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.
This may be a shock, but not all of us liberals agree on these things. Bloomberg's soda cap wasn't even popular in New York City. You're looking for some kind of argument, but I can't sit here and defend things that I don't agree with.
This. Lumping all liberals together, and stating what they all think and believe, is not a good idea.
It's also not a good idea to lump all conservatives together. LOTS of free thinkers in this country who are capable of separating ideas and issues and deciding on their own where they stand. There are, however, extremists on both sides. Those are fairly predictable and they tend to be clannish.
Any "personal decision" that actually affects more than a single person is no longer exclusively personal.
Such is the foundation for all morality.
If your statement is an exaggeration of the butterfly effect - you are correct.
But a person who eats fast food does nothing to anyone else other than create demand for a fast food place to satisfy. A lifetime of fast food is a different story.
Cigarette use in a public place is a different issue - since smoke cannot be contained and it is objectionable (for health reasons) to people nearby.
A more important consideration from a policy perspective is whether or not regulations have their intended effect. We know that there is no data to show that gun laws in the US prevent homicides. A ban on Big Gulps in NYC would never have shown a reduction in obesity. It merely increases the government's intrusion into a business and into personal consumption.
that is the driving force behind many of our programs, the promise of increase of public good at the real cost of personal liberty. "im only thinking of you" from don quixote musical.
tyrants usually tell u they are doing it for your own good.
I don't really think this needs to be controlled by government, as far as the supersized sodas and whatnot. Instead of a supersized cup, I'll just drink three medium cups. Nothing is fixed. That's dumb.
However, I see no problem with requiring food producers to label their foods with exactly what is in them, and pertinent health info. You cannot proclaim that everyone should be responsible for themselves, needs to educate themselves, then rail against the very thing that would educate them. Many people have no idea that letting your two-year-old polish off a family size bag of Cheetos is not good. The two-year-old doesn't know any different, and can't make decisions.
I guess by "wear", you mean helmets? Or do you mean having their jeans at their knees? As far as helmets, having an accident with or without a helmet could place undue requirements on the people who would have to scrape you off the highway. It's not just a personal thing. And as for children wearing helmets, I'm a little torn on this. This goes back to not everyone being educated enough.
• what you can and can't do with your own property,
"Your own property" is an imaginary line drawn out in some documents. There is no physical barrier between your property and someone else's. And what you do on your property can severely depress someone else's value. So, no, I see no problem with their being governmental property requirements.
Case in point: there was a guy in Memphis named Prince Mongo. As you might imagine, he was a strange creature. He made it a point to be as obnoxious as he could be to those around him. His front yard, in a nice, quiet neighborhood, became filled with headless dolls, all sorts of spinny things, toilets, coffins hanging from trees, etc. Fairly minor stuff, but this could cause his neighbor to not be able to sell his house.
Now, should you be able to move into an upscale neighborhood then run your garbage-sifting business out of your front yard? Sorry, no.
• what you can and can't say in public,
Unfortunately, many people need this restriction, but that's my opinion. If you want to stand on a corner with a sign that rails against gay marriage, whatever. But if you're our on a street corner in front of a toy store yelling an endless stream of profanities at all the families who walk by, I have no problem with you being stopped.
• where your kids go to school,
You can choose for your kids to go to another school. It's called private school. And for many public schools, they have lotteries for open spaces in schools outside your zone. But, having a free-for-all public school system would be a nightmare.
• what you drive, How much mileage your car has to get.
You can drive whatever you want, as long as that vehicle meets emissions guidelines. Your emissions affect other people. So sorry, you should not be allowed to do whatever you want here. Go spend a day in downtown Manila and tell me that it doesn't matter. As for mileage, burning a lot of gas usually means more pollution. Again, this affects others.
• how high you can set your thermostat. When you can run your dishwasher. What kind of light bulbs you can buy.
Government supplies much of the power and water systems in this country, which I'm okay with. And power and clean water isn't boundless. There is a supply. And you can't just flick a switch and meet immediate demand with new supply. It takes years and millions or billions of dollars. So sometimes use needs to be restricted. During a drought, watering your 5-acre lawn might not be possible, as you are using an inordinate amount of water that is needed by the community as a whole. Sorry.
Because what you do is not necessarily in a vacuum, as much as you might want to believe it is. Some things, as mentioned above, are dumb. Some things, while you might think they mean nothing or that others should just look the other way, actually do affect other people. You don't get to choose in this situation, or you can choose but might have consequences. Sometimes it has nothing to do with telling you how to live your life by your own rules, but telling you how to work within the society as a whole.
Abortion is obviously a touchy subject. Some people don't want it at all, some people are fine with it the day before birth. I've even seen someone advocate for doing it after birth. I don't believe in late-term abortion, or even anything after 12 weeks. At some point, it needs to be decided if you are stopping a lump of cells, or if it's a human. But, that will never, ever be agreed upon by anyone.
You did a great job of explaining it step by step. I won't even bother. Just ditto.
