The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Politics

Politics Where we learn not to think less of others who don't share our views

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-08-2012, 06:44 PM   #196
DanaC
We have to go back, Kate!
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 25,964
See, now, to me that's just surreal. can't sell unprocessed milk? Seriously?

Just make sure people are aware of the potential risks. We get all sorts of government information about how to handle poultry safely, and how some foods shouldn't be eaten by a pregnant woman, or a young child. So just make that part of the info. Unpasteurised milk may contain whatever it is it might contain. There ya go.

The idea of making it illegal to sell milk from a cow is just bizarre to me. It makes as little sense as the law that prevents me growing a particular plant from seed, drying out its flowers and leaves, burning it and inhaling the smoke.

Now...cigarettes are a different matter. Because they are not the natural product. They are sprayed and blended and refined and have burn accelerators and a whole heap of other chemical components added. I can see a logic in not allowing people to actively create an inherently dangerous substance and then sell it to people for consumption.

Someone wants to grow tobacco, dry it out and try and smoke it? that's back to the milk and the pot and the mushrooms.

Ban milk from the cow? Seriously?

That's practically the definition of modern man.
__________________
Quote:
There's only so much punishment a man can take in pursuit of punani. - Sundae
http://sites.google.com/site/danispoetry/
DanaC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 07:21 PM   #197
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
The argument against "I'm informed, I'll make my own decision and live with the consequences" is that when the shit really hits the fan, and the consequences are horrific, the results get socialized. If a man chooses not to wear a motorcycle helmet, has an accident and is brain dead, guess who pays for his care and supports his family. Health insurance only goes so far, and will fight any distance that it has to go. Same with tobacco use and drinking raw milk (to a much lesser extent). Sometimes it's the taxpayers who pony up, sometimes it's beef and beer fundraisers.
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 07:57 PM   #198
Griff
still says videotape
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 26,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pico and ME View Post
It's even probable that the fight to ban these types of milk farms are probably being egged on by the big factory dairy farms themselves (repubs, for sure) to discourage competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaC View Post

Just make sure people are aware of the potential risks. We get all sorts of government information about how to handle poultry safely, and how some foods shouldn't be eaten by a pregnant woman, or a young child. So just make that part of the info. Unpasteurised milk may contain whatever it is it might contain. There ya go.
I think we are into something about how regulation seems to work in the US. It always seems to favor scaled production. Big business wants to sell low quality pasteurized homogenized for its own convenience, now if it can use regulators to eliminate a better quality competitor under the veneer of a small health risk it is a win for the corporations and the nanny staters. When big business isn't on board as in highfructosecornsyrup there doesn't seem to be much traction.


Quote:

Ban milk from the cow? Seriously?

That's practically the definition of modern man.
That is just clever writing.

Spexx, yours could be seen as a strong argument against socialized medicine, but you'll notice The Brits have managed both. Which risk factors do we ban? Do we ignore the health benefits of raw dairy when we do the calculus? Do we take action against the obese? Do we tell people not to live in certain risky neighborhoods. Do we ban small economy cars as too unsafe? Do we just ban driving altogether? Its the sort of thing that gets Republicans thinking death panel. I don't think of raw milk as being on the slippery slope. Banning raw milk is off the slope and crashing through the trees.
__________________
If you would only recognize that life is hard, things would be so much easier for you.
- Louis D. Brandeis
Griff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2012, 11:38 PM   #199
ZenGum
Doctor Wtf
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spexxvet View Post
The argument against "I'm informed, I'll make my own decision and live with the consequences" is that when the shit really hits the fan, and the consequences are horrific, the results get socialized. If a man chooses not to wear a motorcycle helmet, has an accident and is brain dead, guess who pays for his care and supports his family. Health insurance only goes so far, and will fight any distance that it has to go. Same with tobacco use and drinking raw milk (to a much lesser extent). Sometimes it's the taxpayers who pony up, sometimes it's beef and beer fundraisers.
It has mostly been said, but if this resaoning were applied consistently, we'd ban darn near everything. What wasn't banned would be compulsory.

I am content that my tax dollars will help pay for Aliantha's baby's delivery etc, and even her sons' future rugby injuries, since her taxes helped pay for my higher education.

