You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
For the record, I'm not 100% for Obama's healthcare. I vote Democrat for other reasons, I've stated them in another thread.
I do think the gov't should have some form of massive pool a small bit of our taxes may pay for, but people without insurance would buy into. The healthcare should be a bare minimum, myb 1 dr appt a year, for a $50 co-pay, and a $500 or $1000 maximum. So if someone get a horrible disease, or a really bad accident (broken arm, broken back etc) they're not out $30,000 for a 2 night stay in the hospital. Medical expenses are the leading cause of bankruptcy for this reason. Again, it should be bare bones, no going to a shrink & getting zoloft for $2/bottle on this plan. Just something real generic. I know that isn't what Obama's plan is but we can't all have a President who we agree with on all issues, so I pick the one I choose is best of those remaining for the reasons I choose & feel are important.
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
PaSnow wrote:Randall Flagg wrote:Such policies are already going into affect by banning smoking and trans fat in foods.
This is one of the best laws my local government has ever imposed. I can't goto bars in the suburbs anymore, can't stand the smoke. Oddly enough, it didn't bother me as much before they passed the bill, but now that most places I visit can't allow smoking I'm 110% for it.
Randall Flagg wrote:Freedom means the ability to make choices on your own without permission from others.
Kinda like abortion.
Such bans are a violation of property owners rights. Just as I can't tell you what to permit and deny in your home, you shouldn't be able to tell me what I can allow or deny in my privately owned business. Tom's bar isn't a place you need to go or have a right to enjoy. If Tom wants to cater to smokers as his clientele, he should be able to. No one is forcing you to enter that establishment. Just because you don't like something doesn't give you the authority to outlaw it. I don't like rap music and find it offensive, should I be able to pass a law that bans rap from public businesses?
And on the abortion issue, that itself begs many questions. And to debate that would require many many hours of debate and the assumption you're read up on the numerous court cases that have dealt with it. I am pro-choice or better put, I support the abortion of unwanted children that would grow-up in poor homes and serve as a burden to society. But their is a fundamental problem with abortion that no one has been able to answer. All Americans have a right to life as defined by our laws. The question remains, when does one become a human being and thus an American protected by those laws. Or better articulated, when does a fetus become a baby. Any answer your provide me will be arbitray, so the only valid answer is really conception. You could of course go the opposite route and say when it's capable of thought and feeling, but that would mean 3-4 months after it is born and I don't know if your or the public would want to endorse infanticide. I agree that I have problems coming to my conclusion on this subject. But in the original Roe v. Wade, the standard for life was when the baby could survive outside the womb. With the increase in technology, that could soon be as soon as conception occurs.
Private businesses can't just serve or sell beer, they are regulated by the gov't & need a license. The same is being done with cigarettes, only there's no licenses. Anyway I love it, and don't like being bothered by other peoples smoke. The majority of residents agree, so it's a good representation of the government working for the people.
As for abortion, I agree with Joe Biden on this stance. I am Catholic, and pro-life personally (ie If I ever got a girl pregnant), however I don't cast judgement onto others. They have their own guilt, conscience, & maker to deal with, but not me.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
The reasons they are regulated is the same reason the FDA exists. To ensure that the services advertised are indeed the services provided. I can't advertise or allow you to assume that by eating in my restraunt that the food is quality and sanitary while I secretly keep rats in the back. These licenses also exist to make sure the merchant is compliant with state and federal laws.
I understand you like going to any establishment you choose and not being surrounded by smoke, but that doesn't make it right and not a violation of the property of others.
What if I didn't like a certain minority or or people of a certain persuasion. Could I just outlaw them from my business? Could I pass a law that banned all "undesireables" from a public establishment?
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
What if I didn't like a certain minority or or people of a certain persuasion. Could I just outlaw them from my business? Could I pass a law that banned all "undesireables" from a public establishment?
Minorities don't cause cancer, second hand smoke can.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
ahh, the old second hand smoke causes cancer routine. Here is an article I wrote on this in college that got picked up by alot of sources:
Simply put, second hand smoke causing cancer is bullshit and there is little to no science suggesting it does.
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
ahhh yes, the reliable, non-biased source of tobacco.org.. How did I not think to check there for reliable information. Anyway, I'll revise my post:
What if I didn't like a certain minority or or people of a certain persuasion. Could I just outlaw them from my business? Could I pass a law that banned all "undesireables" from a public establishment?
Minorities don't release toxic fumes & odors, second hand smoke does.
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
Minorities can cause cancer. They might have to work at it, but it can be done. I say we ban them all. Ban everybody for that matter because anybody can do something either intentionally or unintentionally that could result in your death.
I have spoken.
- Randall Flagg
- Rep: 139
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
ahhh yes, the reliable, non-biased source of tobacco.org.. How did I not think to check there for reliable information. Anyway, I'll revise my post:
Randall Flagg wrote:What if I didn't like a certain minority or or people of a certain persuasion. Could I just outlaw them from my business? Could I pass a law that banned all "undesireables" from a public establishment?
Minorities don't release toxic fumes & odors, second hand smoke does.
That wasn't your argument though. You said you didn't like 2nd hand smoke, so you were glad it was banned. I wrote that article, not tobacco.org. They were just one of many places that picked up my article and was the first I saw when I googled it. Don't let the facts get in the way though.
Re: Bush Asks Congress for $700 Billion Bailout
A. I didn't realize your article supercedes numerous studies... however if so, then
B. The judge threw out the fact that 3,000 people DIE annually from second hand smoke, he NEVER threw out the notion that second hand smoke may cause cancer or negative health side effects. Unless there's more in the article than what it shows (the full article link doesn't work anymore), by your logic: Because a judge threw out studies which showed 3,000 people die from cancer caused by second hand smoke, then therefore secondhand smoke doesn't cause cancer whatsoever. Pretzel logic. Plus your article states employees make a choice to work for the company, well no ones forcing smokers to goto bars, they make that choice, stay home if you want to smoke.
Anyway, I wasn't even for it when they passed it here. I thought it was kinda useless, however ever since it went into effect, I like it alot. 100% better, and the majority of residents do as well, so our local government worked for us. Don't knock it till you rock it is all I'm sayin.
