Why Progressives Are So Dangerous to your Health And Freedom

[rikules]

NY City's Emperor Bloomberg, the man who scoffed at the law that limited him to serving only 2 terms as Mayor, thinks its time to continue his Progressive Jihad against smokers and now wants to ban smoking in Times Square and at City Beaches.

It's for your own good, ya know.

Mayor Bloomberg announces legislation that would ban smoking in Times Square, city parks and beaches - NYPOST.com

The Progressives Obama Administration wants to control the appliances you can buy. Why? Because, it's for your own good.

A little known fact of the American Revolution is that Our Founding Fathers fought the British to have a central government that would control the type of wood, nails, and drapes you could have in your house, the proper flow rate of water drawn from a well, what type of shoes your horses could wear, and how far a horse could go between meals.

EDITORIAL: The left's war on home appliances - Washington Times

The appliance will be used to cook government approved healthy meals.

Obama Wants You to Count Your Calories - Spending - Budgeting - SmartMoney.com

It's for your own good, ya know.

the sky is falling! the sky is falling!


shrieks the shrill voice of conservative lunatics



the left wants to BAN smokers from smoking in public...NOT ban tobacco or criminalize smoking

where-as conservatives want to arrest pot smokers and destroy their lives


the left doesn't want to deny YOU the freedom to smoke tobacco or the freedom to use small appliances..


they just want these things done more safely so that they aren't a health problem for OTHER people..

(yes...I know...you don't care how many people you kill just as long as YOU get to smoke tobacco anywhere you want to)


you moronicons run around shrilling shrieking about "our freedoms are being taken away" but in reality you aren't losing any freedoms at all


smoking in public places is NOT a freedom
it's a priviledge....or was...

and now you no longer have the priviledge of forcing other people to breathe in your tobacco smoke.....

but you can still smoke....so...you haven't lost anything....


cons meanwhile want to deny people the priviledge/freedom of;
gays marrying
smoking pot
having sex out side of marriage
getting divorced

some cons still believe homosexuality should be a crime

some cons believe that atheists aren't citizens and shouldn't have rights....

some cons believe that only christians are fit to serve in office, the military, public schools

so would PUNISH non-christians by denying them the RIGHTS that only christians would have....

come back when some liberals actually deny YOU a REAL right

 

[rikules]

Funny how the anti-cigarette crowd loves pot.

The smoke from that is the OK kind, don't ya know.

it takes a very stupid person to think that banning PUBLIC SMOKING of tobacco ( but NOT BANNING TOBACCO) is the same thing as waging war on pot smokers and destroying their lives


every American should have the right to choose for his/her self to smoke tobacco or pot...

THAT is freedom....

but denying people the right to smoke in public is NOT a loss of freedom or the loss of a right...

you can still smoke tobacco legally

 

[mnbasketball]

» BIG NEWS: Federal Court Halts Shocking Property Rights Abuse - Big Government

This what people can do if they are allowed to go unchecked, all in the name of progress.

 

[Jarhead]

» BIG NEWS: Federal Court Halts Shocking Property Rights Abuse - Big Government

This what people can do if they are allowed to go unchecked, all in the name of progress.

Yes. Eminant domain is something that needs to be revisited.
It is way too vague and gives way to much power to local state and federal governments.

 

[DaGoose]

Bottom line........

If you believe that the government should ban abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, prostitution and/or marijuana then you believe in a government that should control the private lives and decisions of its citizens.

.

Without your spin:

Abortion-there is a debate as to whether or not it is murder...and until that debate ends, you can not consider it a breach in private life decisions...unless, of course, you feel that allowing murder is allowing private life freedom. ( I do not believe it is murder, but I understand why those that do are against it)

Euthansasia- Same debate as above. I am pro euthanasia.

Gay Marriage- I believe the debate is waning and all, or most will see uit as it should be seen. Marriage is for all regardless of sexual orientation. But that is why we have debate and why debate is important.

Prostitution-Not sure myself as to why this is illegal.....but I respect those that are against it due to their religious convictions. But religious convictions should not dictate law. If your religion does not allow for prostitution, dont engage in it.

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Abortion-there is a debate as to whether or not it is murder...and until that debate ends, you can not consider it a breach in private life decisions...unless, of course, you feel that allowing murder is allowing private life freedom. ( I do not believe it is murder, but I understand why those that do are against it)

Nope. This cuts right to the very heart of government interference. Unless you're the woman, her doctor or God you and the government has absolutely NO say over her decision. PERIOD.

