral for a zygote.
I guess the voting age in Georgia will have to be changed to 17 years and 3 months?
-- Edited by DonnaL on Sunday 27th of February 2011 12:48:20 PM
What would be next Samurai? Obviously we would have to require every woman in the country to take a pregnancy test every month and send the results in to the appropriate governmental agency. How else could we be sure that no miscarriage goes uninvestigated? Or maybe we could require all men to report all women with whom they've had "relations" each month, because then we'd know which women to go after in order to assure ourselves that they didn't have a secret miscarriage.
The real question is, how do we protect ourselves from the miscarriage of justice from guys like this? There's no blood test for that.
I refuse to be surprised at anything Rep. Franklin might believe in but don't really feel the need to abandon any of my own positions simply because he might turn out to share them.
Hey, cartera: speaking of nutty, is this the guy that was sending those AM pictures of himself tricked out as a tiger to his staff? The one who's staff is currently reccomending him for psychiatric evaluation?
-- Edited by catahoula on Friday 25th of February 2011 06:25:44 PM
BigG, what do you want to bet that legislator who wants the government to investigate every miscarriage, also fervently believes in smaller government?
I have heard different statistics about miscarriage. My OB/GYN told me years ago that about 1 in 4 women pregnancies end in miscarriage, often before the woman even knows she is pregnant.
What a can of worms this bill would open. It wouldn't be out of the realm of possiblility for a woman to have an unusual heavy period which might be thought to be possible miscarriage? Such an invasion of privacy.
What would be next? Investigating why the woman miscarried? Too many glasses of wine? Personal habits? Yikes.
I wonder if the people of Georgia are shocked by this guy? He introduced a bill in which there is a requirement that it be proved that every miscarriage is a miscarriage. If not, the woman can be prosecuted for a felony.