Why not? And lots of before and after pictures, too.

 

What about parents who let their kids spend too much time outdoors in the sun with no sunscreen? Where does it end?

 

And the health care system...well, maybe it's what needs to be fixed. How to fix it? I don't claim to know at this moment.

 

You and I are never going to agree about anything, are we?

 

We will find something, someday.:thumb:

 

Can't legislate everything but that shouldn't mean that the things that could make for a better society, we shouldn't legislate about.

Should doctors also issue prescription for sun exposure? What would the penalty be for some family determined to own their own tanning bed? Would the government license them? Maybe we could just levy a $10/visit tax on all tanning bed users and use the income derived therefrom to help improve child healthcare in this country.

 

We has started down the slippery slope of nanny-statedom and proposals like this one will become common place. What's next, prescriptions for cheeseburgers?

 

As mentioned before, what if we find that there is a safer way to fry the cheeseburgers (getting rid of transfats)? Shouldn't a regulation be put into place to encourage/make businesses fry cheeseburgers in a more healthy way? Especially, since that those food choices are one of the main contributors to the increased cost of health care on the government.

 

Or do we just get to do whatever as adults and just keep raising our taxes so that government can deal with the consequences?

The transfat argument is a red herring. People are starting to believe that if they cut out transfats they don't have to worry about what they eat.

The transfat argument is a red herring. People are starting to believe that if they cut out transfats they don't have to worry about what they eat.

 

Well, that is not true. You eat 5,000 calories a day and exercise or normal activity of 2,000 a day and you are going to get fat whether it is soaked in transfat or nothing but carrots.

 

I am NOT talking about outlawing tanning beds for adults.

I am NOT talking about prescriptions for tanning beds for adults.

I am NOT even agreeing with this guy about tanning beds prescriptions for teenagers.

If they want a suntan, let them earn it the old fashion way by putting lard on their skin and setting outside for 5 hours.

 

I see nothing wrong with what Dad said, no one under 18. No difference with smoking or alcohol. Both are health dangers that we don't allow kids to legally participate in. Why is tanning beds any different?

 

Even though I think he was saying it sarcastically.

NYC has banned the use of certain types of oil high in transfat in restaurants. That would be a good step nationwide to help combat the problem you have mentioned.

 

That is a good governmental step to offsetting the problem. Why is this different?

 

Using your argument, cigarettes to teenagers should be legal and parental responsibility on whether a 14-year old is smoking or not.

That may be good from your perspective, but I think NYC has overstepped its bounds. I don't need laws to prevent my 14 year old from smoking or toking up, either. I'm more than capable of doing that myself. Besides, if you still have to run commercials on MTV to discourage its viewers from smoking, it would seem the laws aren't quite dealing with the problem anyway. It still comes down to parental responsibility.

That may be good from your perspective, but I think NYC has overstepped its bounds. I don't need laws to prevent my 14 year old from smoking or toking up, either. I'm more than capable of doing that myself. Besides, if you still have to run commercials on MTV to discourage its viewers from smoking, it would seem the laws aren't quite dealing with the problem anyway. It still comes down to parental responsibility.

 

Yes, it does, but you are assuming that parents are doing their jobs.

 

What do you do when the parents don't do their jobs?

 

Say well, life ain't fair 10-year old, sorry that you got stuck with bad parents and move on?

 

There are parents that think it is fine for their child to smoke, be sexually active, drink and do drugs while their kids are in MS.

There are parents that think it is fine for their children to have NO CURFEW for their child on school nights. Come in at 1:00 AM if you wish, or not at all. (To combat, this PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY, some cities have curfews for kids.)

How many absentee dads do we have in this country, now? Fathers who are not doing anything financially or emotionally to support their kids.

 

You are right that it IS a parental responsibility. Doesn't change the fact that a good # of parents are shirking that responsibility. Do we just wash our hands of those kids and tell them, you are just one of the unlucky ones, it is your parent's fault and go on with our lives, ignoring the reality of where we are as a society?