Euthansasia- Same debate as above. I am pro euthanasia.

Good for you.

Gay Marriage- I believe the debate is waning and all, or most will see uit as it should be seen. Marriage is for all regardless of sexual orientation. But that is why we have debate and why debate is important.

But the "debate" is over whether government should interfere in the private lives of people. But I applaud your stance.

Prostitution-Not sure myself as to why this is illegal.....but I respect those that are against it due to their religious convictions. But religious convictions should not dictate law. If your religion does not allow for prostitution, dont engage in it.

Agreed. 100%

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Only because the government DEEMED it a "controlled substance". It is no more harmful than alcohol and we saw what happened with prohibition, didn't we?

.

 

[Jarhead]

Bottom line........

If you believe that the government should ban abortion, gay marriage, euthanasia, prostitution and/or marijuana then you believe in a government that should control the private lives and decisions of its citizens.

.

Without your spin:

Abortion-there is a debate as to whether or not it is murder...and until that debate ends, you can not consider it a breach in private life decisions...unless, of course, you feel that allowing murder is allowing private life freedom. ( I do not believe it is murder, but I understand why those that do are against it)

Euthansasia- Same debate as above. I am pro euthanasia.

Gay Marriage- I believe the debate is waning and all, or most will see uit as it should be seen. Marriage is for all regardless of sexual orientation. But that is why we have debate and why debate is important.

Prostitution-Not sure myself as to why this is illegal.....but I respect those that are against it due to their religious convictions. But religious convictions should not dictate law. If your religion does not allow for prostitution, dont engage in it.

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Nope. This cuts right to the very heart of government interference. Unless you're the woman, her doctor or God you and the government has absolutely NO say over her decision. PERIOD.



Good for you.



But the "debate" is over whether government should interfere in the private lives of people. But I applaud your stance.

Prostitution-Not sure myself as to why this is illegal.....but I respect those that are against it due to their religious convictions. But religious convictions should not dictate law. If your religion does not allow for prostitution, dont engage in it.

Agreed. 100%

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Only because the government DEEMED it a "controlled substance". It is no more harmful than alcohol and we saw what happened with prohibition, didn't we?

.

reagrding the abortion point..

You ignored the important part of it.....the debate is whether or not is is murder....not whether or not a woman has the right to do with HER body as she and her doctor sees appropriate.
Many people believe it is murder.
Let me ask you this.....in the case of siamese twins...does one twin have the right to kill the other seeing as the other uses the heart that is squarely in the chest of the first?

I dont personally believe in abortion (with the exception of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the carrying mother) but I will always vote for it as I do not see it as murder and it is not my place to vote against the right for the woman to decide.. But many do see it as murder and I respect their position.

It is still a valid debate.

 

[DaGoose]

Without your spin:

Abortion-there is a debate as to whether or not it is murder...and until that debate ends, you can not consider it a breach in private life decisions...unless, of course, you feel that allowing murder is allowing private life freedom. ( I do not believe it is murder, but I understand why those that do are against it)

Euthansasia- Same debate as above. I am pro euthanasia.

Gay Marriage- I believe the debate is waning and all, or most will see uit as it should be seen. Marriage is for all regardless of sexual orientation. But that is why we have debate and why debate is important.

Prostitution-Not sure myself as to why this is illegal.....but I respect those that are against it due to their religious convictions. But religious convictions should not dictate law. If your religion does not allow for prostitution, dont engage in it.

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Nope. This cuts right to the very heart of government interference. Unless you're the woman, her doctor or God you and the government has absolutely NO say over her decision. PERIOD.



Good for you.



But the "debate" is over whether government should interfere in the private lives of people. But I applaud your stance.



Agreed. 100%

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Only because the government DEEMED it a "controlled substance". It is no more harmful than alcohol and we saw what happened with prohibition, didn't we?

.

reagrding the abortion point..

You ignored the important part of it.....the debate is whether or not is is murder....not whether or not a woman has the right to do with HER body as she and her doctor sees appropriate.
Many people believe it is murder.
Let me ask you this.....in the case of siamese twins...does one twin have the right to kill the other seeing as the other uses the heart that is squarely in the chest of the first?

I dont personally believe in abortion (with the exception of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the carrying mother) but I will always vote for it as I do not see it as murder and it is not my place to vote against the right for the woman to decide.. But many do see it as murder and I respect their position.

