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.
Kind of like New York's soda ban never happened? Kind of like that?
Amd yet, the right bandies this particular meme about constantly. It's even in the OP.
If I'm not mistaken the NY soda ban DID happen, but was later tossed by the courts.
Anyway good job in deflecting from the point that there are lots of sex police on the left. A+ for your deflection skills.
How can the government telling you what Dr. I can use not be an infringement on my rights? That has no effect on the collective. Since we all breath the same air can everything that pollutes be outlawed? Can the government stop me from heating my home? If not then how can they tell me what light bulb I can use?
Building a low income housing project next door(essentially "pissing" on your house ) is what liberals would (and have) done.
Should you have the right to burn tires on your lawn? Should you have the right to play white noise at the level of a jet engine on your property? I'm just trying to point out that there is a line somewhere between the rights of an individual and the rights of the "collective" to usey our terminology.
Quite an interesting point out of nowhere from you. Do you think that my right to develop low-income housing should be trumped by your rights as a neighbor? I'd like to hear from your supposed "conservative" mouth how much control the government should have over free enterprise.
You're bothered that safety precautions are mandated Why? Have you or anyone you have ever known ever puposely purchased an ingredient called "Trans Fat" in a can to add to your recipes? Why would something that large corporations add to food that saves them money but hurts the consumer be a beneficial idea to you? Maybe the government should not have banned DDT. Whether you are aware of it or not, It is research and the people that lobby government that initiates most ban son dangerous or unhealthy products or practices. How else would protections be put in place if not for government bans or laws? Are you naive enough to believe that large corporations should be on the honor system concerning hazardous products? Maybe in China, but who the hell would want to walk around wearing a mask for fear of breathing in pollutants? Are you not aware of the toxicity of so much of the crap that is manufactured there? In case you have not noticed, we are in need of energy conservation due to the impact of the amount of people on the planet compared to resources and the impact that over-consumption has upon the eco-systems. If everybody thought as you do and nothing was addressed and legislated, we'd be up the creek without a paddle. Thankfully, there are activists out there that are doing the research and work that intelligent people are grateful for!
I support much of what the EPA is intended to do. Reducing pollution is a legitimate interest of the society and the government is uniquely positioned to make a difference.
Quote:
As for the soda cup size issue...it was a non-issue and it had zero to do with how much soda a person could consume...IT WAS CUP SIZE!
Since it wouldn't reduce consumption, what was the point of passing a law?
Quote:
BTW..If you were driving and hit a guy on a motorcycle and his brains spilled on the street because he had no helmet on, you'd start to kinda wish that he was wearing one.
Call me insensitive and I might be disgusted, but I would not think anything more than "he should have worn a helmet. how stupid of him."
I want to see the government back off trying to protect people from their own bad behavior.
If people get fat and sick - they should pay more for health insurance. Same if they smoke.
If you borrow $100K to get a college degree in the field of your dreams, but there are no jobs, you still have to repay that loan. Even if you work at Starbucks.
Because the conservative opposition to same-sex marriage is ALL about the individual, eh?
Because the conservative willingness to give corporations carte blanche is ALL about the individual, eh?
WHAT a load of self-serving self-Righteous hooey.
Spoken as a true liberal (which means that your premise is confused and ill-founded).
1. Gays can do whatever the hell they want- I don't care.
2. Calling gay people's unions "weddings" and "marriages" affronts several thousand years of culture. I do not oppose the rights or all that is associated with those rights, just the term.
3. A wedding and marriage is not only a legal event, it is a religious event. If one universally accepts "gay marriage", you are infringing on the rights of the individuals who do not accept that terminology, due to religious convictions.
4. My position on "gay marriage" respects the rights and priveledge of both interests.
Corporations? WTF are you talking about?
1. I believe that private enterprise (particularly small business) is the driving force for economic prosperity in the US.
2. Providing AN ENVIRONMENT for business to prosper benefits us all.
3. When the interests of large business subverts the rights of the individual, I side completely with the individual.
This is why I-
a. opposed NAFTA
b. opposed China most favored nation trade status
c. support national right to work laws
d. support SOME of the EPA measures which oppose pollution and protect the environment
e. oppose the Trial Lawyer's Association, which has created an oligarchy in the US
f. support collective bargaining
You are an enemy of the people. I support the rights of the people, which are constantly threatened by government, seeking more and more power.
How can the government telling you what Dr. I can use not be an infringement on my rights? That has no effect on the collective. Since we all breath the same air can everything that pollutes be outlawed? Can the government stop me from heating my home? If not then how can they tell me what light bulb I can use?
Unless you are on Medicare or Medicaid - the government is NOT telling you which doctor to see.
Unless you are on Medicare or Medicaid - the government is NOT telling you which doctor to see.
Period.
Is that "Period" as in, "If you like your doctor you can keep him. Period?"
Funny, I've been on Medicare for going on six years and the gubmint has never assigned me a doctor. I must have missed that letter. In fact, I have the same doctor now that I chose before I was on Medicare. My wife just went on Medicare and she has that same doctor as well. We must have misplaced her letter from the gubmint too but our doctor still sees both of us as well as several specialists we've chosen. Strange!
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.
