Sometimes people of good conscience have to agree that they’re going to disagree. This is one of those times:
At least 42 states regulate indoor tanning for minors. Thirteen states, including Minnesota, ban the use of ultraviolet tanning devices by anyone under age 18.
If one lawmaker has his way, South Dakota will be the 14th state to ban indoor tanning for anyone under 18.
Representative Scott Munsterman of Brookings says he is bringing a bill to Pierre in January that would add South Dakota to the list of states that ban tanning to anyone under the age of 18…
Scott, you’re a wonderful person, and true statesman. But seriously, you’re killing me here.
The ‘tan ban’ is a misguided, nanny-state measure that has no place in a free society. Because there comes a point where rules become so draconian and overly altruistic where we’re no longer a free society, but an artificially engineered one designed by liberals who want to dictate every single aspect of our lives.
It is so overly intrusive in a free society that we have to be offended by it. If we’re not, then we need to examine what we believe our definition of freedom is.
Because there will come a point in our future where we’re going to go into our front yards for our government mandated calisthenics (for the sake of our health, of course) and wonder “What in the heck happened?”
Just another liberal. You have had to have known that. For crying out loud, you call this a college. Any high school dropout could easily tell for the past ten years that Scott is a lefty.
When will you realize the Governor is a tax and spender? A middle school dropout could figure that one out.
What is the current law on the books? I think consent of a guardian for a minor would be reasonable. It seems like Scott’s overstepping it a bit here.
Written consent from a guardian is reasonable.
Why do we need written consent from the parent? They don’t have give it to have an abortion.
And, unlike abortion, if a teen goes to a tanning booth without their parent’s permission and their parent prohibited it, the parent will just have to look at the teen to see he went to a tanning booth. It’s not like the teen went to meth den and might be permanently damaged by one visit. In fact, on something like that, sometimes the best thing a parent can do is have enough rope so when the teen screws up while living in their house they can deal with it. In retrospect, I’m glad most of my kid’s screw-ups were when they were in high school and I got to deal with it. A lot better than in college where I might not even know of the screw-up.
There is absolutely no merit to this idea. By the way, I’ve never gone to a tanning booth, I don’t endorse their usage (except maybe for a special occasion like a winter wedding to look good in the pictures). But, just because I don’t support something doesn’t mean I support a law to ban it.
Here comes the FDA: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/12/18/fda-indoor-tanning-ban-teens/77550518/
Here are the medical arguments for the control. So far on this thread I’ve not read any reasonable counters against (just ideological). Hey, I’m as libertarian as anybody, but I’m also for protecting our kids. Especially teenagers, most of whom lose their minds for a few years, as per nature’s design. 🙂
http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/skin/basic_info/indoor_tanning.htm
” . . . but I’m also for protecting our kids.”
They’re not your kids, Bill. They have parent(s). You know . . . the adults that should be making this decision?
Tanning is stupid and disgusting, but freedom means letting people do things you don’t think they should do.
You’re not serious are you? Should we give them a couple packs of cigs and a quart of vodka too while we’re at it? Hey, there not our kids, right? Let their parents decide whether they get to kill themselves or not.Give me a break.
^^^ “they’re”… sorry.
There is a threshold question here. When is there so much danger to children that society can’t possibly allow parents to exercise their parental rights? Tanning seems to fall below the threshold for government to usurp the role of parents. Up next . . . Happy Meals?
Put it this way, I’d rather let my kids drink wine than use a tanning booth. If they drink too much wine they will throw up. If they do it continuously they will develop an addiction problem. Conversely, if they stay in the tanning booth too long they will kill themselves in a matter of days. If they do it continuously they will develop cancer. Draw your own conclusion about when we might government might want to step in. Keep in mind, it’s already illegal for them to drink alcohol. I’m assuming you’re okay with that?
Bill –
My concern is directly related to the amount of authority we want to extend to government to intrude into our personal lives, and substitute it’s judgement for our own when it comes to parenting.
Parents are getting arrested for things as mundane as letting them play unsupervised in their own yard. http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/06/14/florida-parents-charged-felony-neglect-after-11-year-old-son-plays-backyard-90-minutes
Government needs to take a giant step back and to stop trying to substitute it’s judgement for that of parents.
Strawman, Pat. Stick to your own topic. 😉
This coming after an irrational and over=-the-top response on drinking and smoking?
Freedom = Tanning?