As mentioned in this op-ed at the Richmond Times-Dispatch, the state wants yoga instructors to become “properly” certified. Why, because of the potential harm un-certified, un-qualified yoga instructors may cause to those attending the classes.
But shouldn’t those who decide to take a yoga class be educating themselves? Shouldn’t they understand what they are doing prior to taking a class?
And most importantly, as the writer points out,
“Face-to-face teaching is a form of free speech, as much a textbook or videotape is. Government needs a compelling state interest in order to regulate speech — and the bar that determines what qualifies as “compelling” is set very high. The commonwealth’s rationale for interfering with yoga-teacher instruction doesn’t clear it.”
Do we really want regulators deciding this? Why not the consumer (the yoga class attendee)?
Instead of, for a moment, thinking about what may be, think about what in fact is, if this were to stand: more costs to instructors, some of which could in fact postpone their genuine “certification” process entirely; does this not hurt the consumer?
In my view, the spirit of the pro-regulators is, in essence, a spirit of ease: that is, it’s the road that has less to do with individual accountability, responsibility, and choice, and more to do with blame, victimization, and a pseudo form of martyrdom.