On 4 Feb 2007 02:14:10 -0800, "Charlie Self" wrote:

On Feb 3, 6:36?am, "George" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...
.... snip
Sometimes it's the village idiot who wants to raise your kids, what?

I have to agree with the intent of the law, but...first, sometimes it
is the village idiot who HAS the kids, and making that idiot attend
teacher/parent meetings or pay a fine they probably don't have the
money to meet is a typical asinine government response.

This is not a matter for legislation. When I was a kid, and belonged
to a Republican organization called Young Americans for Freedom (YAF),
the idea was to keep government out of the individual citizen's life
as much as possible. Today's Republican Party seems to be doing just
the opposite, from education to bedroom.


I'm not sure why you feel that in this case, it's not a matter for
legislation when what is being addressed is a problem with beneficiaries of
a taxpayer-funded program (free education) whose lack of participation is
raising its cost and decreasing its value to those who are participating.
That is one of the areas where legislation seems reasonably applied.

What is funny here is all the people getting their panties in a wad over
attempting to address this problem but no ire has been addressed toward the
school district in New Jersey that is instituting mandatory urinalysis of
students to check for alcohol consumption. That seems to be a wee bit more
intrusive and abusive of individual rights, freedoms, and freedom from
unreasonable search and seizure.


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+

If you're gonna be dumb, you better be tough

+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------+