 

I am very thankful that your kids don't need these rules. But there are a lot of kids that desperately need these types of rules because they have no parents who care about them. They care about their next fix of drugs, alcohol, money, good times, jobs, their lives and not their kids. So, the 12 year old is on their own and are not to bother their parent's lives.

Yes, it does, but you are assuming that parents are doing their jobs.

 

What do you do when the parents don't do their jobs?

 

Say well, life ain't fair 10-year old, sorry that you got stuck with bad parents and move on?

 

There are parents that think it is fine for their child to smoke, be sexually active, drink and do drugs while their kids are in MS.

There are parents that think it is fine for their children to have NO CURFEW for their child on school nights. Come in at 1:00 AM if you wish, or not at all. (To combat, this PARENTAL RESPONSIBILITY, some cities have curfews for kids.)

How many absentee dads do we have in this country, now? Fathers who are not doing anything financially or emotionally to support their kids.

 

You are right that it IS a parental responsibility. Doesn't change the fact that a good # of parents are shirking that responsibility. Do we just wash our hands of those kids and tell them, you are just one of the unlucky ones, it is your parent's fault and go on with our lives, ignoring the reality of where we are as a society?

 

I am very thankful that your kids don't need these rules. But there are a lot of kids that desperately need these types of rules because they have no parents who care about them. They care about their next fix of drugs, alcohol, money, good times, jobs, their lives and not their kids. So, the 12 year old is on their own and are not to bother their parent's lives.

We've gone from a 16 year old being exposed to a cancer risk from laying in a tanning bed for vanity's sake, to the total breakdown of the family unit?

 

OK .....

 

You're missing my point. I know society must take care of those that cannot take care of themselves. I know and support the fact that there should be a point where the government should interfere when the family unit breaks down. Where is that point, though? That is where we disagree.

 

Based on the topic of the thread and following your logic, there should be no way anybody under 18 should ride in a car, much less drive. They could be injured or killed (much more likely than contracting cancer from a tanning bed).

 

How intrusive do you want the government to be in your life? At what point does common sense and personal responsibility kick in? Should all responsibility for raising children be taken from the parent?

Good idea/bad idea, but do we really want any government agency, to regulate tanning beds. What would be next, only 1 soda per day, 15 cell phone calls, 10 "for sures"....Let those who know, raise their own families.

As mentioned before, what if we find that there is a safer way to fry the cheeseburgers (getting rid of transfats)? Shouldn't a regulation be put into place to encourage/make businesses fry cheeseburgers in a more healthy way? Especially, since that those food choices are one of the main contributors to the increased cost of health care on the government.

 

Or do we just get to do whatever as adults and just keep raising our taxes so that government can deal with the consequences?

How about letting people make their own lifestyle choices and then let them deal with their own consequences?

I don't like tanning beds and I think girls that spend 20 minutes a day layin in em look orange and ugly. But, I'm against all these stupid bans. Let em do what they want.

We've gone from a 16 year old being exposed to a cancer risk from laying in a tanning bed for vanity's sake, to the total breakdown of the family unit?

 

OK .....

 

You're missing my point. I know society must take care of those that cannot take care of themselves. I know and support the fact that there should be a point where the government should interfere when the family unit breaks down. Where is that point, though? That is where we disagree.

 

Based on the topic of the thread and following your logic, there should be no way anybody under 18 should ride in a car, much less drive. They could be injured or killed (much more likely than contracting cancer from a tanning bed).

 

How intrusive do you want the government to be in your life? At what point does common sense and personal responsibility kick in? Should all responsibility for raising children be taken from the parent?

 

I don't think we disagree as I am not sure where it is and am struggling to find that point. So, since I don't have a definite point/side, we can't disagree.:lol:

 

I can recognize that the driving/riding is an important aspect of daily life and should not be taken away. I do think the new limits that KY has put on 16 and 17 year olds and driving is acceptable.

 

How about letting people make their own lifestyle choices and then let them deal with their own consequences?

