http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgere…rer/8265432.htm
Georgia banned the piercing of female genitalia sometime back, only female as a matter of fact.
Don’t they have other things to worry about than piercings? And this line looks oddly suspicious to me…
“What? I’ve never seen such a thing,” Heath said. “I, uh, I wouldn’t approve of anyone doing it. I don’t think that’s an appropriate thing to be doing.”
Appropriate based on what???
Of course, the city I work in won’t even allow tattoo parlors. I’m not personally inclined to get a tat or a piercing, but I hardly think the government or “the people” should be concerned with either.
VES
I wonder, how do they enforce such a law? 
That’s nothing compared to the government’s jailing a man one year for shooting an endangered bear in self defense.
I’ll provide the link once I find it. (I remember the article but not the specific link.)
What’s also fascinating is that someone would have had to sponsor such a bill. Was it pressure from some citizen’s group (MAAM - Mothers Against Anatomic Mutilation) or did one of the (ahem) statesmen sponsor the bill? One has to wonder.
VES
The following were taken from a speech by Conservative leader Michael Howard:
Schools in UK were forced to take Hot Cross Buns off the school menu in Liverpool as they were deemed to have the ‘potential to offend’
Not to mention:
Business woman Beryl King was told in August this year to remove the phrase ‘Hard working’ from a job advert by the job center because it discriminated against people who were not industrious.
Of course this is to be expected in a country where:
…the government advised schools to replace traditional sports days with “group problem solving excercises”.
And on top of previous links to government spending on public art Ive given: I now read £80,000 is now being spent on erectec three large steel ‘half arches’ pointing to a center point (thus giving the illusion of them being linked from a certain angle!(???)).
Councils here have far to much time on there hands, a seeminly unlimited supply of (our) resources and the vote has ‘0’ effect on the majority of their decisions/powers, as the councils are beyond the MPs (who are, comparitvely, powerless)
I can’t really why a law like this is even though of. If a woman wants to pierce her genitalia, why not? It does not affect anyone else (at least not many), and very few people will ever know about it. Why should it then be illeagal? This is a “we know best what is best for you”-law.
This has to be a joke…
Business woman Beryl King was told in August this year to remove the phrase ‘Hard working’ from a job advert by the job center because it discriminated against people who were not industrious.
There has to be something missing? Please tell me this is a joke.
It seems to be real. A google search turned up plenty of references, including: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/tm_ob…-name_page.html “just plain crazy” pretty much covers it.