Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | My Orble | Login
 
I am highly opinionated with a firm grip on the difference between right and wrong. I pay more attention to the candidates and the issues than to precise party lines. My facts are just that... FACTS- and my opinions are MY opinions- Regardless of what the subject, you can always find a good read on my blog, I write about various issues and not everything is focused on the subject of politics. I hope you enjoy!

Food Police

December 7th 2006 18:02
I recently had a disagreement with a reader who thought the smoking bans were acceptable. I pointed out to her that she might not like the new laws banning things when something she liked was banned. Well, it has come to pass, folks. In New York, where they banned smoking, they are now banning the use of trans fatty acids. Yep. Your Big Mac is on the way out. How do ya like them apples? Oh, sorry, they'll probably find something wrong with apples someday and prohibit the sale or consumption of them as well. Maybe it will be the pesticides used in growing them? Or the "flavor" of the fertilizer? Or the PETA people will come up with a complaint about picking fruit from trees. (After all, the trees might not like their fruits being torn away! And we can't have that, can we?) Funny isn't it, how when something someone else likes is taken away it doesn't bother us that much. But when it's something we like that is forbidden it's a whole 'nother story. I'm all for prohibiting the use of dangerous drugs. I don't think drinking and driving should be allowed. But for goodness sakes, cigarettes are LEGAL and still not permitted in public places (at the whim of the smoking police and the non-smokers). People who choose to smoke know the risks! As for the newest demon the "behavior police" are tackling, trans fatty acids, people who eat Big Macs and all those other tasty offenders, know what can happen to their arteries if they consume a steady diet of them. If they don't know by now, they aren't likely to learn it any time soon. Banning such foods goes well beyond the pervue of the government, just as banning cigarettes does. As long as the "sheeple" are going to sit back smugly and allow the rights of others to be trampled, it will continue. Wake up folks, before they take away your coffee and doughnuts next!

49
Vote

   

   

   

[ Link ]
Posted By: S.L. - Category: No Category
Related Posts:

Comments
38 Comments. [ Add A Comment ]

Comment by Anonymous

December 7th 2006 19:39
Great commentary, SL. When the government takes a heavy hand in everything, where will it stop? It seems to me that our rights are being stripped away, one by one.

--Steve Thompson

Comment by youranter

December 7th 2006 19:44


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
SL, you don't know the half of it. Here in the 'True North Strong and Free' the health police are bending over backwards to be idiots. They want to close down church suppers because the meals are pot-luck and do not come from a restaurant. They invaded a charity event where the women supplied egg salad sandwiches to raise funds. They poured bleach over the sandwiches so no one could eat them and imposed a fine on the charity for supplying food that didn't meet the 'proper requirements'. As to tobacco products, you can't adverrtise them at all it seems. A local cigar store has had to remove his sign advertising what his business is all about. No smoking is allowed in the premises, but now he can't even tell people what he sells. Another cigar shop has been put on notice to remove a wooden Indian from the front of the shop and flip over his floor rugs as they might entice someone to smoke. The people who put all this into play are laughing right now, but what goes around, comes around. Their turn is coming. I guess I just hate dictatorship.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 7th 2006 19:54
Thanks Steve and Youranter! It's nice to know I'm not alone! The smoking police and their heavy handed tactics have been a pain in many butts for a long time. Now, with the forbidding of trans-fatty acids in New York, we can all see where it's going. The new "dictatorship" of "behavior police" will be going after everything they think somebody else likes but doesn't "really need." Even Nevada had recently voted in a smoking ban on casinos. It's being challenged in Vegas, but I don't hold out much hope for common sense. So far they haven't shown me much to get excited over. I smoke and drink, but my diet is pretty low in fat and calories (on purpose for medical reasons). I have non-smoker friends who were smug about the tobbacco bans but are now in hysterics over the trans fatty acid regulations. If it weren't so sad, it would be almost funny.

Comment by Anonymous

December 7th 2006 21:42
"CSPI first urged the Food and Drug Administration to revoke its approval of partially hydrogenated oil in 2004. Leading epidemiological researchers estimate that use of partially hydrogenated oil kills roughly 50,000 Americans -- including about 1,500 New Yorkers -- each year."
-Consumer Affairs.com

Big Macs aren't going anywhere. The companies like McDonald's will just have to use healthier oils in their recipes.

"When Denmark banned trans fatty acids in processed food, McDonald's switched to a trans fat-free cooking oil at its stores in that country. However, it still uses the substance at its restaurants in the U.S."
-ConsumerAffairs.com

Obviously it's feasible. If you want to have a logical conversation, argument, whatever you call your biased and sheltered little comments...You should think about the fact that the prices will go up. But, seriously, that's it.

