Ok we can probably all agree that female circumcision is bad right? Well a bill to ban it was in the Georgia house and someone slipped in a rider that also bans female genital piercings. Don't matter if you want it, and only applies to woman.
Like they said on the radion, a piercing down there is "like finding that free curly fry in your regular french fries, a nice suprise"
What else can we expect out of Georgia? This is the same state that recently was considering removing the word 'evolution' from the school curriculum, that only recently took anti-sodomy laws off the books, and in which one of the major political issues is whether or not to have a confederate battle flag as part of the state flag. I mean, the county next to mine de-segregated it's schools like 20 years after the rest of the country, and I know of teachers in kintergarden who get away with having straight up Bible study in class because everyone looks the other way.
This is one of the most bassackwards @#%$ up states in the country.
At least the guy could have also slipped in legistlation on voluntary male piercings too, but no! Not only do we get to live a hundred years ago in how we legislate people's personal life, we get to keep the old school sexist condensation too. Yay for the peach state!
lol, so one person passes something through and suddenly the whole state feels that way? yeah right. Wraine aka "The Spine Tickler!"
"You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true." - some genius on Fark
No don't blame the state. Here's what probably happened. Everyone had already decided the initial bill was good (and I agree, female circumcision is a evil thing). Then a few of the leadership let someone slip in a rider. No debate on it, and then pushbutton voting by negligent representatives. I expect it will get caught by the senate.
Okay heres the thing folks. States do have the right to legislate things like this. THey have the right on any body mod you can think of. Most of the time it's a good thing becasuse you don't have @#%$ shops opening up that will get you hurt. In this case it is a bad thing. Now this is the first that I have heared of doing this, but I do know there are atleast two states that have a ban on tattoos.
As to female circumscision some girls want to have this done or a couple procedures about the hood done due to the way they feel it looks or their sexuality. This removes that right from them and well either cause them to get it done by illeagal cutters who will just @#%$ @#%$ up or to do it themselves with sometimes thankfully good results. The same goes to genital piercings on girls. Just because it's illegal dosent mean they wont be getting it done it just means that they will be getting it done by who don't care about the laws.
Quote, so one person passes something through and suddenly the whole state feels that way? yeah right.
Yeah right indeed, it would be an illogical conclusion to jump to that everyone in the entire state feels the same way based on one person - but then I looked back through the entire thread and realized no one said that, so now I'm wondering why Wraine is talking to himself.
MARBH, I hope you're right. And since it did pass 160-0 that would seem very probable... it just pisses me off that we have people like Bill Heath in there in the first place. He knew what he was doing by slipping it in there, and also refuses to do the same for male piercings to at least be consistent:
Heath said that while some piercings do fall under the category of involuntary genital mutilation, he is fine with banning the voluntary procedures as well. "I just don't think it's appropriate," Heath said.
The bill only regulates female genital piercings. Heath said he doesn't support male genital piercings, but won't draft legislation to address the issue.
Quote:Since you find it so interesting, would you be so kind as to point out *any* double standard in *any* statement I have ever made?
Your posts in threads that discussed homosexuals being allowed to marry one another... There were quite a few statements you made that said that the term marriage should be reserved for hetero- unions only, etc.
That's a double standard if ever I heard one - heteros can, homos can't... even though they're all legal citizens with presumably the same legal rights.
If I remember correctly its Oklahoma and South Carolina. I am sure of it on Oklahoma which is why dallas area has so many tat shops that can charge out the ass. South Carolina is what I am iffy on.
Heres a link to the bme article on whats going on
I'm quite well away of what I posted, Wraine. I'm quite frustrated by of nonsense that goes on in my state, indicated by the examples I gave.
However, I don't see how saying that I'm not surprised that something like this happened in Georgia based on all the other crap I've see happen here = everybody thinks one way because one person thinks that way.
So now that we've visited short-term memory lane on what both you and I posted, I'm gonna go off and say, "I didn't do that" because I didn't. Shurley you can see that. And don't call me George. Edited by: Gannab at: 3/25/04 11:44 am
There's actually a law in MA that limits the number of unwed (women?) who can live in the same apartment. Evidently they're worried that if more than a couple share an apartment, a brothel will open up!
"Evidently they're worried that if more than a couple share an apartment, a brothel will open up!"
This has been tested scientifically and is true. Not to claim the status of a "real professional" in any one endeavor has been a small price to pay for the many benefits and pleasures of trespassing. ~Leo Lionni
I was married in Massachusetts and a marriage license requires a blood test there (NH does not). I figured it was some "avoid incest" precaution from colonial days or a hip modern test to screen for HIV. Apparently it's for communicable syphilis. If you have communicable syphilis you cannot get married in Massachusetts. WTF?
I know what you were getting at. It's the way that you said it that I take issue with. If you had said something along the line of, "How could we expect less? Legislators in this state are known for their rediculously regressive and intrusive proposals. For example..."
Shirley, you can see the difference I infer between that and what you posted:
"What else can we expect out of Georgia? This is the same state that recently was considering removing the word 'evolution' from the school curriculum..."
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I probably am), but female circumcision and FGM (female genital mutilation) are interchangeable in most people's minds. I don't just mean just here; I've seen many people campaigning against female circumcision when they are really against FGM. I believe this is where the alleged "double standard" is being seen. Male circumcision applies only to removing the foreskin, while female circumcision is anything from doing the same to the clitoris to suturing up the vagina.
I remember reading that only uncircumcised men are susceptible to penile cancer, while circumcising the clitoris gives no such perk.
Quote:I am sure of it on Oklahoma which is why dallas area has so many tat shops that can charge out the ass.
Dallas is kind of far from any densely populated areas of Oklahoma. I would imagine you would find the glut of parlors in the Sher/Den area or in Denton if this was the case. I'm going straight to hell, just like my momma said.
Quote:I know what you were getting at. It's the way that you said it that I take issue with. If you had said something along the line of, "How could we expect less? Legislators in this state are known for their rediculously regressive and intrusive proposals. For example..."
I didn't say legislators because I wasn't just talking about just them in my examples. I made an ad hominem attack against the people of a particular state based on my unjustified stereotype of them, further making myself a hypocrite due to the fact that I live in said state. I was a dink. Let's move on.
I agree that this will never stand up in court. While I'm sure the state government could regulate piercing parlors for sanitary and other public health concerns, and outright banning of any cosmetic surgery is going to run afoul of the same constitutional protections as abortion.
"I blame Sherman and Grant for the South's backwardassness."
haha thats a good one. Yes its really sad the south didn't
win the civil war and be able to continue the fine traditions
of slavery and oppression
Anyways...this is just another example of a lawmaker
forcing other people to comply with his personal beliefs.
When will these goofs get it into their heads thats people
should be free to do what they want as long as it doesn't
hurt anyone else and its fully consensual.