Economy

First, it was the news that Mississippi Lawmaker(s?) have proposed a bill that would make it illegal for restaurants to serve obese patrons.

There are so many things wrong with situation, I doubted whether or not I wanted to write about it. Why would anyone discriminate against a group of people (a majority in the US)?
I couldn't wrap my mind around it, not to mention how there is no way it's constitutional. Nevermind, how terribly, horribly, mean that is.

Besides, who would decide what qualifies as obese? What would be the deciding factor? Some people doubt the truthiness or quality of the BMI scale. So, what would you go by? Some hostess in some random restaurant's suggestion or opinion?

Not to mention the douchebag Republican Lawmaker that doesn't even think it will or should pass.

"I do not have any intention of this becoming law," says the Desoto County Republican. "I don't think it has a Chinaman's chance. I'm against intrusive government. I don't think that's what we're here for and what we should be doing."

So why draft such controversial legislation?

"The reason I put the bill in," says Mayhall, "was to call attention to the seriousness of the obesity epidemic in Mississippi."

Oh! So you proposed a bill you don't even agree with or want to pass, because you want to alienate a certain group of people because you disagree with their lifestyle. Ahh, so very Republican of you.

I don't care what your opinion is on the state of the people in your state, lose weight like Mike Huckabee did. Or actually try and think about doing something that might make a difference an encourage people of unhealthy weight to do something about it, instead of estranging those who you're trying to 'help'.

Just because Mississippi has been ranked #1 in amount of obese people in the US for the past 3 years, doesn't justify this kind of unethical behavior. That's simply ridiculous.

Then, a California man is being sued by his city, San Carlos, for canceling his trash pick up, because he was environmentally conscious.

SAN CARLOS (Map, News) - A man who claims to have reduced his waste to nearly nothing out of concern for the environment now faces a lawsuit from San Carlos for canceling his garbage-collection service.

Eddie House, 53, says he was shocked when he was served with a lawsuit Sunday at his Cedar Street home.

The lawsuit, filed by San Carlos Deputy City Attorney Linda Noeske in San Mateo Superior Court on Jan. 22, seeks a permanent injunction forcing House to maintain garbage service. City officials are also seeking to recoup from House the costs of the lawsuit.

The lawsuit claims House broke the city’s municipal code requiring all residential, commercial and industrial properties to contract with Allied Waste for pickup at least once a week — a standard requirement in most cities, San Carlos Deputy City Manager Brian Moura said.

I shit you not. A guy recycles and composts all his waste, therefore he doesn't need his trash service. And? He gets sued. SUED.

I can see how the city would be concerned about people having plenty of waste, and not throwing it away or wanting to pay the trash guys, but if he has no trash then what in the hell are they expecting for them to pick up?

It makes no sense. Any rational, logical, or reasonable person would applaud his efforts, and let him be. But apparently we're too concerned with the laws themselves to worry about who we're enforcing them on, or why we're enforcing them.

And it's not like the City just got confused, and they didn't know the whole situation (Which, really, who does before they SUE SOMEONE). But they're trying to recoup their expenses from HIM for the lawsuit.

Sometimes, I seriously wonder if we’re too wrapped up in silly laws that seek to govern our every step. It’s almost as if we live in a country that believes it will behave in exactly the same way 200 years from now. Change and the rights of the individual are covered in layers of codes and red tape. This is a perfect example. And was it truly necessary to sue? Couldn’t there have been some other action taken to resolve any issues between the city and the homeowner? Ridiculous.

I get it, we're a nation of laws. But since when do they dictate everything we do? From being overweight to being environmentally conscious.

I've never met them, so I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty sure The Founding Fathers didn't mean for laws to go this far.

Since when is the legislative process not for actually proposing legislation that might better the state and its people, but is instead meant to get your opinions on the news?

Since when do we care more about going by the books like some kind of mindless robots, than analyzing the situation like real, rational people?

I think we need to reevaluate our situation in this country, and maybe start voting for change.

Our government needs to start answering to us, rather than the other way around. Isn't that what a Democracy is supposed to be anyway?