It is still a valid debate.

Siamese twins? Boy, you're really going out on a limb here aren't you?

It IS a valid debate but it will never be settled to everyone's satisfaction. NEVER.

So it still boils down to it being a decision between a woman and her doctor. And if she has to answer to God, so be it. Once again, THAT is between her and God, not you, me or the government.

I do find it interesting that, at least in every translation I read, the Bible never once mentions the word abortion.


.

 

[Jarhead]

Nope. This cuts right to the very heart of government interference. Unless you're the woman, her doctor or God you and the government has absolutely NO say over her decision. PERIOD.



Good for you.



But the "debate" is over whether government should interfere in the private lives of people. But I applaud your stance.



Agreed. 100%



Only because the government DEEMED it a "controlled substance". It is no more harmful than alcohol and we saw what happened with prohibition, didn't we?

.

reagrding the abortion point..

You ignored the important part of it.....the debate is whether or not is is murder....not whether or not a woman has the right to do with HER body as she and her doctor sees appropriate.
Many people believe it is murder.
Let me ask you this.....in the case of siamese twins...does one twin have the right to kill the other seeing as the other uses the heart that is squarely in the chest of the first?

I dont personally believe in abortion (with the exception of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the carrying mother) but I will always vote for it as I do not see it as murder and it is not my place to vote against the right for the woman to decide.. But many do see it as murder and I respect their position.

It is still a valid debate.

Siamese twins? Boy, you're really going out on a limb here aren't you?

It IS a valid debate but it will never be settled to everyone's satisfaction. NEVER.

So it still boils down to it being a decision between a woman and her doctor. And if she has to answer to God, so be it. Once again, THAT is between her and God, not you, me or the government.

I do find it interesting that, at least in every translation I read, the Bible never once mentions the word abortion.


.

it may be seen as going out on a limb with the siamese twins example...
But the comparison is eerily similar and should not be ignored.

Would you consider it murder if the life of the first is not in jeopardy but he opts to have a doctor surgically remove the second seeing as the second is having a negaitve afect on his lifestyle and is sharing the heart and other viotal organs that is squarely in the body cavity of the first....and thus it is the first's body that it is attached to AND LIVING OFF OF.

It is a valid question and if you think about it....a fetus (or baby) is pretty much the exact same thing to a mother carrying it...it is liiving off of the mother.

Me? I dont have an answer...but I am curious what you would consider it if you heard that one actually did it....to accommodate lifestyle...not health.

 

[The Gadfly]

Smoking in the open air outdoors impacts the health of non-smokers? That's a pretty big stretch. I tell you what, how about, I suggest the government ban some habit of yours I happen to dislike?

How about, since we all know of its deleterious effects on the whole of society, we ban the consumption of alcohol (yes, I know we tried that once, and it didn't work, but humor me for a moment). I am willing to bet that more people are killed every year from the effects of other people's consumption of alcohol, than by second-hand tobacco smoke, indoors or out. Alcohol induced murders, drunk driving, drunk boating, accidents caused by impaired workers (some people do drink on the job), and so on. Sounds like reason enough to ban it, what with the increased medical cost attributable directly to alcohol consumption, higher insurance premiums, etc.etc. etc.. Let's do it, by government fiat; NO MORE BOOZE!

Happy? I doubt some of you progressives are, actually. By your logic the government should make sure we all eat the right amount of everything, all exercise enough, and don't use any unapproved substance; after all, each and every one of those things can be said to have a financial impact on everyone else, and on the individual, and/or be detrimental to the health of others. So, tomorrow, we're going to close down all the fast food restaurants, clean all those unhealthy products off the grocery store shelves; after all, if the rest of us aren't smart enough to make the correct choices, then neither are you, and so,for the financial well being and health of us all, I'll give up my freedom to eat what I want, PROVIDED you do exactly the same; won't be anything to argue about, that way. Let's try that for a while; no more booze, no mere burgers and fries, no mere streaks, just salad, tofu and bean sprouts for all! Oh, and I forgot to mention, 1 hour of PT, every day. Hit the deck and give me fifty! It's the law, now. Move it, move it, it's for your own good, idiots; see how much healthier you feel now? Feeling winded? I'm not, and I used to smoke (before YOU outlawed my habit), but hey, I run three miles a day; have for years. You can't do fifty pushups? I still can, and I'm past sixty-five! Come on, pick those feet up; I'm gonna run you til you puke; it's the law! It's all for the public good, not to mention your own!

