MP or not MP - that is the question

[Gilrandir]

Having watched the latest parliamentary elections in Ukraine (as well as - rather cursorily - suchlike procedures in other countries) I can't help expressing some thoughts connected with them.
1. If you want to have a tooth filled you go to a dentist, if you want to buy tasty pastry you go to the baker's, if you want to learn a foreign language you go to a teacher, if you have problems with your plumbery you invite a plumber, if you want to be entertained you go to the movies to watch actors doing it. You would never think of calling a plumber to have your bad tooth extracted, visiting a dentist to buy some buns from him or going to an actress to teach you French (if you really mean to study).
The parliament is a legislative body, so its job is to create laws. Why on earth do we elect dentists, teachers, journalists, soldiers, actors to create laws? What education or experience do they have to do that?
Conclusion 1: only lawyers must be allowed to run for the parliament.
2. Can you imagine, say, FIFA holding sessions all the year round and adopting new football rules all the time (changing the pitch size, ball diameter, goalheight, match duration and so on)? Rules can't be constantly changed.
Laws are rules according to which a state lives. How can they be constantly shifting, updating and vacillating and people who are in charge of them inventing reasons to get money for it? Once adopted they must hold for at least ten years or more (like American constitution with minor chages is 200 years old) and not provide those eager for easy money with a temptation to try and get it.
Conclusion 2: parliaments must be at work, say, three months a year (April, October, December) and MPs get their salaries accordingly.