New York City passes trans fat ban

[Sava]

Originally posted by Lorizael
I'm not a trans fats supporter. I'm just very curious. Why can't we just warn people? Why the need to ban? Why should cigarettes, a product that causes cancer, be allowed on the market?

Nicotine is not used for preparing food in restaurants. It's not served to children.

Getting such warnings would be more difficult than banning the substance, especially when there are people who aren't willing to listen to the facts.

And speaking of cigarettes, if there was a safe alternative to tobacco that produced the same "effect", tasted the same, and was essentially the same in every way but without as many health risks... I would support banning tobacco and/or nicotine in favor of using this alternative.

Verto's analogy is correct. This is just the same as banning lead in paint.

[Ninot]

and how about Texas? does it give you a suggestion, or a hard limit, on what speed you may travel by car?

[Sava]

Originally posted by SlowwHand

It's a matter of the government becoming involved in telling you what you can do to you.

STRAWMAN

[SlowwHand]

That's the lamest ****ing term I have heard lately.
You and Che use that way to excess.

You don't agree, you drag out that term.


And what's your point, Ninot? That Texas makes no mistakes in government? We don't have an autobahn here.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
It's not a matter of you supporting eating garbage, Sava.
It's a matter of the government becoming involved in telling you what you can do to you.

QFT.

(Sloww, this argument applies in the "Sex with dead deer" thread too )

[Verto]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I don't think my eating fried chicken endangers you.
You don't want it, don't eat it.

If I want my child to work in the coal mines at age 5, then the government has no place butting in! It's not harming you, after all.

[Ninot]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
And what's your point, Ninot? That Texas makes no mistakes in government? We don't have an autobahn here.

My point is the government sometimes must save the people from themselves.

Perhaps Germany is civilized enough to have an autobahn, while Americans aren't. Much as Americans have shown that they can't trust themselves with transfats.

[Verto]

BTW, I think it is a sad state when Americans bend over and take it when it comes to the Patriot Act, and the Bush Administration in general, but get up in arms when the guvmint tries to take away their God-given right to ingest trans fat.

[SlowwHand]

That endangers your minor miner, Einstein. Go back to class.


And Shiva, if you want to go hump a dead deer, please feel free. Be sure you tell your next pardner that you do it.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Verto
If I want my child to work in the coal mines at age 5, then the government has no place butting in! It's not harming you, after all.

Yes, because eating a hamburger and forcing someone else to do something dangerous are equivalent.

[Sava]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
That's the lamest ****ing term I have heard lately.
You and Che use that way to excess.

You don't agree, you drag out that term.

The term means you are setting up a counter-argument that has nothing to do with what we are talking about (easily refuted). And that's what you are doing.

I hate repeating myself, but I'll do it again.

This is not about the government regulating what people eat. You can still go eat your fried chicken, burgers, fries, pizza, or whatever else you want. This is only about banning a particular oil which is TOXIC. There are alternatives that can be used that are healthier and make food taste better.

I don't know why you keep ignoring this fact.

[Ninot]

Because he's trolling?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Sava
This is not about the government regulating what people eat. You can still go eat your fried chicken, burgers, fries, pizza, or whatever else you want. This is only about banning a particular oil which is TOXIC. There are alternatives that can be used that are healthier and make food taste better.

Cigarettes are toxic. There are alternatives that are healthier and that taste better (such as not smoking).

[Verto]

Originally posted by LordShiva


Cigarettes are toxic. There are alternatives that are healthier and that taste better (such as not smoking).

How 'bout a compromise then - the government places a tax on all transfat goods, like they do with cigarettes.

Or how about people stop quibbling about stupid ****? Cigarettes are legal because the tobacco companies spend freely in Washington. How does this in anyway take away from the government regulating trans fat? By your argument, lead in paint should still be allowed in whatever % a company sees fit, because cigs are still legal.

[SlowwHand]

I'm trolling? I'm Trolling?!?

Not once have you heard me say it was healthy.
What I've said is that it's not the government's responsibility, and it's not.