Like that? No? Why not? I have as much right to demand you do that, as you have to demand I not smoke outdoors, but regulating things is not so much fun, when YOU are on the receiving end, now is it?. Oh, by the way, to make up for the increased cost of MY health insurance (thanks to lard-asses like you), I demand a tax on overweight people; I mean, if I can control my urge to smoke, then YOU can control your urge to eat. Now put down that burger and fries, and pour out that beer, or I'm calling the health police; the same ones you want to sic on me!

 

[BlindBoo]

If any ConJob who is a member of this board, bitches about Health Care but remain on MediCare, then I have news for you. You are part of U.S. Government Funded, Tax Payer Supported Universal Health Care Plan.

IF and this is a very big IF you are so damn opposed to such health care, then put your fucking health care where your fucking mouth is and drop MediCare.

If you do not, your a hypocrite.

What fucking business is it of Government's anyway? What RIGHT do they have to mandate people have a plan -or else-?

Healthcare is a personal responsibility-PERIOD.

The business is that your smoke is affecting other people. You are free to smoke in your own private space. Smoking in public space used by others can be controlled

Personally I think smoke from the coal fired power plants affect non smokers health more than second hand cigarette smoke outdoors.

 

[BlindBoo]

Without your spin:

Abortion-there is a debate as to whether or not it is murder...and until that debate ends, you can not consider it a breach in private life decisions...unless, of course, you feel that allowing murder is allowing private life freedom. ( I do not believe it is murder, but I understand why those that do are against it)

Euthansasia- Same debate as above. I am pro euthanasia.

Gay Marriage- I believe the debate is waning and all, or most will see uit as it should be seen. Marriage is for all regardless of sexual orientation. But that is why we have debate and why debate is important.

Prostitution-Not sure myself as to why this is illegal.....but I respect those that are against it due to their religious convictions. But religious convictions should not dictate law. If your religion does not allow for prostitution, dont engage in it.

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Nope. This cuts right to the very heart of government interference. Unless you're the woman, her doctor or God you and the government has absolutely NO say over her decision. PERIOD.



Good for you.



But the "debate" is over whether government should interfere in the private lives of people. But I applaud your stance.



Agreed. 100%

Marijuana- It is a controlled substance and we all agree that contorlled substances should be illegal withgout a prescription. However, there is an ongoing debate as to whether or not it should be deemed a controlled substance...with valid arguments on both sides.

Only because the government DEEMED it a "controlled substance". It is no more harmful than alcohol and we saw what happened with prohibition, didn't we?

.

reagrding the abortion point..

You ignored the important part of it.....the debate is whether or not is is murder....not whether or not a woman has the right to do with HER body as she and her doctor sees appropriate.
Many people believe it is murder.
Let me ask you this.....in the case of siamese twins...does one twin have the right to kill the other seeing as the other uses the heart that is squarely in the chest of the first?

I dont personally believe in abortion (with the exception of rape, incest or a threat to the life of the carrying mother) but I will always vote for it as I do not see it as murder and it is not my place to vote against the right for the woman to decide.. But many do see it as murder and I respect their position.

It is still a valid debate.

Why don't we leave it up to God to make the decision if it's murder or not. I mean who are we mere mortals to decide when a lump of cells qualify for life and is injected with a soul? Do any of you remember when it happened to you?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I sincerely don't give a single fuck about you or how you live your life. I gave examples of the Progressive Jihad on Freedom and what do you post in reply? Just an adhom attack against me because you have no answer to the facts I've presented.

Yeah.....let's Hear It!!!!, for the....​

TEABAGGERS' LEGACY!!!!!​

"Even as Americans debate whether President Obama’s health-care law and its promise of guaranteed health coverage should be scrapped, many far less affluent nations are moving in the opposite direction — to provide medical insurance to all citizens.

China, after years of underfunding health care, is on track to complete a three-year, $124 billion initiative projected to cover more than 90 percent of the nation’s residents.

Mexico, which a decade ago covered less than half its population, completed an eight-year drive for universal coverage that has dramatically expanded Mexicans’ access to life-saving treatments for diseases such as leukemia and breast cancer.

In Thailand, where the gross domestic product per person is one-fifth that of the United States, just 1 percent of the population lacks health insurance. And in sub-Saharan Africa, Rwanda and Ghana — two of the world’s poorest nations — are working to create networks of insurance plans to cover their citizens.