The people who post here aren't the know-nothings. I'm interested in why intelligent people are okay with giving the government control over some proposed, current or former individual decisions. It's not just healthcare. But things like what you and your kids can eat, drink or wear, what you can and can't do with your own property, what you can and can't say in public, where your kids go to school, what you drive, what your kids wear when they ride their bikes, etc. Are you afraid of making mistakes with your life and your children's lives so you don't want the responsibility of making the decisions? It's easier if the government does it for you? Do you need rules/laws in order to figure out how to function? Or is it that you are uncomfortable when everyone in society isn't exactly alike in what they say or do? You want everyone to be the same so you don't feel like an oddball?
For example, I'm trying to figure out the logic that goes with a woman has a right to say or do what she wants with her body unless it involves having a supersized drink, eating trans fats. or not wearing a helmet when she rides her motorcycle. I'm not saying she can't come to the same conclusions, only asking why she's okay with someone telling her she can't do those things if she's okay with making her own decision on abortion. Telling your kids what you have to put in their brown bag lunch from home or how high you can set your thermostat. When you can run your dishwasher. How much mileage your car has to get. What kind of light bulbs you can buy. Etc...I don't get why you just go along with it all even if you would do those things on your own.
I guess you're OK with outhouses that drain into the water table that other people drink from.
OK with chopping down aquatic plants that filter and clean lake water, so you can have a sandy beach, but resulting in toxic algal blooms that destroy lakes.
OK with overwatering your lawn during times of drought, when water is scarce and on the verge of running out.
OK with cars that pollute, leading to increased smog and many more asthma deaths.
OK with not wearing seatbelts or helmets, leading to traumatic injuries and a huge strain on the medical system.
OK with parents feeding kids crap, so they grow into morbidly obese adults with diabetes.
OK with just wasting resources, because by God, you deserve to, despite the fact that the US has 5% of the global population, yet consumes 25% of available resources.
What you really want is a free-for-all. An attitude of "Scr**w you! I'll do whatever the hell I want!"
Regardless of how it affects your neighbours, your environment and your community.
Last edited by weltschmerz; 11-24-2013 at 10:39 AM..
I don't think there is any way to answer that question, as you are asking why government is allowed to pass legislation. All legislation will affect someone. That's why we vote. There is the rule of law or there is anarchy. Are you in favor of anarchy? If not, where would you draw the line on which laws are allowed and who is allowed to be affected? There are lots of laws I do not like--I believe marijuana should be legalized, I believe many traffic laws are ridiculous, I believe the US should have a single-payer health insurance system and I don't believe parents should be allowed to abuse their children or let them die due to religious beliefs.
Sorry, but these black and white questions assume there is an answer to issues that are extremely subtle and complex. I suggest if you do not like a law or the way it affects you, that you work within the system to change it. If enough people agree, you may succeed. If you are in the minority, then you will have to accept it. Most people would rather not make the effort, as it involves getting involved, activism and work, and it is so much easier to complain online.
In short because they feel that "P" Obama is their daddy, the 1st lady their mom and Harry Reid their closest Uncle and that they know what's good and can do no wrong by/for them.
For example, I'm trying to figure out the logic that goes with a woman has a right to say or do what she wants with her body unless it involves having a supersized drink, eating trans fats. or not wearing a helmet when she rides her motorcycle. I'm not saying she can't come to the same conclusions, only asking why she's okay with someone telling her she can't do those things if she's okay with making her own decision on abortion.
Abortion is good. I am not pro-choice, I am pro-abortion. Abortion is good.
The people who post here aren't the know-nothings. I'm interested in why intelligent people are okay with giving the government control over some proposed, current or former individual decisions. It's not just healthcare. But things like what you and your kids can eat, drink or wear, what you can and can't do with your own property, what ou ycan and can't say in public, where your kids go to school, what you drive, what your kids wear when they ride their bikes, etc. Are you afraid of making mistakes with your life and your children's lives so you don't want the responsibility of making the decisions? It's easier if the government does it for you? Do you need rules/laws in order to figure out how to function? Or is it that you are uncomfortable when everyone in society isn't exactly alike in what they say or do? You want everyone to be the same so you don't feel like an oddball?
For example, I'm trying to figure out the logic that goes with a woman has a right to say or do what she wants with her body unless it involves having a supersized drink, eating trans fats. or not wearing a helmet when she rides her motorcycle. I'm not saying she can't come to the same conclusions, only asking why she's okay with someone telling her she can't do those things if she's okay with making her own decision on abortion. Telling your kids what you have to put in their brown bag lunch from home or how high you can set your thermostat. When you can run your dishwasher. How much mileage your car has to get. What kind of light bulbs you can buy. Etc...I don't get why you just go along with it all even if you would do those things on your own.
Who is this elusive *you* to whom you refer? Do you imagine that *all* liberals march lock step, en masse, to approve of the soda ban? The trans fat ban? Helmet laws?
Of course, most of us DO believe that living in a civilized society requires laws. What do 'you people' feel about that?
Would *you* just love a big ole' free-for-all? Do your own thang? No rules? No laws?
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.
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.
Libs, Why Are You Okay With The Government Making Personal Decisions For You?