Comment by Brenton

December 7th 2006 22:27


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

Yeah... because everybody knows that second hand junk food harms innocent bystanders...

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 00:08
Hi Brenton! Second hand foods are most harmful when turned into gas!!

Comment by Devil's Advocate

December 8th 2006 03:31
While I understand your point re: government intrusion and tend to agree with it, as a non-smoker, I find cigarette smoke to not only smell bad, but makes me cough. I am not concerned with the health issues regarding secondhand smoke... as there isn't much on the planet that doesn't cause cancer, but rather my right to be comfortable. If someone else's choice to smoke is violating my choice not to, that's a problem. I believe you have a right to smoke. I just follow that up with a firm belief that I have a right not to... including smoking your vapourous seconds. Maybe someone should go back to the idea of perfecting smokeless cigarretes.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 03:39
Hello D.A. I agree that I have a right to smoke and you have a right not to. I make a point of not going where I can't smoke unless I have to. And those visits I make as brief as possible. You can choose to only go to non-smoking places (there are an abundance of them) and not to the few remaining ones where smoking is still allowed. Until smokeless cigarettes get invented, that seems to be the best choice, don't you think?

Comment by Devil's Advocate

December 8th 2006 04:00
Well the thing about legislation is that legislation serves the purpose of regulating people who are not as polite about their smoking choices as you. I'm not saying that they have it right. I'm just saying that I see both sides.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 04:09
Most of the smokers I know (and I know lots of them) are polite about their cigarettes. There are some places we can't even smoke outdoors or in our own homes, believe it or not. That's taking things way too far.

Comment by Devil's Advocate

December 8th 2006 04:36
Agreed. There is such a thing as too far. The problem most legislators have, in my opinion, is that they forget that the purpose of the Constitution was to limit the powers of government... not the powers of the people. Extraneous laws are necessary in order to keep the peace, but in my opinon, that should always take into account the main purpose of law rather than the belief systems or morality codes of the governmental elite or those padding the pockets of such people. Sadly, the legislation of morality/ wish lists is a bi-partisan problem, both the left and the right, equally guilty.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 04:50
No argument there. Entitlements are rampant and new rules and regulations crop up far too fast. If Jefferson and Washington could see some of the political highjinks going on now, they'd be amazed.

Comment by youranter

December 8th 2006 11:05


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
The smoking bans are just the tip of the iceberg. Watch what happens in the future. As for smoking in casinos, tell me about it. We've laid off 329 people here because the Americans don't (won't) come back anymore. My wife's brother was a dealer in Vegas and he told me the 2 casinos that banned smoking went bust. In Vegas? Think about it. As I stated in my first comment, the gov't will come after all and everything you do. Be afraid, people. Be very afraid.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 15:09
When they pass smoking bans, the voters are told that it won't harm businesses. When the bans go through, businesses go under. You'd think they'd see the connection, wouldn't you? The rapidly vanishing rights we enjoy are indeed scary, very scary.

Comment by youranter

December 8th 2006 16:23


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Our gov't hid from the public a survey it commissioned saying businesses would go under. How sorry is that?

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 16:26
Typically surveys only serve the ones who arranged for them When it doesn't work out their way and they can't spin it, they ignore or discount it. It's VERY sorry, but unfortunately not unusual.

Comment by youranter

December 8th 2006 16:42


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
They didn't spin this one. They knew what damage it would do them and hid it. www.mychoice.ca had to get it through the freedom of information act. That's how either scared they are or how powerful some of these lobbies can become. Our vets fought against dictatorship and yet that's exactly what's happening here. I hope it doesn't happen to you.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 17:52
Youranter, you're absolutely right. But it is happening here. Many years ago, the Calif. voters voted against having forced cable TV. It was passed into law less than a month later with plenty of excuses. Same with many of the bans we now deal with. I wonder if it's happening everywhere?

Comment by youranter

December 8th 2006 20:41


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Forced cable TV? I knew that California was full of fruit cakes but that's as bad as what we are facing here. They're going after people who get US TV stations on their satellite dishes here. I think if I pay for it, you don't have a right to tell me what to watch. It's only going to get worse.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 21:10
And worse, and worse, unfortunately. There must be a way to go back to the "good old days" when freedom meant freedom. Now the main right than we can enjoy is the one to "remain silent."