“This is truly a global movement,” said Julio Frenk, a former health minister in Mexico and dean of the Harvard School of Public Health. “As countries advance, they are realizing that creating universal health-care systems is a necessity for long-term economic development.”

Many countries are struggling to improve the quality of their medical care. And making health care affordable remains a challenge for most countries, as it does for the United States, where about 15 percent of people lack coverage.

But the international drive to provide health care for everyone is leaving America behind."

 

[auditor0007]

NY City's Emperor Bloomberg, the man who scoffed at the law that limited him to serving only 2 terms as Mayor, thinks its time to continue his Progressive Jihad against smokers and now wants to ban smoking in Times Square and at City Beaches.

It's for your own good, ya know.

Mayor Bloomberg announces legislation that would ban smoking in Times Square, city parks and beaches - NYPOST.com

The Progressives Obama Administration wants to control the appliances you can buy. Why? Because, it's for your own good.

A little known fact of the American Revolution is that Our Founding Fathers fought the British to have a central government that would control the type of wood, nails, and drapes you could have in your house, the proper flow rate of water drawn from a well, what type of shoes your horses could wear, and how far a horse could go between meals.

EDITORIAL: The left's war on home appliances - Washington Times

The appliance will be used to cook government approved healthy meals.

Obama Wants You to Count Your Calories - Spending - Budgeting - SmartMoney.com

It's for your own good, ya know.

Today I was running the trails at the park, when I passed by this guy who was smoking a cigar. I really could care less that he was smoking except for the fact that when I ran past him, I ended up taking in a big whiff of his nasty cigar. Honestly, I shouldn't be forced to breath in his cancerous second hand smoke anywhere, especially on a trail that most people run on to stay in good health.

I am a bit radical about the whole smoking thing since I quit. The thing is that even when I did smoke, for nearly 30 years, I always tried to respect the rights of non-smokers over my wish to have a smoke.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

NY City's Emperor Bloomberg, the man who scoffed at the law that limited him to serving only 2 terms as Mayor, thinks its time to continue his Progressive Jihad against smokers and now wants to ban smoking in Times Square and at City Beaches.

It's for your own good, ya know.

Mayor Bloomberg announces legislation that would ban smoking in Times Square, city parks and beaches - NYPOST.com

The Progressives Obama Administration wants to control the appliances you can buy. Why? Because, it's for your own good.

A little known fact of the American Revolution is that Our Founding Fathers fought the British to have a central government that would control the type of wood, nails, and drapes you could have in your house, the proper flow rate of water drawn from a well, what type of shoes your horses could wear, and how far a horse could go between meals.

EDITORIAL: The left's war on home appliances - Washington Times

The appliance will be used to cook government approved healthy meals.

Obama Wants You to Count Your Calories - Spending - Budgeting - SmartMoney.com

It's for your own good, ya know.

Today I was running the trails at the park, when I passed by this guy who was smoking a cigar. I really could care less that he was smoking except for the fact that when I ran past him, I ended up taking in a big whiff of his nasty cigar. Honestly, I shouldn't be forced to breath in his cancerous second hand smoke anywhere, especially on a trail that most people run on to stay in good health.

I am a bit radical about the whole smoking thing since I quit.

It's called self-righteousness.

TRY to allow others the same latitude you had....to quit when you wanted to.​

 

[eflatminor]

Always strikes me as odd that the right wing, who want to control your life through marriage, birth control, education, turn the argument around when it comes to having respect for other people's health concern. Interfering in your freedoms is fine so long as they draw the guidelines.

I thought it worth mentioning that while I agree with the OP (I stand against nanny staters like Bloomberg), as a Classical Liberal, I:

• support your right to marry whomever you like;
• couldn't give two shits how you practice birth control as long as others don't have to pay for it;
• would be the LAST one to want to control education; and yes,
• I think you should be able eat whatever you like.

Just saying.

 

[bripat9643]

If any ConJob who is a member of this board, bitches about Health Care but remain on MediCare, then I have news for you. You are part of U.S. Government Funded, Tax Payer Supported Universal Health Care Plan.

IF and this is a very big IF you are so damn opposed to such health care, then put your fucking health care where your fucking mouth is and drop MediCare.

If you do not, your a hypocrite.

I'll turn down medicare when they stop making me pay for it. Until then

FUCK OFF, ASSHOLE.