Is Your Body Your Property Or The State's?
I think you should be allowed to ask for help in assisted suicide if you are incapable of killing yourself, and if you think you'd improve your looks by wearing a big plate in your lip, I think you should be able to have at it.
Your body should belong to you, entirely, and not the state, and decisions about what's done with it, providing you aren't hurting any non-consenting other person should be yours entirely.
Well, Arkansas is having none of that. Because the state is problem-free -- a veritable utopia amongst states -- they want to ban non-trad body art. From Intellihub.com, via ifeminists, JG Vibes writes:
Fox 16 reported that:
The Senate passed a bill that would ban non-traditional body art and skin implants. The bill's sponsor, Senator Missy Irvin of Mountain View, AR, wants to limit body art procedures, particularly scarification and dermal implants. By a 26-4 vote, the Senate moved to outlaw scarification, a procedure involving the scarring of the skin using heat to form a tattoo without ink, and implants that place ornaments under the skin. The bill now goes to the House.
More from ArkTimes' David Ramsey:
Irvin and a Health Department official testified that they wanted to reduce infections but they mostly employed an "ew gross" strategy of talking about various procedures. They particularly harped on a "tongue-splitting" that was performed in Little Rock, even though that would not be impacted one way or the other by the legislation. Irvin, an ostensibly small-government conservative who loves to use the legislature to boss citizens around about what they do with their bodies, was in fine form. At one point she compared scarification to female genital mutilation in Africa.
Oh, please. Female genital mutilation? I'm thinking we need a vagina version of Godwin's Law.
This is just a rural state politician trying to get ink. If it never makes it out of committee he has gotten what he wants, his name in the paper.
Fred Mallison at August 21, 2013 3:14 PM
That is absurd! If someone wants to do anything to their body and it doesn't affect anyone else then what's the harm? They already try these restrictions in other ways such as if someone has piercings and tattoos they have to cover or hide and why? If someone wants to have something done to their own body they should be able to show them and not have to pretend or act how a certain job or shop a certain store. They ban alot of things out here that doesn't make sense to me yet enforce their way of thinking on others like asking religious preferences and where a person goes to services,etc
April Quinn at August 21, 2013 3:18 PM
If you don't have help, is it still "assisted" suicide - or is it just suicide?
;-)
Conan the Grammarian at August 21, 2013 3:24 PM
Yep, between this and the government's forced home visits thanks to Obama's ACA, sanctioned government rape via the TSA and now this - we might as well just give the government access to our phones, computers and call them family... Oh wait, they already have access to our phones and computers... wait. Ok, we have no rights left. No more government needed.
Lee Ladisky at August 21, 2013 4:06 PM
Without bounds, I agree.
However, your personal freedom becomes our burden in taxes and insurance premiums. So, whatever unhealthy habits are yours to indulge, we will eventually all take a hit because of it.
And your personal freedom definitely does not extend to your right to smoke. Go foul up your own air.
And if you must do pot around me, I hear it makes a nice tea.
Patrick at August 21, 2013 4:13 PM
Patrick, this kind of stuff is what makes the public-private health insurance racket so insidious. As long as our health care costs are being paid mostly be government or the deep pockets of private insurers, there will inevitably be a perceived justification for restricting other people's behaviors for health purposes.
If everybody paid most of their own medical costs, with health insurance reserved for catastrophic events, just like auto insurance or home insurance, there would not be such a perceived need to restrict people's behaviors. Incidentally, the whole contraception mandate debate would be rendered moot, as it would be customary for everybody to pay for their own contraceptives and abortions.
mpetrie98 at August 21, 2013 4:38 PM
Perhaps, mpetrie, but who can afford their own medical bills. Even a routine procedure can be exorbitant.
Give me the days of Little House on the Prairie, when kindly Doc Baker did everything out of the goodness of his heart, and would accept a chicken or a bushel of apples as payment.
Patrick at August 21, 2013 6:22 PM
Sip marijuana tea? OK- this is the first time that your agenda has has infringed upon me.
~On the other hand~~~
Wouldn't it be great if you could go out to the local store and buy some "Arizona Marijuana-Laced Iced Tea"? I HATE malls, but I love to people watch when I'm stoned.
Eric at August 21, 2013 6:30 PM
Part of the cause is that so much of medical care has been covered by insurance in the past.
Look at the costs of LASIK eye surgery. It has dropped steeply because it is paid for by the party getting the operation.
Look at the price list for MRI's and body scans. I bet they would be even lower if most people paid for them on their own.
When you take the responsibility for cost controls away from the person and leave it on someone else there is no incentive to consider it.
The same thing happened with college costs. The student takes loans out that pay for everything, and don't look to the future when they have to pay it back.
But how much has your car repair bills gone up? Even tires have not really risen much, because that is payed by the user, not the insurance company.
Jim P. at August 21, 2013 6:49 PM
Fred: "This is just a rural state politician trying to get ink.
Ahh, but is he trying to the "non-traditional" kind of ink? or is just a run-of-the-mill tatoo?
nice pun there Fred, I love it!
Charles at August 21, 2013 6:49 PM
Stupidity aside, cause that's what this is.....your body is the only the you own that cannot be taken away from you.....
The big problem that I have with the comparison is that genital mutilation is done on unwilling victims, usually too young to say yea or nay, where body mod is done by consenting adults.
Duh.
wtf at August 21, 2013 7:47 PM
What agenda? My agenda involves breathing air. It's been my observation that burning marijuana has a rancid smell, like burning rotten trash.
Sip tea, I don't smell it or breathe the smoke (and I don't even want to know what chemicals are in it or what it does to me.
Patrick at August 21, 2013 8:39 PM
Left alone, free market will drop medical prices for common procedures dramatically. See "23 and me", and at-home DNA test that provides information about genetic predisposition for diseases. 4 years ago it was $1000. Not it's $100. The company had a vested interest in making the process more efficient and less costly, because the less they charged the more they would sell.
Most vaccines cost a few bucks now, if that. But once you pay for al the administration and paper pushers in government, insurance, and the Dr's own billing staff that has to have specialized training to learn the morass of nonsense that is insurance reimbursement, the cost of that vaccine is probably over $100.
momof4 at August 22, 2013 5:55 AM
he has gotten what he wants, his name in the paper
A boy named Missy?
There at a table, dealing stud,
Sat the dirty, mangy dog that named me "Missy."
I R A Darth Aggie at August 22, 2013 6:13 AM
Leave a comment