Friday, December 28, 2007 11:08 PM CST
COLUMN: We also need new law outlawing passing of gas in fine restaurants
By HARRY REYNOLDS, Editorial Page Editor
hreynolds@jg-tc.com
The American Lung Association of Illinois harbors hopes Big Nanny will implement a statewide ban on burning leaves in 2008.
Having pushed through legislation designed to punished smokers for their perceived bad habit, the association needs another dragon to slay. Getting lawmakers to go along with what, admittedly, is an admirable goal will be difficult.
Imposing a statewide ban on leaf burning shouldn’t rank anywhere near the top of the Illinois General Assembly’s must-do list. But, it probably will. From the too-typical lawmaker’s perspective, mundane issues such as the state budget, highways and byways, construction projects, etc., pale in comparison with something like imposing a moment of silence in public schools.
The moment of silence’s unintended consequences are taxpayer funds spent on defending such lunacy from lawsuits; and nice retainers for lawyers.
Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruled organized classroom prayer unconstitutional, the religious right has engaged in an illogical — and blatantly misleading — campaign to force the practice.
Being descendants immigrants fleeing religious persecution, the Founding Fathers framed the Constitution in such a manner as to preclude theocracy.
Separation of church and state sounds pretty good when it means keeping government out of churches. Not so good when it comes to keeping churches out of government.
Prayer is a great thing. More people ought to engage in it. But, prayer does not mandate loud and public professions. One can as easily do it in privately.
The argument the Supreme Court ruling prevents the faithful from praying in school is, of course, false. Anyone can pray at anytime. It’s as easy as daydreaming — a matter of silent contemplation.
The moment of silence law has a similar smack to the lung association’s campaign to impose a statewide ban on leaf burning: One vested group trying to impose its will on the recalcitrant.
Just as I oppose any religion’s efforts to use public institutions to force children to recite classroom prayers, so do I oppose the efforts of well-meaning crusaders to use the state as a tool to implement their will.
The lung association will find no disagreement from this corner as to the detrimental effects of burning leaves on the physically afflicted. Further, it will find no counter to the argument for communities to prevent the practice, as it involves many people living in close proximity.
A statewide ban on burning leaves goes far beyond a municipal ban. Not only does it impose a ban where it makes sense; it also imposes a ban where it makes little sense.
What we don’t need is Big Nanny — impelled by mothering crusaders — interfering in the business of local communities. Common sense, exercised at the local level, is the best solution when it comes to an issue like burning leaves.
One can advance no reasoned proposition to the effect burning leaves improves one’s health. But, then, it’s hard to advocate raking the little devils up, placing them on the curb and praying the street department collects them before winter intervenes.
A few years ago, the Mattoon City Council decided to outlaw the burning of leaves. Many of the inhabitants of this fair city were outraged.
The debate continues, bursting from a smoldering pile with the advent of fall. It is an issue provoking more public discourse than erectile disfunction.
Since the lung association deems it reasonable to use the state as a tool to further its goal of fostering good health by edict, I feel compelled — by reason of inclination to tell other people what to do — to advocate new state laws:
-- No Restroom Left Behind With Hands Unwashed. One out of three men, it is estimated, doesn’t wash his hands after going potty. They deposit their germs, etc., on door handles and on the hand of the next person they greet.
-- Legislation banning the passing of gas in public places, particularly fine restaurants. Only livestock would be excluded from this act.
-- No Women Flouncing Their Hair, which would have several salutary effects. One being the reduction of whiplash cases among the female population. The second being the reduction of the chances of a guy being flipped in the face.
-- Must Clean Heating and Cooling Ducts in Public Buildings. Ever imagine what’s in those ducts? Molds, bacteria, mouse droppings and other unpleasant critters reign.
-- Separation of Men and Women into Separate Groups in Bars. Many a nose has been broken, teeth loosened and concussion incurred when two guys with their eye on the same girl go testosterone.
And finally:
-- The Summary Execution of Well-Meaning Crusading Do-Gooders. This act would discourage people trying to tell other people what to do because they think it is good for them. A positive effect of this law would be to give lawmakers little reason avoid attending to the business of the people.
Who knows, we might get a balanced budget, improved roads, repaired and replaced bridges, upgraded transit systems and other issues that, while lacking the sex appeal of a statewide leaf-burning ban and state-imposed moment of silence in public school, are vital.
Harry Reynolds is editorial page editor of the Journal Gazette/Times-Courier. Contact Reynolds at hreynolds@jg-tc.com or 238-6861.
Add your comments
Not already registered?
Then click Here.
Comment policy:
JG-TC.com encourages readers to engage in civil conversation with their neighbors. Comments that are submitted are not posted to the site immediately. They go into a queue to be moderated and may take several hours to be reviewed. Comments posted on Saturday may not be reviewed until Sunday afternoon.
In order to keep the page a set width, long lines (mostly long links) will be chopped. Try putting spaces in your links or consider using tinyurl.com to make a smaller link that you can include.
We will never edit or alter your comments, but we do reserve the right to remove comments that violate our code of conduct.
No comment may contain:
* Potentially libelous statements; such as accusing somebody of a crime, defamation of character, or statements that can harm somebody's reputation.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults, threats, harassment or inciting violence.
* Commercial product promotions.
If you have any questions, please contact our moderator.
|
|
|
longtimegone wrote on Dec 29, 2007 5:54 AM: