An EXCELENT Opinion Piece on Values...

[007]

Note: Bottom of first column reads,

...John Kerry and the Mrs. live - along with loveable Ted Kennedy, who's...


and the next: ... Redefine values? Where to begin? Why not start by re-creating the place...

Too long to fit it all in scanner. So sue me... :funnyface

 

[musicman]

Great post, PR! I think this lady makes a point that we would all do well to remember:

The "elites" truly despise us.

 

[007]

Great post, PR! I think this lady makes a point that we would all do well to remember:

The "elites" truly despise us.

And doesn't it make you wonder WHY?

I think it's because most folks prefer to live by some semblence of rules and decency. But that's just not "progressive" enough for good 'ole hollywierd. They want to reinvent everything, and ta' hell with what we think. We're just a bunch of stupid old hicks to them. We're not filthy rich and liberal.

Well what these asswipes fail to realize is, "they" are the minority, not us.

 

[Mariner]

But moral arguments can cut both ways. Was it moral to invade a sovereign country on a fabricated charge that they had ICBMs armed with nuclear weapons ready to attack us? Is it moral to set aside the Geneva convention? Is it moral to spend more while taxing less, creating an enormous debt burden for our children to pay off? Is it moral to change congressional ethics rules so that our own leaders can avoid punishment for their crimes? Is it moral to claim a mandate when 48% of the population voted against you and your approval rating prior to the election was less than 50%?

I agree with this columnist's explanation for Bush's victory--that he was seen as a leader even by many people who didn't agree with him on particular issues (the majority of Americans oppose his beliefs on the environment, on abortion, on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and on massive deficit spending).

I disagree with her point about sexual morality. She's ignoring the actual facts: Massachusetts, where we've supposedly remade Sodom and Gomorrah, has a lower divorce rate than every other state in the country, and fewer of out-of-wedlock births than nearly every "red," "moral" state. What if liberal social policy actually promotes moral behavior better than weak gov't and strong church?

Mariner.

 

[Mariner]

Your "helmets suck" tag-phrase got me thinking... I am curious what the conservative position on helmet use is? The average case of severe head injury from motorcycle accidents costs upwards of $500,000 per year in rehabilitation and nursing home costs. Can I safely assume that every conservative motorcycle rider has either purchased long-term insurance that will cover this cost, or has sufficient money in the bank to cover these costs so that they are not borne by "liberal" society?

This situation seems to me a really good test of the extent to which safety networks are needed in society, and the extent of the social contract, e.g. a helmet law which essentially says, "Since we have the medical knowledge to save your life if you are head-injured, but it costs a fortune, we need to mandate that you wear a helmet."

Mariner.

 

[007]

But moral arguments can cut both ways.

No they don't. You being a liberal and contorting the issues is what cuts both ways.

Was it moral to invade a sovereign country on a fabricated charge that they had ICBMs armed with nuclear weapons ready to attack us?

This country was no more "soveriegn" than Palestine is, and after the first gulf war, building up a military might to the extreme was Sadam's intention, and attack America with it. If you don't know that, you are either ignorant, or denying yourself the truth.

Is it moral to set aside the Geneva convention?

NO ONE... I repeat NO ONE, has EVER, followed the Geneva Conventions closer than America. Your anti-America liberal, micheal moore induced coma is really showing itself here.

Is it moral to spend more while taxing less, creating an enormous debt burden for our children to pay off?

Is it MORAL to tax me into poverty? Is it MORAL to make me work the first FIVE MONTHS OF THE YEAR JUST TO PAY TAXES? Is it moral to TAKE FROM ME TO GIVE TO OTHERS? Is COMMUNISM your answer? Of course it is. You're a socialist liberal.

Is it moral to change congressional ethics rules so that our own leaders can avoid punishment for their crimes?

And what would Bill Clintons answer be to that? Or how about Tom Dashel?

Is it moral to claim a mandate when 48% of the population voted against you and your approval rating prior to the election was less than 50%?

The heart of the nation reelected President Bush. Get over it.

I agree with this columnist's explanation for Bush's victory--that he was seen as a leader even by many people who didn't agree with him on particular issues (the majority of Americans oppose his beliefs on the environment, on abortion, on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, and on massive deficit spending).

NO... they DON'T. The statement of yours above is a crock of shit.

I disagree with her point about sexual morality. She's ignoring the actual facts: Massachusetts, where we've supposedly remade Sodom and Gomorrah, has a lower divorce rate than every other state in the country, and fewer of out-of-wedlock births than nearly every "red," "moral" state. What if liberal social policy actually promotes moral behavior better than weak gov't and strong church?

Mariner.

Prove it.

 

[007]

Your "helmets suck" tag-phrase got me thinking... I am curious what the conservative position on helmet use is? The average case of severe head injury from motorcycle accidents costs upwards of $500,000 per year in rehabilitation and nursing home costs. Can I safely assume that every conservative motorcycle rider has either purchased long-term insurance that will cover this cost, or has sufficient money in the bank to cover these costs so that they are not borne by "liberal" society?

Don't make claims you can't back up slow load. Either provide a link with facts, or admit you're just running your liberal cake hole with fabricated stats.

LET THOSE WHO RIDE DECIDE.

 

[Mariner]

I'm a doctor and work with head injury all the time. A few months ago I read a half-dozen books about the costs of head injury and the policy issues involved (because I was involved in a forensic case related to a woman hit by a mail truck). My number ($500K per year) is not an exaggeration--it's a fact which you can look up yourself. Average total costs for head injury amount to millions of dollars per person.

"Let those who ride decide." I say fine to that, as long as they take REAL responsibility for the consequences of their actions, which would mean setting aside enough money to pay their own medical bills rather than expecting me to do it via my taxes, or taking advantage of the liberal values of hospitals and doctors who provide care for free.

Sir E., as for the Geneva convention, following it gives us a moral high ground and makes our overall actions less suspect. Every single innocent Muslim we mistreat gives Muslims reason to hate us, and, in my opinion, increases the risk of terrorism. The idea that we're going to scare them into not coming to get us doesn't make any sense to me. Being tough works to deter nation-states, which have something to lose, but won't deter an individual willing to give his/her life during a suicide attack. That's why I think we should pay attention to Muslim opinion rather than ignoring it or inflaming it unnecessarily. Detaining thousands of people without cause and holding them without trial makes us look to the rest of the world more like the old USSR than the "beacon of hope" we're supposed to be. So does mistreating prisoners at Abu Ghraib, killing unarmed soldiers in mosques, and taking revenge on insurgents. The U.S. had much higher standards in WWII, which is one of the reasons we earned so much of the world's respect at that time.

BTW, I don't see how calling me a "butthead" advances your argument.

Mariner

 

[nakedemperor]

LET THOSE WHO RIDE DECIDE.

Pale, I really think you should wear a helmet. Riding a motorcycle is very, very dangerous to begin with, and not wearing a helmet is a pretty poor decision. Helmets alone can do wonders to protect your noggin' in an accident, and like Mariner said, if you do happen to injure your head severely, you'll likely never full recover and likely never pay off the debt. I realize there are cosmetic and personal reasons to not wear a helmet, but if you weigh the pros and cons, I'm sure you'll see that wearing a helmet is the right way to go.

 

[007]

Pale, I really think you should wear a helmet. Riding a motorcycle is very, very dangerous to begin with, and not wearing a helmet is a pretty poor decision. Helmets alone can do wonders to protect your noggin' in an accident, and like Mariner said, if you do happen to injure your head severely, you'll likely never full recover and likely never pay off the debt. I realize there are cosmetic and personal reasons to not wear a helmet, but if you weigh the pros and cons, I'm sure you'll see that wearing a helmet is the right way to go.

naked... son... I've been riding motorcycles for forty plus years. I've had ONE accident, and then it was very late at night, and I was drunker than seven barrels of shit and should never have been on the bike. Fell asleep riding it in a corner and rode right off the road, wasn't wearing a helmet, never hit my head. Lucky? Maybe.

If I'm ever in a serious accident on motorcycle I can tell you this, my frickin' head is the last thing I'm going to be worried about, because if I crack my skull I'll probably die, but if I break legs, arms, fingers, back, I going to have to live the life of a cripple, and that's worse then dying from head injury.

If we're going to go the helmet route, then "CAR" drivers should ALSO be mandated to wear helmets. What's good for the goose is good for gander.

 

[007]

I'm a doctor and work with head injury all the time. A few months ago I read a half-dozen books about the costs of head injury and the policy issues involved (because I was involved in a forensic case related to a woman hit by a mail truck). My number ($500K per year) is not an exaggeration--it's a fact which you can look up yourself. Average total costs for head injury amount to millions of dollars per person.

I don't believe you're a doctor mariner. Like anyone else, you can claim to be anyone or anything on the internet without "proof". With a board name of "mariner", that would inline me to believe you're something more along the line of a squid in the Navy. A "liberal" squid.

And you're still making claims without "proof". If you are going to keep making these claims, then "YOU" provide the proof. It's not up to ME to back your claim. You've got it just backwards there sailor.

I look at helmet laws as just another government mandate on the people to protect them from themselves. Well fuck that. I don't want or need uncle sam to tell me anything. Leave me the fuck alone!

LEGALIZE FIREWORKS!!!

 

[nakedemperor]

If I'm ever in a serious accident on motorcycle I can tell you this, my frickin' head is the last thing I'm going to be worried about, because if I crack my skull I'll probably die, but if I break legs, arms, fingers, back, I going to have to live the life of a cripple, and that's worse then dying from head injury.

