Once again we see a piece of news that brings to mind movies made over 20 years ago, such as Demolition man, where the perfect "Utopian" society has been created to which anything the government deems "bad for you" becomes illegal.
We're going to start with a short clip of what was deemed "bad for you, hence illegal" in Demolition Man, then take a look around America, different laws, "guidelines," bans and controls that have insidiously been placed on Americans throughout the years which is eerily reminiscent of Aldous Huxley's 1932 book "Brave New World" where reproductive technology, sleep-learning, psychological manipulation, and classical conditioning are all used to "change society."
Lenina Huxley: Ah, smoking is not good for you, and it's been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat...
John Spartan: Are you sh*tting me?
Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.
John Spartan: What the hell is that?
Moral Statute Machine: John Spartan, you are fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.
Lenina Huxley: Bad language, chocolate, gasoline, uneducational toys and anything spicy.
Note the name Huxley used as a wink and a nod towards the 'Brave New World"
The most recent news showing the path we are headed down and the "programming" or "conditioning" being applied to Americans in order to "change society," is reported by Fox 5, where New York City gets the OK to issue salt fines during the appeal process against the requirement.
New York City plans to start enforcing a first-of-its-kind requirement for chain restaurants to use icons to warn patrons of salty foods after getting an appeals court's go-ahead Thursday to start issuing fines. But it's not the final word on whether the regulation will stand.
The novel rule took effect in December, and some eateries already have added the requisite salt-shaker-like icons to menu items that contain more salt than doctors recommend ingesting in an entire day.
But penalties have been in limbo as the National Restaurant Association fights the measure in court. That clash is ongoing, but an appeals court Thursday lifted a temporary hold on issuing the fines while the case plays out. Fines can be up to $600.
The city will start enforcing the rule June 6.
While salt wasn't mentioned in the first clip shown above, it is at the 12 second mark in the short clip below:
Many may remember that it was New York that also attemtped to implement the Sugary Drinks Portion Cap Rule where NYC former Mayor Michael Bloomberg intended to prohibit the sale of many sweetened drinks more than 16 ounces at restaurants, fast-food establishments, delis, movie theaters, sports stadiums and food carts. (Wiki)
Ultimately the courts ruled the sugar ban illegal, but the fact is the attempt was made and Bloomberg's successor Mayor Bill de Blasio supports the sugary drink ban idea, so the issue may come back up.
The government also provides "Dietary Guidelines for Americans," which includes statements such as "Support healthy eating patterns for all," on their official summary. Eating healthy is good, don't get me wrong, but once again it fits the pattern of the government attempting to tell a "free" society what they should and should not be doing. It all comes back to "control," and programming the populace to act and eat in a manner the government deems appropriate.
Remember when school lunches actually looked appetizing and filled your childrens stomachs while they were at school, before Michelle Obama decided children should be forced to eat what she felt was best?
Before Michelle O:
After Mooch decided to ruin school lunchs, students and some parents went on a #thanksmichelleobama campaign by taking pictures of what they are forced to eat in school now, and shared to social media:
In the meantime, Michelle seems to believe in the old adage, do as I say, not as I do:
Some might respond that if the parents do not like what their child is being fed in school, which in most cases the parents are paying for, then they can just send the children with a packed lunch from home..... not so fast, as some school are forbidding parents from sending packed lunches, and others refusing to let the children eat what the parents did pack (mom sent Oreos for child's desert in packed lunch), sending the parents a reprimanding note along with the desert the mother had chosen to give her child:
"Dear Parents, it is very important that all students have a nutritious lunch. This is a public school setting and all children are required to have a fruit, a vegetable and a heavy snack from home, along with a milk. If they have potatoes, the child will also need bread to go along with it. Lunchables, chips, fruit snacks, and peanut butter are not considered to be a healthy snack. This is a very important part of our program and we need everyone's participation."
The pièce de résistance of the government's belief that they know what is best for OUR children, is when the Feds drafted a "policy statement on family engagement from the early years to the early grades," where "government employees will intervene to provide, “monitoring goals for the children at home and the classroom,” and that if parents are failing to meet the standards set, “evidence-based parenting interventions” will be made to, “ensure that children’s social-emotional and behavioral needs are met.” (InfoWars)
The U.S. government now seems to think it is their right to decide what your child's social-emotional and behavioral needs are, not yours.
Page one from that PDF states in part "It is the position of the Departments that all early childhood programs and schools recognize families asequal partnersin improving children’s development, learning and wellness across all settings, and over the course of their children’s developmental and educational experiences."
FAMILIES ARE JUST EQUAL PARTNERS????!!!!!!!??????
Reminds me of Melissa Pery trying to tell parents their children did not belong to them, they belonged to the community!
The law, approved in 2014 and set to go into effect in August, assigns a guardian—a teacher, nurse, midwife, social worker, or other government-employed person—to monitor the “wellbeing” of every Scottish child from birth to age 18. The named person would have access to school, medical, and legal documents and be able to intervene if necessary.
Notice Huxley mentioned bad language in the first clip? Did you know there are already "bad language laws" on on the books for multiple states?
In Mississppi there is § 97-29-47 - Profanity or drunkenness in public place, which states "If any person shall profanely swear or curse, or use vulgar and indecent language, or be drunk in any public place, in the presence of two (2) or more persons, he shall, on conviction thereof, be fined not more than one hundred dollars ($ 100.00) or be imprisoned in the county jail not more than thirty (30) days or both."
In Oklahoma, Title 21, Chapter 36, Section 906 states "If any person shall utter or speak any obscene or lascivious language or word in any public place, or in the presence of females, or in the presence of children under ten (10) years of age, he shall be liable to a fine of not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), or imprisonment for not more than thirty (30) days, or both."
In Rhode Island, § 11-11-5 Profanity. – Every person who shall be guilty of profane swearing and cursing shall be fined not exceeding five dollars ($5.00).
While we are not suggesting it is pleasant to go out in public and hear a rowdy bunch of people swearing and cursing and certainly not in front of our children, but to create actual laws that punishes people for free speech that is not inciting violence, is a method of "control," and "programming," as well as running right over our First Amendment.
It isn't only laws though as certain companies have started penalizing people for what they say in their own home, such as X-Box, where in the video below we see that due to the language of the user, who s playing the game inside his own home, is shown a message on his screen that says "Call technical due to bad language."
Video below, language warning - NSFW.
Or how about receiving the message seen in the image below, from a game that was being played in "career mode," where the user wasn't even interacting with others online:
The examples of the government and large companies attempting to "control" the behavior of the masses go on and on and on, to list them all would make this a ten page report, at least, including whether you can smoke in your own home, fly the American flag, Free speech "zones" on college campusus in different states, how much you can withdraw from the bank without the authorities being called, and much, much more.
