House Bill 282 Prohibits Restaurants from serving Fat People!!!!
February 3rd 2008 18:22
You all know that government intervention in our lives is a button-pusher for me....Well....this one really takes the cake! Front page story today is about House Bill 282. It's unbelievable to me that someone would even think of doing such a thing.
Basically it is a twist on the law that says a bar is responsible to monitor it's customer's level of intoxication (to protect the public) and cut them off if they are too drunk. This time, if an obese person goes into a restaurant, to protect their health, the restaurant is not supposed to serve them.
I know that at times, when I've written about the intervening on a person's right to smoke in their own home I've gotten some pretty heavy duty comments, but the bottom line is that if you give the government (prompted and supported by radical people) an inch...they try to take a mile. I'm a law abiding, tax-paying citizen that supports most of the actions by our government regarding issues with the United States. However, when you come into my house or start looking at how much I weigh....I take huge offense. It's time to stop this nonsense.
The article talks about how this certainly wouldn't be passed, but believe me its the start to a house bill that will be passed in the future. When the avid anti-smoking thing started, people said the same thing...now look where we are.
Basically it is a twist on the law that says a bar is responsible to monitor it's customer's level of intoxication (to protect the public) and cut them off if they are too drunk. This time, if an obese person goes into a restaurant, to protect their health, the restaurant is not supposed to serve them.
I know that at times, when I've written about the intervening on a person's right to smoke in their own home I've gotten some pretty heavy duty comments, but the bottom line is that if you give the government (prompted and supported by radical people) an inch...they try to take a mile. I'm a law abiding, tax-paying citizen that supports most of the actions by our government regarding issues with the United States. However, when you come into my house or start looking at how much I weigh....I take huge offense. It's time to stop this nonsense.
The article talks about how this certainly wouldn't be passed, but believe me its the start to a house bill that will be passed in the future. When the avid anti-smoking thing started, people said the same thing...now look where we are.
| 50 |
| Vote |
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Patricia 7
Inside my Mind
Free Speech
The article talks about how this certainly wouldn't be passed, but believe me its the start to a house bill that will be passed in the future. When the avid anti-smoking thing started, people said the same thing...now look where we are.
I know, I actually knew it would come to this. Not because I'm psychic, but because of logic. The major reason they went after the tobacco companies was money. Medicare and health insurance costs were skyrocketing due to smoking related illnesses.
Next came trans-fats. They've banned it in some places, because it causes artery and heart problems.
Now, here we are trying to ban serving people food? Last time I checked, people need food to survive. Am I mistaken? Why are they trying to ban serving obese people food? You guessed it - money! Obese people cost the government and health companies too much money. This is the reason I knew it would come to this.
They won't be able to pass it (I don't think), because what criteria is used to judge if a person is too fat to be served? The courts can't set a guideline that is firm on this. In addition, they can cut someone off from drinking because drinking alcohol isn't a necessity to life. Also, being too drunk is an imminent threat to a person's life. Imminent is the key word here. Next, it's easy to tell if a person is sloppy drunk. Also, the clincher is this: Public intoxication is a crime. That's why I think this will fail, because they are using the alcohol law as precedent - it won't hold up.
It should be interesting to see how they rule.
I wrote a whole article here. Sorry!
Comment by Cathy
Fakes Frauds Fools
Comment by S.L. Bradish
The "nanny state" wants to give people "rights" that they were never intended to have (like abortion) and take away rights that we are guaranteed both by law and the Constitution. Given the opportunity, they'll take away the right to bear arms (already trying, in fact!), the right to smoke LEGAL cigarettes (while they spend the billions of tax dollars that cigarettes generate every year), the right to eat whatever we want, what's next? They'll decide where we have to live? Where to work? Whom to marry? How often we can use our own bathrooms?? Liberalism has brought us all these "wonderful" things. That's why they'll never get my vote!
Just wondering, Cathy, do you think they'll regulate stores next and forbid them from selling fatty foods that people can prepare at home?
Comment by Cathy
Fakes Frauds Fools