Yet more proof that the more and more some need to virtue signal their environmental wokeness, the stupider the signaled virtue: Plastic straw bans. But what could be more woke than banning straws? Throwing people in jail for violating the ban!
“The city of Santa Barbara has passed an ordinance that will allow restaurant employees to be punished with up to six months of jail time or a $1,000 fine after a second offense of giving plastic straws to their customers.
“Oh, and each individual straw counts as a separate infraction, meaning that if someone got busted handing out straws to a table of four people, he or she could end up facing years behind bars.”
California, of late, due to overcrowding in jails has sought fit to turn many felonies into more minor misdemeanors, thus letting a myriad of true criminals out on the streets. That it takes giving out drinking straws to raise to the level of jailable criminality is telling about the twisted values that have destroyed a once golden state.
Interestingly enough, the ordinance only bans “food providers” and “beverage providers” from handing out straws, and not some enterprising individual who does naught but sell straws in front of such an establishment…
Pictured: Environmental Terrorists and Straw-using Criminal Scum, according to the City of Santa Barbara
Does this mean that bendy straws will be considered “assault straws” with the thingy that goes up? Or how about those twisty fun straws???
Despite persecution of bakers, florists, and photographers for daring to keep their 1st Amendment rights while engaging in commerce, certainly they are still free to read and study what they read outside of business activities in the privacy of their very own private property, especially when the freedom of speech and freedom of associated is become a hat trick with the inclusion of religious freedom, right?
According to Sewickley Heights Borough near Pittsburgh, they don’t. The borough ordered Scott and Terri Fetterolf to “stop using their 35-acre property to host Bible studies, worship events, religious retreats, or religious fundraisers.” How do they argue that this is acceptable? Zoning laws, unsurprisingly.
“Borough officials filed a Notice of Violation/Cease and Desist Order and seek to impose zoning restrictions such as those applicable to ‘Places of Worship’ like churches and synagogues on the Fetterolfs’ activities. However, secular counterparts to these activities like parties, political fundraisers, and book clubs are not banned.”
Rather than the expectation that freedoms the government is barred from infringing shall not be infringed, this brave new mindset declares that all is forbidden unless the government allows otherwise. If you have to ask permission, then you are not free.
That religious activities were specifically targeted indicates an animus that would certainly not stand-up to scrutiny, especially in light of Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission.
When euthanasia was declared a medical procedure it was inevitable that it would be wielded by doctors, nurses, and hospital staff not only against those with a terminal disease who were in pain, but as a tool to eliminate undesirables. There has been no more clear example of this than the U.K.’s National Healthcare System (NHS).
“The report of The Gosport Independent Panel into Gosport War Memorial Hospital found that only 45% of those administered terminal quantities of diamorphine (which can be appropriate in alleviating severe pain at the very end of life) were said to be in pain. Many of the case studies showed that even where pain was noted, it was not properly assessed, and the effect of medication was not monitored.
“In 29% of cases, no reason or rationale was given for prescribing the lethal doses. In 26%, reasons were given that would “rarely, if ever, be regarded as appropriate indications,” such as deterioration, distress, or agitation.”
Some of the reasons are horrifying.