Posted on 01/23/2012 12:38:16 PM PST by Responsibility2nd
A Georgia mother who was arrested for allowing her 10-year-old to get a tattoo said she had no idea it was illegal for him to get one, even with her consent.
When Chuntera Napier’s son Gaquan Napier asked her if he could get a memorial tattoo for his 12-year-old brother Malik who died after being hit by a car, Napier was touched by the request.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
“I think that whenever one person deliberately, willfully and permanently physically harms another person it is always the business of government to punish the violator to discourage others from doing the same. “
but that’s not the case here because there was
-no physical harm. If there was, then the govt wouldn’t allow anyone to give a tattoo unless he was a doctor.
-kid wanted it and Mom approved
-it was to remember his dead brother. It’s not as if he wanted to do something ‘cool’ one day on a whim
And there we have the reason I said, Nope.
Self ping for later read.
Nope. That was not misguided. I directed that right down your throat. You have ass-antlers yourself, don’t you? Or your daughter does?
You feel sorry for me? Tell me, is that your basic reaction when coming on a conservative thread with your ghetto ideals and then getting a verbal beat-down?
A tattoo is physical harm, if disfigures G*d given skin for the rest of ones life. A ten year old child is not competent to make a life long decision.
Bye bye
Its amazing how many so called conservatives that are for smaller government think this is the governments business...you should realize your a liberal, big government person that thinks there should be a law against a girl wanting a tattoo...You just want the big governemnt making laws you approve of...idiots.
It's amusing the quackery of osteopathy is given an exception.
Didn’t she play a part in Predator?
I am not normally in favor of tatoos, but it does seem that there is a parents’ rights issue here. More to the point, the little boy is grieving the sudden loss of his older brother. (And btw, his brother was hit by a car, not taken out by a gang or something. There doesn’t seem to be any reason to suppose that gangs or anything similar are involved here.) I think if one of my boys asked to memorialize his brother under similar circumstances, I would at least think about saying yet.
Ditto—in fact, this is probably the first instance I have heard of where I would favour a tatoo.
Tell me, is that your basic reaction when coming on a conservative thread with your ghetto ideals and then getting a verbal beat-down?
<><><><><><
I really wasn’t going to get involved, as I’m no fan of tattoos for myself (none), my wife (none) and three kids ages 19-29 (collectively none), but I have no doubt you actually believe you’ve delivered a verbal beat-down, when, of course, nothing could be further from the truth.
I don’t fault you at all for your opinion, but that’s all it is, an opinion. And you desire to use police powers to enforce your opinion.
You’ve simply not made the case that harm is done, and that the harm is egregious enough to require the state to intervene.
Which is the very reason I have a tattoo. The one I have commemorates the birth and short life of my twin grandsons. They were born, changed lives and passed too soon.
It is a decision I will never regret.
My daughter and sonIL both also have tattoos celebrating their short lives. It is a decision they will never regret.
I’m not normally big on tattoos. Honestly, I think most of them look trashy. (But if someone else wants one, I really don’t care.) However, I think in some special circumstances, they can be useful, perhaps even touching or beautiful. Years ago I met a woman in a wheelchair who had had a bunch of surgeries for some ongoing problem (what exactly, I don’t remember) and had ended up with a lot of scars in places that showed, like her arms and legs. She had chosen to cover the scars with tattoos. (They were nice, artistically speaking - very well done and tasteful.) She had chosen that way to give her medical condition “the finger” - a way to fight back mentally against something that was ravaging her physically. I couldn’t fault her for that.
No you’re describing apples and oranges.
An abortion takes another life - is necessary to be performed by a doctor, and is only available to females.
THIS - is permanent marking of the flesh. Not a whole lot different from pierced ears (both involve needles and somewhat permanent. Pierced ears don’t always close up - my second ones never did. Actually I haven’t worn earrings in over two years, but the piercings remain.)
I just really think this is up to a parent to decide the appropriateness. We’re not talking about forced tattoos.
people with tats don’t earn less.
People with tats on their face may earn less....
Some cosmetic/plastic/reconstructive surgeries employ tattooing to minimize the appearance of scars or disfigurment.
You’re right!
I have an 8 year old daughter - my answer would be no.
But I think that as far as this boy understands a memorial - it’s weirdly appropriate.
Tattoos aren't murder; don't conflate them with abortions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.