Oxbow6 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 We disagree on yet another issue. Big surprise. I guess we don't need to have a conversation as to which way each of us will vote in this upcoming presidential election! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodak hockey fanatic Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 I could make a case for every single one of these. In case you haven't heard, theses Mandatory immunizations have been known to lead children to develop Autism. (as a judge has admited hence financial payments) I think its sad the Government thinks they own your kids and tells you they have to shot your kid with "medicine." Let's say you don't believe it may have led to Autistic like symptoms, well it would at least be nice maybe if those who do had the choice to not vaccinate their kids with MMR because who knows, but maybe "better safe than sorry." No choice to live a "natural" God created life. A crazy answer I know - Being born and then "nothing." Oh yeah lets not forget the United States Court of Federal Claims created a Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. im sorry to play devils advocate here, but since you chose to use this as your example, i think it is fair to point out you are wrong. not one study has ever linked the mmr vaccine with autism. here is a link if you care to look, many useful links to answer the questions surrounding this issue. there are many things i concede to the more educated on, but with a sister who is a special education teacher specializing in autism, and an aunt who is a pediatric nurse practitioner, i happen to know more than i care to on the subject... http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/vaccines.htm http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/...m_factsheet.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeftyZL Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 But if my wanting to go to a restaurant/bar/club affects my health as a non-smoker because there is smoking, that LIMITS my choices as a non-smoker. How is that now different than the new ban. I used to choose not to frequnet those places because of smoke. Now smokers have their choices LIMITED but the ban doesn't dictate that they CAN'T smoke. Now I can go to a place with smokers, enjoy their company but not be affected by their smoke and they still have the OPTION to smoke, just not in that enviroment. Inconvenient for smokers? Yes. Lost their right to smoke? No. That's my whole point. You make it sound like it's inconvenient for non-smoker's that they aren't able to go to their bars that they choose to, but now you are ok with passing the inconvenience on to the smoker's? Sure, smoker's have not lost their right to smoke, but their rights have been limited dramatically. Now they can't smoke in public places. Next thing they won't be allowed to smoke on public sidewalks. Next they won't be able to smoke in their own house/car. Next they won't be allowed to smoke period. I just feel we have stepped on a slippery slope and are waiting to go for a ride. I understand your position. I just don't agree with it. And I agree with Cratter: Libertarian is the way to go. The less government involvement we have in our daily lives, the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 That's my whole point. You make it sound like it's inconvenient for non-smoker's that they aren't able to go to their bars that they choose to, but now you are ok with passing the inconvenience on to the smoker's? Sure, smoker's have not lost their right to smoke, but their rights have been limited dramatically. Now they can't smoke in public places. Next thing they won't be allowed to smoke on public sidewalks. Next they won't be able to smoke in their own house/car. Next they won't be allowed to smoke period. I just feel we have stepped on a slippery slope and are waiting to go for a ride. I understand your position. I just don't agree with it. And I agree with Cratter: Libertarian is the way to go. The less government involvement we have in our daily lives, the better. No! Their OPTIONS, not their rights, have been limited just like my options were limited before the ban. And yes, I'm ok with the ban passing and passing the inconvenience on to the smoker. We'll just agree to see it differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 And I agree with Cratter: Libertarian is the way to go. The less government involvement we have in our daily lives, the better. Less government isn't the answer. I've become to much of a cynic to believe that my fellow citizen will do the 'right thing'. The result of 'less government' is me and mine getting hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 im sorry to play devils advocate here, but since you chose to use this as your example, i think it is fair to point out you are wrong. not one study has ever linked the mmr vaccine with autism. here is a link if you care to look, many useful links to answer the questions surrounding this issue. there are many things i concede to the more educated on, but with a sister who is a special education teacher specializing in autism, and an aunt who is a pediatric nurse practitioner, i happen to know more than i care to on the subject... http://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/vaccines.htm http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/...m_factsheet.htm I understand there is controvery. I am not saying one way or another. Was just trying to make a simple point. But there is a reason they need to have websites about the safety of vaccines, because it is widely held for right or wrong belief that it may help lead to symptoms. Hence the controvery, and the arguement why one might want to opt out (not saying I would, just like I would obviously education my kids ) I understand that it may not cause it, but to say there is no way it can't or won't, Why would the Courts in the USA claim within the last year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cratter Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Less government isn't the answer. I've become to much of a cynic to believe that my fellow citizen will do the 'right thing'. The result of 'less government' is me and mine getting hurt. Ah yes, the Million Dollar (philosophical) question, "Do you believe in the humanity of your fellow man (or woman)?" Do you believe given a choice the average person would do "good" or "bad"; "right or wrong"? I like to believe my neighbor is generally "good" and would do "the right thing." Hence more individual choices and less government intervention/interaction. I know where you stand. (of course there is no "right" or "wrong" answer). