A Stitch in Haste

Tim Sandefur asks whether a libertarian can in good conscience, without being a hypocrite, oppose a controversial new pastime: remote-controlled big game hunting.

Good question, although I think the answer can fit fairly easily within my general “animal cruelty generates negative externalities that can rise to such a level as to warrant proscription” paradigm. (Compare and contrast, Wisconsin’s now-vetoed “Kitty Kitty Bang Bang” bill.)

I, on the other hand, have my own “libertarian versus central planner” conundrum: Can we please figure out a way, consistent with libertarian principles, to ban breastfeeding in public?

A city commission candidate was criticized for breast-feeding her daughter during a public meeting, so 16 other mothers turned up and nursed their children at another gathering as a show of support.

Gabrielle Redfern apologized for offending anyone, but says she won't stop breast-feeding her child when necessary. She had been criticized by some for breast-feeding her 1-year-old daughter, Elsie, during Mayor David Dermer's recent State of the City address.

"Elsie's been coming to public meetings since she was 2 weeks old," said Redfern, who is in her first bid for public office. "I shouldn't have to choose between being a publicly involved citizen and being a good mother."
...
"I think it's a beautiful and natural thing [SIC!], but there's a time and a place for it," said Joe Fontana, who regularly attends community meetings. "It's distracting. Why inside? Why not step outside to do it?"

Exactly. “Beautiful” is an entirely subjective term -- I, unsurprisingly, find absolutely nothing beautiful about the female breast, especially when a hungry infant’s maw is attached to it. And “natural” is irrelevant – all bodily functions are “natural” -- and most are (rightly) banned in public.

Why shouldn’t Redfern "have to choose between being a publicly involved citizen and being a good mother”? Parents make those sort of choices all the time. Kids are expensive, not only in terms of money, but also in terms of time and options, especially while in public.

And since when does being a “good mother” require performing the “goodness” in public? A good mother changes her baby’s diaper in a private setting. A good mother leaves her sick kid at home rather than sending him to day care to infect all the other children. A good mother in the private sector leaves her kid home, period. Plenty of good mothers use bottles, even for breast milk. Why does this woman, or these 16 women, get to impose their vision of “good mothering” on the public, most of whom probably would prefer that these “good mothers” engage in their “good mothering” somewhere else?

So, open thread: Can a libertarian support a ban on public breastfeeding?

(To clarify, the city in question has a law expressly granting women the right to breastfeed pretty much anywhere. I’m asking the reverse hypothetical: does a jurisdiction have the right to ban breastfeeding in public for no other reason than because a sufficient number of legislators, or voters, consider it “icky”?)

NOTE: The side issue of women using their babies as props for political stunts is, um, a side issue. Related post here.