Whaaaaat. You totally lost me with this logic-- its a thread on values, I just think you should value your life.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

The dems lost this election due to wrongheaded defense and tax policy. Libs will never win until they fix this, but their hatred of america and love of socialism is too deeply entrenched in the party. They are headed off a cliff, like so many lemmings.

 

[Mariner]

Why would I lie? Send me a personal email, promise you won't "out" me, and I'll send you any proof you want of my professional position and standing. I use 'Mariner' to protect my confidentiality here only because I prefer to keep my political views and activities separate from the rest of my professional life. I will tell you here that I work in Cambridge, teach at Harvard, and also do private practice work around New England, including the occasional legal case such as the one I mentioned above. I saw many a motorcycle accident victim when I spent a surgical training rotation at a Navy Hospital. The (sadistic) surgeons there used to leave the "road rash" cases without anesthesia, better to teach them to wear leather and a helmet, and ride sober, the next time out.

When I get a moment I'll look for a web source for head injury information. As NE pointed out, head injury is far worse than bodily injury. More often than not, the victim doesn't die, but instead has major personality change, e.g. becoming very violent, or loses motor/sensory/bowel/bladder control etc., or develops seizures, or more than one of the above. Far easier to lose one's arm or leg than to lose one's mind. But I still support your right to ride without a helmet--as long as you accept the financial responsibility for the potential outcome of head injury.

Mariner.

 

[nakedemperor]

The dems lost this election due to wrongheaded defense and tax policy. Libs will never win until they fix this, but their hatred of america and love of socialism is too deeply entrenched in the party. They are headed off a cliff, like so many lemmings.

Headed off a cliff? Buddy, its not a lemming in the driver's seat, its a 10-gallon hat, and he's going off the cliff and taking everyone, including the lemmings, with him.

Dems lost tax policy because somehow lowering taxes while increasing spending and going to war twice makes sense. Ha. That's funny.

 

[007]

Whaaaaat. You totally lost me with this logic-- its a thread on values, I just think you should value your life.

I do value my life. But I also value my right to choose.

You can't live your life scared, or letting someone else tell you what to do, as the liberals love to try and do. Motorcycling is a thrilling thing to do. Inherently there is danger that comes with it, and keeps many from ever trying it. Their lose. Every ride is an adventure, no matter how short or long, and riding without a helmet only enhances the experience.

I still think it's unfair for the government to stick their stinking nose into the biker's world and mandate what they will and won't do, and most other "bikers" agree with me.

 

[007]

Why would I lie? Send me a personal email, promise you won't "out" me, and I'll send you any proof you want of my professional position and standing. I use 'Mariner' to protect my confidentiality here only because I prefer to keep my political views and activities separate from the rest of my professional life. I will tell you here that I work in Cambridge, teach at Harvard, and also do private practice work around New England, including the occasional legal case such as the one I mentioned above. I saw many a motorcycle accident victim when I spent a surgical training rotation at a Navy Hospital. The (sadistic) surgeons there used to leave the "road rash" cases without anesthesia, better to teach them to wear leather and a helmet, and ride sober, the next time out.

When I get a moment I'll look for a web source for head injury information. As NE pointed out, head injury is far worse than bodily injury. More often than not, the victim doesn't die, but instead has major personality change, e.g. becoming very violent, or loses motor/sensory/bowel/bladder control etc., or develops seizures, or more than one of the above. Far easier to lose one's arm or leg than to lose one's mind. But I still support your right to ride without a helmet--as long as you accept the financial responsibility for the potential outcome of head injury.

Mariner.

Whatever mariner. I still don't see why you would have a problem with posting "proof" as to your claims here. Most people do, and that's why we believe them.

 

[nakedemperor]

I do value my life. But I also value my right to choose.

You can't live your life scared, or letting someone else tell you what to do, as the liberals love to try and do. Motorcycling is a thrilling thing to do. Inherently there is danger that comes with it, and keeps many from ever trying it. Their lose. Every ride is an adventure, no matter how short or long, and riding without a helmet only enhances the experience.

I still think it's unfair for the government to stick their stinking nose into the biker's world and mandate what they will and won't do, and most other "bikers" agree with me.

I mean, if the government told you you couldn't hit yourself in the head with a hammer, would you do it just to spite them? Obviously its your decision ultimately, but having bikers wear helmets also ensures the safety of others. Debris is kicked up by vehicles all the time, and is mostly deflected harmlessly by a car's exterior; but if you were struck in the head in a motorcycle, it would be easy to lose control of your bike, endangering others. That's part of why you wear a seatbelt in a car; if you get rear ended and you go face first into the stearing wheel and are rendered unconscious or stunned, you cant break your car or prevent yourself from swerving into other cars. Its just better for everyone on the road.

 

[nakedemperor]

Plus I've seen some wicked cool looking helmets

 

[dilloduck]

values?--shit happens---you are responsible for your own actions .