Comment by youranter

December 8th 2006 22:56


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
It's a result of liberal gov't trying to save us from ourselves. They opened the doors to frivilous lawsuits and now we pay the price. I once worked for a company that sent equipment to the far East. A sailor, instead of walking around, walked over an open hatch. He sued the co. he was working for, the shipbuilders and us because the cardboard covering broke when he stepped on it and he ended up with a broken leg. I still shake my head. As for DA, you can direct him to read my rants against the smoking laws. He seems intelligent enough. Maybe it will wake him up a bit further.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 23:17
Consider it done, Youranter. He didn't sound too reasonable a few days ago, but maybe it was just a bad day for him... Did you hear about the woman who bought a cup of coffee from MacDonalds and sued them when it was so hot it burned her? It makes about as much sense at the famous "Twinkie defense." If all the lawyers had to pay for losing their foolish lawsuits out of their own pockets, maybe they'd be sure the suit was worthwhile before launching it.

Comment by youranter

December 8th 2006 23:23


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Yeah, it was an 85 year old woman as I recall. The one that caught my fancy was the guy who claimed his pecker got squashed between the ring and bowl as he reached for some ticker tape. If I was hung like that my wife would be a happy woman. And some ambulance chaser actually took it to court. I don't know how it turned out, but it had me howling for days.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 8th 2006 23:25
Ouch! LOL!! How about the guy who got his pecker stuck in the hot tub valve? Some people have no shame! Or class!! I think he lost the suit... at least I hope so!!

Comment by Brenton

December 10th 2006 13:16


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

OH it's the LIBERALS fault! Now it makes sense.

Bah, I know in Austrlaia, smoking bans stop people smaking where they affect other people. If you're really as polite a smaker as EVERY aussie smoker puports, then you have nothing to fear.

It's a tough one too isn't it, over buisness? Should you protect buisness or human life? Goddamn hippie liberals wanthing to support human life. It's a conspiracy.

And farting, so far as I know, has never been linked to emphuseimia.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 10th 2006 13:27
Good Morning, Brenton. Control over the behavior of others (as long as it isn't criminal in nature) is a favorite cause of the liberals. Whether you believe it or not, it happens to be true. They have taken rights away that we have always had and invented rights that no one should have. The smoking bans are ridiculous to say the least. Cigarettes are LEGAL and should not be so extremely restricted. If you don't want to smell the smoke, don't be around it. We have plenty of non-smoking places in the US as I'm sure you have in Australia. But that's not good enough for the libs. They have to prevent people from smoking in their own homes to feel relevant. Meanwhile they enjoy spending all that tobbacco money they collect from the smokers. What would they do if everyone quit smoking and their cash cow wasn't giving them money-milk anymore?

Comment by youranter

December 10th 2006 13:56


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Brenton, go back through the comments posted here. I think you'll find that this smoking ban is a matter of dictatorship. Maybe it's not the Liberals/Democrats fault, but it is strange that this type of thing happens under their watch. We used to have designated smoking rooms, installed at no small expense to the bar or restaurant owner, but it wasn't good enough for the left wing tree huggers. They banned smoking completely and the economy is taking a hard hit. There are hospitals where, if you are sitting in your own car, windows rolled up, they'll nail you for smoking if you're on their property. I thought our vets fought against this type of thing.

Comment by Brenton

December 11th 2006 02:26


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

Your vets? Your war vetrans? Went to war to give you the right to affect people with your smoke? Well. Thank God that those men and civilians didn't die in vain...

Look; Do whatever the hell you want if it doesn't harm others. If smoking somehow doesn't affect others help, that good for you, go on the offensive.

I just find it ironic that you need to construct yourselves an enemy in the form of some mythical tree hugging left wing liberal hippies.

I have no sympathy for people whining that laws designed to protect others (I for one don't care if you kill yourself with fags) are inpacting on their drug addiction. Boo friggidy hoo.

No, if you're not over-reacting (as I suspect you are) and you actually ARE prohibited from smoking in your own home, then that's too far. But really, I've had too many smokers blowing their crap in my direction to feel any sympaty for you being pushed out of public areas.

Comment by youranter

December 11th 2006 10:53


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
No Brenton, the vets didn't go to war to give us the right to smoke. They went to war to keep our freedom of choice for us. Otherwise we might as well be speaking German. As for the tre-hugging libs, they are the ones who put this draconian law into effect. The cons at least gave us DSR's where my smoke wouldn't bother you unless for strange reason you decided to enter it. Read some of the other comments and see how far this is going. Detroying food at a charity function? Banning church suppers because the food is not from a restaurant? A wooden Indian is going to entice you to smoke? The shop you own deals strictly in tobacco products and you aren't even allowed to advertise? Give me a break.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 11th 2006 15:12
Right on the money, Youranter! As for you Brenton, in the San Francisco Bay area, it you live in an apartment you are not allowed to smoke indoors. It might bother your neighbors, they say. However, it seems it would bother them too, if you smoke ourdoors!

