Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-01-2011, 01:29 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,201,197 times
Reputation: 5240

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgain View Post
What's preventing you from smoking in your own house?

As for smoking in public, your right to smoke infringes on my right to breathe air not contaminated with cigarette smoke.

same goes for the greenhouse gases coming out of democrats and republicans pieholes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2011, 01:37 AM
 
573 posts, read 971,133 times
Reputation: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDC View Post
Why do you try to control everybody's personal decisions? I do not support people doing things that infringe on other people's rights to life, liberty and property. But if I want to smoke in my own house, why can't I? If I want to ride a motorcycle without a helmet, why can't I? If I want to go eat at McDonald's every day, why does that make you want to start burning effigies of Ronald McDonald in front of their headquarters?

I've just never understood the nanny-state mentality I suppose. I remember seeing a comment in the newspaper about how the CDC predicts all states will have indoor (for restaurants, etc) smoking bans in 20 years. The fascist said something to the effect of "Some people are too stupid for their own good." Hah, first off, plenty of intelligent people do this "stupid" thing, but secondly who the hell are you to decide what I can and cannot do?

I know there are some of you out there, so again I ask you to explain why you think you should be on this crusade to end all bad things.

As the late Bill Hicks said, "I'll smoke, I'll cough, I'll get the tumors, I'll die. Deal?" And that applies to pretty much anything the nanny-statists want to ban.

Because someday you might require healthcare for all the bad decisions you made in life (Smoking: cancer, Fast food: some food related illness such as diabetes or heart disease) and I don't want to pay for your bad decisions if I can prevent them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 01:40 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,201,197 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevebri View Post
Because someday you might require healthcare for all the bad decisions you made in life (Smoking: cancer, Fast food: some food related illness such as diabetes or heart disease) and I don't want to pay for your bad decisions if I can prevent them.

too bad, that is what the taxes are paid for into socialized security, medicaid and medicare. if the feds dont want to pay it, then stop stealing the money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 01:41 AM
 
6,137 posts, read 4,862,292 times
Reputation: 1517
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevebri View Post
Because someday you might require healthcare for all the bad decisions you made in life (Smoking: cancer, Fast food: some food related illness such as diabetes or heart disease) and I don't want to pay for your bad decisions if I can prevent them.
Yeah, exactly. That's another reason that taxpayer funded health care restricts us. Where does it end?

If you support UHC then it only stands to reason that you should support a ban of anything unhealthy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 01:43 AM
 
6,137 posts, read 4,862,292 times
Reputation: 1517
This is the problem. They want to force people on to government health care, then they use that as an excuse to control them further. It's pretty brilliant if you think about it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 01:46 AM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,201,197 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamBarrow View Post
This is the problem. They want to force people on to government health care, then they use that as an excuse to control them further. It's pretty brilliant if you think about it.

sorry, I for one will not be buying into any UC and neither will my family. as a result, we carry our medical and dental records with us when we go to the doctor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 02:27 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,916,363 times
Reputation: 4459
Quote:
Originally Posted by BruSan View Post
Well perhaps it's because a civilized society hasn't quite learned to simply ignore your lack of well being if you become ill through your indulgence.

it's one thing to say you should have the right but it's another when the pool of money known as tax-payer's funds are used to treat any illness or injury you might sustain through your exercising your 'rights'. We haven't gotten to that stage yet where we can say "George decided to ride his Harley without a helmet and sustained a brain injury so we don't have to treat him". While Charley fell off a scaffolding and broke his back but we will treat him because he was observing all OSHA requirements."
It's fine to EXPECT nanny state compassion when you NEED it but to also rail against that very nanny state that implements basic rules that seem to be needed because people have proven they cannot think and behave responsibly is sorta "wanting your cake and eating it too".
it was turned into a nanny state BY the government when the government implemented free mandatory ER treatment for everybody, regardless of reason.

perhaps the government is actually at fault here. if people who engaged in bad behavior were held responsible for their own bad decisions, it might alter behavior over time better than a nanny state which restricts everyone's freedom.

forced universal health care insurance is just another step in taking away freedom of choice for americans.

observe the world. countries fail economically when they lose their freedom, and that is a fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 02:36 AM
 
45,227 posts, read 26,450,499 times
Reputation: 24985
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevebri View Post
Because someday you might require healthcare for all the bad decisions you made in life (Smoking: cancer, Fast food: some food related illness such as diabetes or heart disease) and I don't want to pay for your bad decisions if I can prevent them.
You make a great case for people being responsible for their own healthcare.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 09:37 AM
 
573 posts, read 971,133 times
Reputation: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
You make a great case for people being responsible for their own healthcare.
I wouldn't have that big of a problem with it if so many in the healthcare industry were not there trying to get rich. One of the reasons we need health insurance is that by ourselves we cannot afford to pay for healthcare on our own. It doesn't stop there. When people with private health insurance via their jobs are getting priced out of the market, I think there is a big problem that universal health care is meant to correct.

I also don't consider it a freedom to allow someone to become addicted to cigarettes or consume food that is more harmful then nutritious.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2011, 09:47 AM
 
10,545 posts, read 13,587,085 times
Reputation: 2823
If we're going to say that we have to make laws because a poor decision might cost other people money through healthcare costs, and we're also going to say that people must buy health insurance, can we do the following?

Mandate that people invest a portion of their money into an investment account for retirement? When they make a poor decision not to, it costs everyone else money. In addition, we can now tell people they have to purchase insurance, why not mutual funds or bonds etc.?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:06 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top