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 I like to believe my neighbor is generally "good" and would do "the right thing." I'd like to believe that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND Fan Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Let's just say that I am of the opinion that conservative political propaganda is the very root of much of the evil that exists in this world today, but that's a different topic for a different thread... probably on a different message board. I'm coming to the realization that our shared values and common interests appear to begin and end with UND and Brett Favre. I fully agree with your "different message board" comment! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxbow6 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Let's just say that I am of the opinion that conservative political propaganda is the very root of much of the evil that exists in this world today, but that's a different topic for a different thread... probably on a different message board. I'm coming to the realization that our shared values and common interests appear to begin and end with UND and Brett Favre. Are you serious? "Root of much of the evil that exists" is because of conservative politics? You are right this is for a whole different thread, but if that is your true belief than I feel sorry for you. That would be like me saying liberal politics is at the cause of all that is wrong here in America and across the world and I know that is far from the case. And I'm not saying that conservative politics is or has been what this country and/or world has needed or needs to succeed either. I'm sure the suicide bomber in Iraq echos your sentiment, as does the pedophile in your neighborhood. I'm sure most that are "evil" blame it on politics they don't agree with? Evil isn't due to politics, evil is due to greed, hate, envy...should I continue? And I guess throwing God, prayer and the Pledge of Allegience out of schools has made our younger gernerations less "evil". Is there any other shortcomings or "evil" wrongdoings by society that you want to enable because of politics you don't agree with? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Are you serious? "Root of much of the evil that exists" is because of conservative politics? You are right this is for a whole different thread, but if that is your true belief than I feel sorry for you. That would be like me saying liberal politics is at the cause of all that is wrong here in America and across the world and I know that is far from the case. And I'm not saying that conservative politics is or has been what this country and/or world has needed or needs to succeed either. I'm sure the suicide bomber in Iraq echos your sentiment, as does the pedophile in your neighborhood. I'm sure most that are "evil" blame it on politics they don't agree with? Evil isn't due to politics, evil is due to greed, hate, envy...should I continue? And I guess throwing God, prayer and the Pledge of Allegience out of schools has made our younger gernerations less "evil". Is there any other shortcomings or "evil" wrongdoings by society that you want to enable because of politics you don't agree with? There is a myriad of issues you bring up in your post, Oxbow, but I agree with the gist of it. Conservatives are no more evil than liberals, in my opinion. Liberal teachings have been used in the past to justify socialism, communism, and anti-capitalistic belief and political structures. Conservative political thought can be blamed for belief systems that were atrocious as well (Stalin's pogroms, Hitler, fascism, Pol Pot's killing fields, etc.). I think what the real root of all evil in terms of this topic is extremism. Extreme liberalism and extreme conservativist thought are really bad for everyone. Religion is an issue that is very different than a smoking ban. However, I'll leave theological debate for a different thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Let's just say that I am of the opinion that conservative political propaganda is the very root of much of the evil that exists in this world today, but that's a different topic for a different thread... probably on a different message board. I'm coming to the realization that our shared values and common interests appear to begin and end with UND and Brett Favre. That has to be one of more %$^!@#$ things that you have said lately. This whole smoking thing has more to do with people's health and collective rights of the masses. Dave if you're against the ban than file a legal challenge to it. Good luck gettting the ND supreme court to hear your case. Frankly the people have spoken there was a democratic vote on a public smoking ban, the ban passed. Like I said if you don't like it sue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Conservative political propaganda is the root of much of what it wrong with this country. Conservatives generally cater to two groups, wealthy people and religious people. Their agenda to help the rich get richer at the expense of the middle class is an example of greed and selfishness. You might want to stick to bashing the Bison, your attempt at politics was horrendus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 There is a myriad of issues you bring up in your post, Oxbow, but I agree with the gist of it. Conservatives are no more evil than liberals, in my opinion. Liberal teachings have been used in the past to justify socialism, communism, and anti-capitalistic belief and political structures. Conservative political thought can be blamed for belief systems that were atrocious as well (Stalin's pogroms, Hitler, fascism, Pol Pot's killing fields, etc.). I think what the real root of all evil in terms of this