Don't mention that I a fair portion of my scholarship. She'll be paying for my emphesyma treatment.
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008.
Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.
ZenGum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 08:16 AM   #200
Spexxvet
Makes some feel uncomfortable
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 10,346
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griff View Post
...Spexx, yours could be seen as a strong argument against socialized medicine...
The difference is that in socialized medicine, both sides of the equation are socialized, not just the horrific consequences.

There has to be a line drawn between prohibited and compulsory. While we all probably agree that the consequences of "hold my beer and watch this" activities should be left to Darwinism, there's a lot of grey area.
__________________
"I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce
Spexxvet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 04:44 PM   #201
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibram View Post
...toxic wormwood absinthe....
Really, where can you buy that in the US?
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 04:52 PM   #202
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
Obama is going to lose big on this in the issue of birth control in Catholic Hospitals as well as damage his public image among a huge voter block (I hope).
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 05:39 PM   #203
Ibby
erika
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: "the high up north"
Posts: 6,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
Really, where can you buy that in the US?
You (quite rightly, I think) can't, but they do still make it some places in eastern europe.
__________________
not really back, you didn't see me, i was never here shhhhhh
Ibby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 06:55 PM   #204
ZenGum
Doctor Wtf
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
Obama is going to lose big on this in the issue of birth control in Catholic Hospitals as well as damage his public image among a huge voter block (I hope).
I strongly deny that requiring Catholic employers to pay for insurance for their employees which covers contraceptionand abortion in any way impedes said Catholic employer from practising their religion.

What is going on is that the Catholic employer is trying to FORCE their religion (i.e. anti-abortion stance) on their employees, and THAT is a violation of the employees' right to freely practise THEIR religion which may well allow abortion.
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008.
Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.
ZenGum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 07:06 PM   #205
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibram View Post
You (quite rightly, I think) can't, but they do still make it some places in eastern europe.
With all do respect, I could give a shit about anything that happens outside of the our economy unless it involves my fellow troops.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 07:12 PM   #206
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZenGum View Post
I strongly deny that requiring Catholic employers to pay for insurance for their employees which covers contraceptionand abortion in any way impedes said Catholic employer from practising their religion.

What is going on is that the Catholic employer is trying to FORCE their religion (i.e. anti-abortion stance) on their employees, and THAT is a violation of the employees' right to freely practise THEIR religion which may well allow abortion.
Now, now, that is total bull shit.

Those employees have the perfect Right to go anywhere they want to "Peruse happiness", as protected by the Constitution, or they can work somewhere else. If you have ever worked in a place like a Catholic Hospital, and when you sign your contract, you accept the work conditions and those include probation's against "stuff", tow the line or move on.... not really difficult, not illegal, not discriminatory. You sign on the dotted line to do what they want you to do or you move on, not a big deal. You choose to work there under THEIR conditions or you choose to work somewhere else. Not complicated.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2012, 07:33 PM   #207
ZenGum
Doctor Wtf
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Badelaide, Baustralia
Posts: 12,861
If one of those conditions includes obeying their religious doctrines, it is totally a violation of the employee's freedom of religion. Forcing them to seek employment elsewhere is religious discrimination. QED.
__________________
Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008.
Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.
ZenGum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2012, 05:22 AM   #208
TheMercenary
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
Holy Crap! The wold if filled with people like this....

http://revolutionarypolitics.tv/vide...video_id=15915
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012!
TheMercenary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2012, 07:10 AM   #209
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
Those employees have the perfect Right to go anywhere they want to "Peruse happiness", as protected by the Constitution, or they can work somewhere else.
More important in America, nobody imposes their religious beliefs on anyone else. Religion is only a relationship between one man and his god. No man ever imposes his religious beliefs on anyone else - not even his employees. Churches do not like such realities. Because it says the church cannot tell others how to think.

Only American civil law is relevant and fundamental here. We also do not ban driving on the Sabbath. That restriction would also make a religious institution nothing more than Satan worshippers. Does your church tell its employees that they cannot drive on the Sabbath? Of course not. Because a church is only an adviser. It has no business imposing its beliefs on anyone.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2012, 07:29 AM   #210
glatt
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMercenary View Post
Obama is going to lose big on this in the issue of birth control in Catholic Hospitals as well as damage his public image among a huge voter block (I hope).
Full page ad in today's Washington Post (this is being seen by most eyes in Congress this morning.)
Name:  CFC.jpg
Views: 102
Size:  77.3 KB
glatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:19 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.