Thursday, April 07, 2005

Fight for your right to Drink Milk?

This week's attempt to legislate attitudes comes in the form of a petition asking for the right to breastfeed anywhere to be created under the Human Rights Act. This proposal is flawed at conception because it dilutes the importance of the Human Right Act, the Human Rights Act protects people from discrimination based on their personal characteristics (gender, ethnicity, religion, sexuality), not the performance of an act. It is the right of management of public places to not have women breastfeed whilst on their property, just as it their right to ban screaming children. The campaigners also claim that Parliament should set an example by reversing a ruling banning breastfeeding in the House. There are enough screaming children in the House without allowing babies to bought in.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

The issue is clearly one of property rights. It's clearly up to the owner of the property to set their own rules in their own establishment.

Unfortunately, there is little real understanding of what property rights actually mean - just witness the confusion over smoking in bars, wherein too many people (including the busybody advocates of the law) were of the view that bars are public places, which of course they are not. They are private property which you enter at the owner's invitation and under the owner's rules of behaviour.

It's the same confusion between public and private - and a large dollop of Nannying of which this government is so partial - that makes me worry that the 'right' to force your breasts on others will soon be enshrined in law.
 

Posted by PC

Anonymous said...

I'd just like to point out that the main crux of the smoking in bars legislation was not so much that of 'public' vs 'private' space, but rather the rights of workers to safe workplaces. (I'm not placing any value judgements on that, or expressing my opinion either, just clarifying the situation for PC) 

Posted by xavierg

Anonymous said...

Clarify all you like, Xavier, but the two facts you're evading is 1)that the bars you advocate bullying are not owned by you, and what happens in those bars is rightly the business of those bar-owners; and 2) that people are free to work where they will, and to take responsibility for those choices.

You say "the main crux of the smoking in bars legislation was not so much that of 'public' vs 'private' space" - all the worse for the legislation, I say, since that is indeed the fundamental point evaded by the legislation. 

Posted by PC