Comment by Brenton

December 12th 2006 10:31


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

Isn't their a fairly popular meme from Conservatives on this one, love it or leave it..?

When I guess it sucks for the drug addicts but yeah, if your addiction is affecting the health of people who choose not to use, then not happening.

If it's not affecting them, and you can prove it, then by all means you have my sympathies.

Comment by youranter

December 12th 2006 10:59


youranter
Opinions
opinionatedranter
Tales From The Green Lantern
Good night Brenton. Obviously your mind is so closed you're not worth debating.

Comment by Brenton

December 12th 2006 11:10


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

Good night youranter, sorry my disagreeing with you suggests a closed mind.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 12th 2006 14:50
Hello Brenton.Youranter was right about your closed mind. You can't even keep your own comments straight. Earlier in the comments, you said "that's too far" in referrence to people not being allowed to smoke in their own homes. Then you seemed to think it was acceptable in a later comment, scroll back and read them if you like. BTW, I heard about a new study that suggests that second hand smoke is not as harmful as the smoking nazis want us to believe. I'll write a blog about it as soon as I get more info.

Comment by Brenton

December 12th 2006 22:11


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

I'll admit to ambiguity there. I meant to suggest that if, as I've been saying all the time, smoking doesn't affect others in their own house, which I meant as an actual, family home, then it is taking things too far. I actually enjoy a drunken ciggarette, and wouldn't be happy if I wasn't permitted one with my mates, at heir, or my house.

In an apartment, I can see how, depending on the setup, you might me harming other residents. Now, if, as I have repeatedly said, is not the case, then yes, none of anyones buisness, who cares.

And I'm sure it's possible that second hand smoke isn't as harmful as thought. It's also possible that mercurary and stinging trees aren't as harmful as thought. Who cares; it it's still harmful, it's harmful. What difference?

And it's ironic how you'ree arguing your point with as stubborn a mind, and self rightious a view as I allegedly (and quite possibly) am, yet somehow I'm the only one with a closed mind?

Ach, the irony.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 12th 2006 22:26
Brenton, we have diametrically opposing views, true. But there is no real evidence that the average person is affected by second-hand smoke. Certainly not to the degree claimed by the non-smoking nazis. My grandson has a problem with any kind of smoke. My mother had a problem with it as well. So we kept and continue to keep our cigarettes away from those who are so sensitive. However, forcing people not to smoke outdoors or in their own home is ridiculous. Allergies are one thing, forcing your will on others while spending the money those others pay in taxes is completely WRONG. It's a matter of control, only, or cigarettes would have been made illegal and not taxed over the proverbial edge.

Comment by Brenton

December 13th 2006 02:17


Dr Spin
Tales From The Other Side
Blip Blog
Gadget Museum

Well, what I"ve seen scientiffically, seems to suggest otherwise, but like global warming, the hollocaust, AIDS, and the attempted genocide of Australian Aboriginals, the validity or otherwise of that isn't going to be porved one way or another to either sides satisfaction, so meh.

I say we leave it here, seems the poor conversations been done to death.

Comment by S.L.Bradish

December 13th 2006 02:53
And then some..... Come back sometime and discuss something else.

Add A Comment

To create a fully formatted comment please click here.


CLICK HERE TO LOGIN | CLICK HERE TO REGISTER

Name or Orble Tag
Home Page (optional)
Comments
Bold Italic Underline Strikethrough Separator Left Center Right Separator Quote Insert Link Insert Email
Notify me of replies
Notify extra people about this comment
Is this a private comment?
List the Email Addresses or Orble Tags of the people you would like to be notified about this comment


One per line max of 30

List the Email Addresses or Orble Tags of the people you would like to be notified about this private comment thread. Only the people in this list will be able to see or reply to your comment.


One per line max of 30

Your Name
(for the email going out to the above list, it can be different to your Orble Tag)
Your Email Address
(optional)
(required for reply notification)
Submit
More Posts
February 2010
4 Posts
January 2010
9 Posts
December 2009
14 Posts
Older Posts
2123 Posts dating from October 2006
Email Subscription
Receive e-mail notifications of new posts on this blog:
0
[ View Blog Summary ] [ Create A New Post ] [ Add A Comment ]
Moderated by S.L.
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]