l****z
发帖数: 29846 | 1 by Alli Bachmann
Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I) has done his job; and he’s done it well. He’s
maintained the New York City that Mayor Rudy Guiliani (R) created during the
1990’s. After a special election and winning a third term as mayor,
Bloomberg has officially outlived his usefulness as Mayor. Some Bloomberg
initiatives that have recently sparked controversy are his proposed ban on
large, sugary beverages and his breastfeeding-only hospital restriction. As
a man who once claimed to be a republican, Bloomberg should know the
difference between an individual’s right and a government responsibility.
As mayor of one of the world’s largest cities, Bloomberg has a
responsibility to maintain and further enhance the quality of life for his
citizens. A controversial initiative passed by the New York Board of Health
in 2006 that successfully does this without hinging on an individual’s
right includes calorie counts on restaurant menus. An individual is not
prohibited from buying any particular item and restaurant owners are not
barred from providing them. While caloric intake is not a pretty sight, its
informative purpose is both constitutional and, some would say, necessary.
The Great-New York City-Smoking Ban began nearly a decade ago. While smokers
may feel attacked by Bloomberg, what he is actually tackling falls within
his governing power. Smoking was first banned in New York City offices, bars
, and restaurants and just recently, Bloomberg moved to ban smoking in
pedestrian plazas (e.g.: Time Square), parks, and beaches (Yes, NYC has
beaches). Bloomberg’s smoking ban falls within his governing powers
because the health of the public is consequently affected by the decisions
of others. While smokers maintain their individual right to inhale well
known cancer-causing toxins, the public’s right to breathe must be equally
considered. Some proponents of smoker rights question the outdoor ban as
necessary which is why his current initiative is stalled. While the smell of
smoke may be unpleasant to tourists, they are not the ones chronically
affected by daily second-hand smoke inhalation. The hundreds of thousands of
Manhattan-bound commuters walking through pedestrian plazas on a daily
basis to and from work are the victims. As a conservative, I am a proponent
of government ensuring my health and safety. I believe in the
constitutionality of Bloomberg’s smoking ban.
This is where I draw the line with Bloomberg politics. One of his newest
initiatives is a ban on 16 oz. sugary drinks in public establishments (
restaurants, movie theaters, ballparks, etc.). Do I personally drink soda?
No, I don’t. But I also don’t believe in the government forbidding sales
of a product. While restaurants post calories to inform the public of their
food choices, they do not bar individuals from purchasing the fried
mozzarella sticks. Bloomberg must take a cigarette-similar approach down the
middle in order for his sugary drink initiative to succeed. His current ban
has left a sour taste in the mouths of thousands of soda drinkers,
distributers, and manufacturers. His next scheme has me wondering what he
would actually prefer the public to supplement their soda with……
The pro-choice Mayor has also asked hospitals to stop providing new mothers
with formula. This proposal, called Latch On NYC, goes into effect in
September. Nurses in participating hospitals, so far half of all New York
City hospitals, will be instructed not to give formula to babies unless
there’s a medical reason. Grueling coaching sessions will be provided by
breastfeeding advocates and until a doctor signs-off on a medical reason,
mothers will not be awarded formula for their new babies.
So let me get this straight, Nanny Bloomberg, you only protect a baby when
it has survived your city’s 41% abortion rate and made it out of the womb?
A mother has a choice to no longer maintain a pregnancy, but if she does,
she does not have a choice whether to breastfeed or bottle feed? The
hypocrisy is ludicrous. I personally do not believe that new mothers should
need a medical reason to choose formula over breast-milk. I have always been
an advocate for a two-parent household; therefore, a father is deserving of
equal rights and quality time to bond with their newborn. If breastfeeding
advocates would allow mothers to “pump” and use their milk via-bottles
then I would not be so hands-down against the process. Furthermore, each
household, lifestyle, and decision of a FAMILY must be considered. NYC
hospitals should continue providing family support and newborn information
from expert nurses that will allow the family to decide what works best for
their particular situation.
The controversy lies within the restriction of products provided to the
public, Mr. Mayor. Adding calorie counts to menus was approved because your
goal was to inform your constituents of healthy choices but never barring
them from making their own. Your semi-smoking ban was tolerable because you
restricted and limited smoking in high-traffic outdoor areas and indoor,
unventilated places, but still allowed individuals to purchase their product
and maintain their lifestyle choice. The verdict is in, Mr. Mayor. The
public does not like big government forbidding them of exercising their
individual right. You are pro-choice, aren’t you? |
|