You do realize that them dealing with their own consequences WILL affect you through a myriad of different ways including but not limited to higher health costs. When the government did away with the well and the common drinking ladle to battle illness going around, I bet there was someone with the point, "Well I don't drink out of it and if someone wants to, they should have to deal with the consequences.

Good idea/bad idea, but do we really want any government agency, to regulate tanning beds. What would be next, only 1 soda per day, 15 cell phone calls, 10 "for sures"....Let those who know, raise their own families.

I AM NOT saying take parental responsibility away from parents. That point is now the one going to the extreme.

 

What I am saying and my focus is not you guys who practice parental responsibility. Rather what do you do with the kids that parents ARE NOT being parentally repsonsible to them. And trust me when I say it is not an extreme scenario.

You do realize that them dealing with their own consequences WILL affect you through a myriad of different ways including but not limited to higher health costs. When the government did away with the well and the common drinking ladle to battle illness going around, I bet there was someone with the point, "Well I don't drink out of it and if someone wants to, they should have to deal with the consequences.

I AM NOT saying take parental responsibility away from parents. That point is now the one going to the extreme.

The remedy for too much government involvement in health care and interference with parenting is not more government. If programs don't work, spending more money on those programs and expanding their scope usually makes matters worse, not better. By advocating that the ultimate decision of whether and when teens can visit tanning beds you are saying take away some parental responsibility and give it to the government.

 

If the government wants to heavily regulate the activities of of some of its dependents as a means to discourage government dependency and decrease "free" health care, then I might consider supporting those tanning bed prescriptions. American taxpayers should not be subsidizing the bad habits of those who refuse to work. However, taxpayers already are bearing enough of a burden in our society without stripping us of more or our freedoms.

The remedy for too much government involvement in health care and interference with parenting is not more government. If programs don't work, spending more money on those programs and expanding their scope usually makes matters worse, not better. By advocating that the ultimate decision of whether and when teens can visit tanning beds you are saying take away some parental responsibility and give it to the government.

 

If the government wants to heavily regulate the activities of of some of its dependents as a means to discourage government dependency and decrease "free" health care, then I might consider supporting those tanning bed prescriptions. American taxpayers should not be subsidizing the bad habits of those who refuse to work. However, taxpayers already are bearing enough of a burden in our society without stripping us of more or our freedoms.

 

ON the bolded, please explain.

 

On the refuse to work, I said nothing about welfare.

 

And you do realize that if you don't regulate the use of tanning beds, now, that you may see an increase burden on taxpayers in the future when health care costs rise as we see an increase in the number of skin cancer cases.

 

Do you agree that there is a good number (and growing) of teenagers out there that their parents don't give a flying rat's rear about what they do?

ON the bolded, please explain.

 

On the refuse to work, I said nothing about welfare.

 

And you do realize that if you don't regulate the use of tanning beds, now, that you may see an increase burden on taxpayers in the future when health care costs rise as we see an increase in the number of skin cancer cases.

 

Do you agree that there is a good number (and growing) of teenagers out there that their parents don't give a flying rat's rear about what they do?

On the bolded part of my post, people who foot the bill naturally believe that they should have some say so about how the money is spent. If government wants to take people's freedom away to smoke, drink, and tan, let them begin by stripping those freedoms from those whose medical bills the government already pays. As for me and millions of other taxpayers who provide for our own medical care, the government should butt out and allow us to spend our money and live our lives as we want.

 

I realize that socialized health care is probably inevitable in this country, but I am not ready to throw in the towel and voluntarily surrender more of my freedoms to the growing hordes of socialists just yet. Liberty was given to most of us at birth, but we owe it to those who shed their blood not to give away that freedom without a fight.

 

Laws and regulations are no substitutes for good parenting. Many Americans already eagerly blame public schools, rap music, Hollywood, and anybody else but themselves for their failure as parents. Those parents don't need the government taking away another responsibility from them. Dependency does not yield good parents.