topic is extremism. Extreme liberalism and extreme conservativist thought are really bad for everyone. Religion is an issue that is very different than a smoking ban. However, I'll leave theological debate for a different thread. Well said Redwing_77. I think the problem is that we are now in constant campaign mode. I am about ready to throw my lap top and tv out the window because I am sick of listening to political ads with fancy speeches that lack substance . I can't wait till this silly election is over. The fact that McCain is close after all of the cheer leading for Barrack Obama by the Main Stream Media is actually proof that our country is split down the middle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 You might want to stick to bashing the Bison, your attempt at politics was horrendus. As I said privately, I lean more to the left on most issues but I find DK's statement stoopid! But, I also find myself almost siding with the bilous green and puke yellow when he posts crap about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 As I said privately, I lean more to the left on most issues but I find DK's statement stoopid! But, I also find myself almost siding with the bilous green and puke yellow when he posts crap about them. I have a lot of friends that probably lean more to the left of center but none of them have ever called me EVIL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Goon don't get into a battle of wits with this guy, he's obviously unarmed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamdance Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Children, children... Play nice, will ya? Or I'll stop this thread right now and give ya what for. Back to our regularly scheduled programming. Being as out here in the land of fruit and nuts and lawsuits, the smoking ban has yet to be overturned, I seriously doubt it will happen in Fargo. However, enterprising business owners have found ways around it and I'm sure the same will happen there. Environmental concerns notwithstanding. It's nice to know five of the nine Supremes are still upholding the 2nd Ammendment. And, starting July 1, it will be illegal to use your cel-phone while driving without a hands-free device in the State of Kalifornia. (Yes, I voted for this one. I'm so over soccer moms driving their oversize SUV's, juggling a phone and a Starbucks triple pump vanilla frappachino and shrieking at their spoiled brats texting their spoiled brat friends trying to turn me into a red smear.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 I'm so over soccer moms driving their oversize SUV's, juggling a phone and a Starbucks triple pump vanilla frappachino and shrieking at their spoiled brats texting their spoiled brat friends trying to turn me into a red smear.) We have that in Grand Forks as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamdance Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 We have that in Grand Forks as well. The "hands-free" law? Or the idiot drivers? Or both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Classless personal attack from Sioux-cia in only 13 mintes, right on cue. So predictable. At some point in time I must have really struck a nerve with this poor obsessed soul. Hmmm, let's see, now why don't I like DaveK? Oh yeah!! His kid's hockey team lost, in a fair little guy game, to my friend's kid's team. And what does this hockey dad do? He goes over to the winning teams teen-aged coach, accuses him of cheating, attempts to ream him a new one and gets upset when the parents come to the coach's defense. Yeah, I admit it, I don't like DaveK! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 And, starting July 1, it will be illegal to use your cel-phone while driving without a hands-free device in the State of Kalifornia. (Yes, I voted for this one. I'm so over soccer moms driving their oversize SUV's, juggling a phone and a Starbucks triple pump vanilla frappachino and shrieking at their spoiled brats texting their spoiled brat friends trying to turn me into a red smear.) But, isn't that infringing on soccer mom's personal freedom? I'd vote for that as well! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamdance Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 But, isn't that infringing on soccer mom's personal freedom? I'd vote for that as well! Nope, she still gets to use the phone while driving. IF they OUTLAWED phone use while driving, THAT would be infringing on her personal freedom. See the difference? Smoking is OUTLAWED inside certain places. You HAVE to go outside to smoke. There are no legal inside accomodations for smokers that I'm aware of. The infringement of personal freedom is being done to the business owner who chose to allow smoking in his place and the smoker who chose to LEGALLY smoke and no longer can. Prior to the smoking ban, there was NO infringement to the non-smoker. They could CHOOSE to work or patronize at a place that allowed smoking. Tag, you're it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 The "hands-free" law? Or the idiot drivers? Or both? C all of the above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted June 26, 2008 Share Posted June 26, 2008 Nope, she still gets to use the phone while driving. IF they OUTLAWED phone use while driving, THAT would be infringing on her personal freedom. See the difference? Smoking is OUTLAWED inside certain places. You HAVE to go outside to smoke. There are no legal inside accomodations for smokers that I'm aware of. The infringement of personal freedom is being done to the business owner who chose to allow smoking in his place and the smoker who chose to LEGALLY smoke and no longer can. Prior to the smoking ban, there was NO infringement to the non-smoker. They could CHOOSE to work or patronize at a place that allowed smoking. Tag, you're it... Yes and no. She can still use the phone and drive but there is a caveat applied, she needs hands free technology to do it. It's still legal to drink and smoke. The caveat is it cannot be in a public establishment. I see the point about the bar owner. BUT, the bar is PUBLIC. I would not oppose smoking in PRIVATE drinking establishments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.