boob oppression

[rone]

Some woman was sentenced to three months of house arrest after she was spotted "nursing her baby daughter on an Ohio highway while driving at 65mph. She said she did not stop because she was talking on the phone to her husband and taking notes on the steering wheel." Note that she feels that the police trampled her religious freedom because she hadn't "done anything wrong." Of course, the cops could've played along and arrested her husband for contributing to the delinquency of a minor or something.

I wonder why we haven't gotten more dangerous behavior justified behind the shield of religious freedom; hell, why don't these greedhead asshole executives who embezzle their way to fame and fortune just claim to be Objectivists and rebuff any attempt of prosecution as a trampling of their beliefs?

Perhaps i need to found the First Scorched Earth Fellowship for Eternal Sovereignty, where whoever holds the lead pipe is head of the family and metes out punishment to anyone who doesn't hold one.

Comments

[jwgh]

Does anyone feel like establishing the First Church of Stupid? Actually, maybe it wouldn't be first.

[kerri9494.livejournal.com]

Since when does religious freedom have anything to do with BREAKING THE LAW by having your kid not restrained in a child safety seat? Nurse the kid until she's reading Harry Potter for all I care. But until she's eight years old AND eighty pounds, she should be in the BACK SEAT in a safety seat.

Idiots.

[boymozart.livejournal.com]

I would have said "Leave her alone, let her crash her car, killing herself and her child; let her husband's last contact with his wife be her chilling scream as she's sent through the windshield, since she probably wasn't wearing her seat belt, either."  Unfortunately she's too much of a threat to other drivers and pedestrians.

I wonder what her husband will do to her to punish her for being caught by police?  She doesn't have a driver's license, either; what's the punishment for First Christian women who get one?

[kodi]

Hrm. In this story, she says, "It's not like I'm trying to change a diaper while I'm driving, she pretty much just lays there on the pillow in my lap. I would certainly submit that talking on a cell phone causes far more distraction than nursing a child while she's just laying there." But in the BBC story, "She said she did not stop because she was talking on the phone to her husband and taking notes on the steering wheel."

It looks like the husband actually felt that he should be the one charged, though, according to this report.

In case anyone was curious, I checked - it's true that in Michigan, children under the age of 4 who are being nursed do not need to be installed in restraint systems, but it's also true that "A person shall not drive a vehicle ... when there are in the front seat a number of persons ... as to interfere with the driver's control over the driving mechanism of the vehicle." Of course, Donkers claims that her ability to drive was in no way impaired.

[wisn.livejournal.com]

Ohio has laws against driving without a license, without insurance, reckless driving, driving without a seat belt, and refusal to yield to emergency vehicles, same as many other states. (I'm sympathetic to her not stopping until she was at a toll booth - it's good to have witnesses.) Michigan law regarding moving violations wouldn't apply to a driver stopped in Ohio, and Donkers claims to live in Pittsburgh - I don't see how Michigan is an issue except as the start of the trip.

She got 'three months house arrest', and she's complaining? Is this the same as probation? Religious belief has rarely been a successful defense on grounds of reckless behavior and it's had inconsistent success as defense in other situations of endangerment and harm, such as Christian Scientists denying medical care for children in their custody.

Let's see how Bill Janklow does with his reverse-Twinkie defense. I like seeing when people who bemoan the demise of personal responsibility fall on cascades of excuses for their bad behavior.

[kerri9494.livejournal.com]

in Michigan, children under the age of 4 who are being nursed do not need to be installed in restraint systems

OK, this is SHEER LUNACY. Thanks.

[huaman.livejournal.com]

Aw crap, in which state is it 8 years and 80 pounds now?

[kodi]

I figured it went without saying there was no reason Michigan law would apply; I was just pointing out that her statement of Michigan law was also somewhat inadequate.

[kerri9494.livejournal.com]

I don't think 8/80 is the law in any states...I believe most states are 6/60. I could go look this up, but I'm too lazy right now.

Fact is, auto-safety experts are the ones that are recommending 8/80, because it's been shown to be safer. I fail to see the advantage to having a kid a) not sitting in a booster, or 2) having the kid in the front seat...it's all much of a muchness, really. Gotta sit somewhere, doesn't really matter where, may as well be the safest place, no? Am I a total worrywort or something?

[ronebofh.livejournal.com]

My mom didn't let me or my brother sit in the front seat of the car until we were 12. So, no, i don't think you're a total worrywart.

[kerri9494.livejournal.com]

OK, I got un-lazy.

http://www.safechild.net/for_parents/carboosterseats.html

Looks like Maine, DC, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming -- and then various other weirdnesses. But still. Personally, I don't care what the LAW says...it's about doing what's safest, within reason, of course.