 |
Look in a bastion of freedom they are not going to ban anything even if it is publicly responsible. They won't ban smoking and they won't ban guns and both kill equal numbers. One day the population will wake up and say we have had enough but that day is a long way away
The emperor's FDA is going to put the final nail in trans fats . That way the whole country can eat the slop that they feed the kids in Moochelle's lunch program.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
In the good ole USA anything "trans" is accepted and celebrated .....except trans fats.
Stop complaining, she's right and so is he the time to have a more responsible community is here, and the trogladites will be carried kicking and screaming to the bon fire. you know Tom freedom isn't freedom if you have to die enjoying it
I usually read labels to avoid them . But why should the government be making the choice for me ?
Yup. No more margarine dumped on those wholesome veggies.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
They aren't making the choice for you. They are telling industries to stop poisoning people. You still have plenty of options to poison yourself though Tom.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Look there are all sorts of additives in processed food, you are not being given a choice whether you consume those substances other than total rejection of the product, but you are trying to tell me a government who tells these industries to clean up their act is acting against your interests, your freedom. If you want to consume salt, sugar and these other substances pore them on yourself, they are freely available.
I use only olive oil and butter in my cooking . But margarine became the alternative when the government told us that the healthier alternative butter was bad for us . Suppose they had banned butter then ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
You still haven't got it fats get changed by cooking, all life is a lottery. I live in regime where there are lots of things I cannot eat, It's sad because some of them I like
Like what?Quote:
I live in regime where there are lots of things I cannot eat, It's sad because some of them I like
Broccoli, pasta, red wine, fruit juice the list is long
so you are talking about personal restrictions ? Good point. Foods that some people can't eat for health reasons ....maybe the government should ban them too .
All those lactose-intolerant people may eliminate ice cream from our food group.
Yes Tom I'm talking about personal restrictions but if more were known maybe some of these so called health foods should be on the banned list or at least their properties publicised
Those are outlawed in Australia?Quote:
Broccoli, pasta, red wine, fruit juice the list is long
No Karma, when you suffer from certain complaints these and other foods make the problem worse or may even be the source
So what does your personal issues have to do with the discussion?
What does anything have to do with our conversation? As I recall this thread is about banned substances so the relevance is that I suggest some be banned.
Apparently history has been banned.
Or altered speech If we are lucky very soon the country of origin will be required on all foods
The news that the US Supreme Court had approved gay marriage swept into our news and swept out just as fast. Many things were instantly more important and that's the way it should be. Is the world fimally getting some perspective?
Seems the perspective is to harm those that dont sgree with your opinion so long as you belong to the favored class.
Right now in the U.S. the liberals are having a feild day and they dont even realize how they are destroying the country. They think its all going to last forever but soon the well will run dry and they wont have a clue as to what to do.
Replace "liberals" with "conservatives" and the statement can also be true.Quote:
Right now in the U.S. the liberals are having a feild day and they dont even realize how they are destroying the country. They think its all going to last forever but soon the well will run dry and they wont have a clue as to what to do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
If you think that is true then you really need to look at what is really going on. Im not seeing conservatives pass laws that cost billions to poor people and hide from the content of the laws until it is passed. I dont see conservatives wanting to give hand outs over and over thinking all they have to do is fire up the money presses and it is paid for. Real people are suffering from liberal laws and behavior. Look at all the cities and states that are near or are going bankrupt and you will see they are and have been under liberal control for decades. Not all problems are solved by simply throwing more money at them.
And of course the conservative solution is the only solution. No compromise possible.
Oh, yes. Check out what's happening in Illinois with basic services to the disabled, the elderly,and children, thanks to a Republican governor.Quote:
Originally Posted by cdad
Made news here in China, China feels that Americans are violent people who can not control their sexual urges and live immoral lives with just lust of sex, money and power.
And it also is a joke here that America now has a emperor called the Supreme Court that has taken away the republic and any form of democracy.
So to at least some parts of the world, America is a laughing stock at the changes happening.
You know Chuck america has been a laughing stock for sometime, unfortunately they don't know it. Daesh is laughing in Iraq, China is laughing in the south china sea, North Korea is laughing, Russia is laughing and so is Iran, meanwhile america gives into human weakness and lust and calls it utopia. I'm sure all the BTGLP will flock to america now and all I can say we will be well rid of them
The cruelest cut is that John Roberts made it clear during his confirmation that he opposed judicial activism and legislating from the bench. He has twice changed the ACA with the stroke of his pen. He is an unelected uber-legislatorQuote:
Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck
There is no recourse against SCOTUS tyranny . The last time a justice was subject to impeachment was in 1801 . Jefferson want to rid the country of Samuel Chase's services. He was impeached for allowing his partisan leanings to affect his decisions . The Senate voted to acquit Chase of all charges . Since then associate justices have had virtual immunity even when there was no doubt about certain justices incompetence.
It would take an Amendment to put term limits on SCOTUS . There is no way the traditional way of getting amendments would get the job done. But if there was an Article 5 "application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states," .... to "call a convention for proposing amendments",perhaps the course of the country could be righted .
The is also a recourse for tyranny Tom, something about liberty being refreshed in blood of course those are old ideas held closely by those who wrote your constitution and long forgotten, they probably died out after the civil war to be replaced with flowery speech and filibusters
Your much beloved founders wrote the rules and now you holler foul?
They weren't my founders, my founders wrote a constitution it is very hard to change and as a result we don't have all this constitutional bullcrap, of course, we had a hundred years of observing your mistakes to guide us
I directed my comments to Tom, but will remark our constitutions is as hard to change also, but can be challenged. There is a process in place. Good you learned from our mistakes, and good luck learning from your own.
Jefferson yelled foul long before I did .Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
"You seem ... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots."
An Article 5 Convention is within the rules .
Go for it.
Yes Tal we continually learn from our own mistakes and thus we don't need to resort to constitutional constraints to keep our legislature in line
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:08 PM. |