Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

McMillan

Breast feeding in public

   185 votes

  1. 1. Should women be allowed to breast feed in public?

    • Yes, unconditionally
      77
    • Yes but they should cover up
      89
    • Yes but in separated rooms
      8
    • No
      9
    • Other
      2

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

406 posts in this topic

Yes, somehow gay rights are the same thing as having women consider those around them while breast feeding. Women ask that others consider their baby's needs, while they ignore the concerns and considerations of others. This isn't discrimination at all.

Awesome.

F@cking leftarded morons.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is a f@cking right these days, eh?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I'm not a parent, but I do understand something called, "common sense".

Ok, perhaps some family rooms are a bit messy, but there could be solutions around that. More frequent cleaning, and maybe having a specific room built for the sole purpose of breastfeeding. Key, lock, special access and all.

For the changing room part, when I'm at the mall, I might see a grand total of like 5-15 mothers with children who are still in breastfeeding age, so I don't see where you get the idea of not having enough stalls for everyone. Heck, there are like at least 30+ changing rooms at the Bays, Sears, Zellers, etc. So unless there's a babies convention at the mall or just so happened that 200 breastfeeding mothers are at the mall who needs to all feed their child at the same time, I still don't see any issue.

It's not anything extreme, just simple logistics.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you think rights are equal?

They are not and sometimes they even conflict. A good example is The Civil Marriage Act in which same sex civil marriage (and not just something like marriage) was found to be necessary in order to confer equality upon gay and lesbian couples. However this runs up against the freedom of religion and those faiths that do not believe in same sex marriage. The solution was to recognize that civilly same sex marriages were lawful but to give religions a choice as to whether to marry same sex couples.

Marriage — certain aspects of capacity

2. Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others.

Religious officials

3. It is recognized that officials of religious groups are free to refuse to perform marriages that are not in accordance with their religious beliefs.

Sometimes rights must be limited as the Charter notes:

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

We had the advantage of seeing how the US law tied itself in knots over the Bakke case and affirmative action in that country so we went a different direction under the Charter in repspect of equality rights.

The Abella Report - a 1984 publication entitled Equality in Employment: A Royal Commission Report under the direction of Commissioner Judge Rosalie Abella was adopted by Parliament and used for the first Employment Equity laws. It was quite clear this was not to be be US style affirmative action as Commissioner Abella noted:

Equality under the Charter, then, is a right to integrate into the mainstream of Canadian society based on, and notwithstanding, differences. It is acknowledging and accommodating differences rather than ignoring or denying them. This is the paradox at the core of any quest for employment equity: because differences exist and must be respected, equality in the workplace does not, and cannot be allowed to, mean the same treatment for all. In recognition of the journey many have yet to complete before they achieve equality, and in recognition of how the duration of the journey has been and is being unfairly protracted by arbitrary barriers, section 15(2) permits laws, programs, or activities designed to eliminate these restraints.

Women who are nursing children are not "unintentionally exposing themselves" - they are exercising a legal right. If you are asking woman to cover up while nursing or to go somewhere else that is not a reasonable request, it is discrimination. And no you cannot ask.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I the topless thing I fact? Or is it in certain locations u can be topless. I guess it should be a courtesy thing. For example when I'm around children I'm mindful of swearing and inappropriate gestures. I just think that other people should be mindful of things too not everyone is ok with breast feeding. Myself I could careless but I do know that there are people who care about it. I just like to argue :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so you say you have common sense, so please try and answer these questions:

1- Why are you allowed to eat in say, a restaurant, but a baby cannot eat there?

2- Why would you consider it an unreasonable request for someone to ask you to eat in the toilet but you think it's totally ok to ask a baby to?

3- Why is the naked breast of a new mother so offensive to you that you feel it should be banished from public view? Do you feel that way about all female breasts, or just one's with a newborn baby attached?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone care to sum up this thread in one post for me?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, is it babies that are eating or a mommy's booby that you find so offensive?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

more breasts the better. if you don't like it, look away. H. sapiens are mammals, it's our way of life.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is a f@cking right these days, eh?

Throw out courtesy and respect for others out the window!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone care to sum up this thread in one post for me?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we should just get rid of all those stupid rights and just have a free for all. Stupid people and their stupid rights. They're driving us 'right' up the wall...eh?

God-Damn hippies! Right Nitronuts!?

/snark

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone care to sum up this thread in one post for me?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to go ahead and answer your questions.

1. Not saying the baby can't would just like some discretion used for the comfort of the other patrons.

2. I don't think they should feed in a bathroom or even a different room just using a suitable amount of coverage, blanket if the child will use it or just not lifting your shirt up beyond what's necessary.

3. Why is it offensive? It's not offensive, it's just inappropriate in public. Sure the law says it's fine but the law doesn't need to take in account for common courtesy. I don't have to get out of my seat for an elderly or disable person but I do. Why? It's just common courtesy the same courtesy that I'd like when a mother is feeding her child. Why does it have to be an issue? I'm sure there's lots of things other people do that are perfectly legal that make you uncomfortable. Does that mean that you shouldn't be allowed to ask them to stop doing it or maybe find another way to accomplish it in which makes it more comfortable for you?

Honestly, the complete and utter lack of any courtesy to the people who find it uncomfortable from you is utterly ridiculous. You act as if you're being told to feed formula and hang your head in shame for you're disgusting acts.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leftards think everything is a human right, and that while a mother's and baby's needs must be acknowledged the concerns of others while in a public space don't need to be.

Awesome mentality, eh?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What the heck is the big deal?

Most covers of Cosmo show more boob than a breastfeeding mother.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone care to sum up this thread in one post for me?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll give it a crack here bud.

Should nursing mothers be allowed to nurse wherever they feel like it without covering up?

WHAT!? BOOBIEZZZZ!11! HELL YES BROZKI!

I believe it's terribly inappropriate and disrespectful to mankind for a woman to expose herself like this. She should go to a filthy bathroom stall like a civilized being.

I have no real problem with it, but a woman should know that she's going to get leered at. Why would she want to put herself in that position?

It's just a nipple guys. It's natural. Grop up.

I'm concerned with the state of humanity. Why aren't we all naked all the time.

This thread is a car wreck and I can't look away. People are ridiculous.

Why doesn't the lady just show a little courtesy and cover up a bit?

...to be continued, seemingly for the next several weeks.

EDIT: Tiger said it better, and faster.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds about right, what I got out of it was:

"women should be discreet"

"the law says they don't have to"

"well they should still be discreet"

"they don't have to"

"they still should"

"no they shouldn't"

"uh-huh"

"nu-uh"

...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.