US Congress Rules That Pizza is a Vegetable

Vashdaman

Za Warudo
Yes, let's allow our governments to trample all over our rights because they have the power to use deadly force against us but we don't have the power to use it against them. Let's have a look at the second amendment:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

The reason the Yanks have guns, enshrined there in law by their founding fathers, is not for self defence, protecting your home and family or any of that other crap that gets trotted out at every political debate; it's to overthrow the government if it becomes tyrannical. And for that reason the ability to own a gun should absolutely be a right anywhere in the world. Notice now that Gaddafi's gone they're trying to get the Libyans to surrender their weapons... Great, so once the citizens are disarmed what's to stop another tyrant rising to power, who they then can't fight because they don't have weapons any more! I would go out and buy a gun tomorrow if they were available here. And if I had a university degree I'd be buying my one way ticket to Canada or America for the cheap land, cheap petrol, low population density and distinct lack of the nanny-no-longer-even-bothering-to-hide-her-swastika-armband state.

They'll need more than just guns to overthrow the government, they'll need the will, intellect and health of body to do it. And it's questionable if enough of the American mass population have those things. Guns are useles by themselves in any revolutionary cause. But to be honest I'd rather have a peaceful revolution without the need for guns and violence which is no less viable than a violent one in America at least.
And the fact remains the gun crime is a by product of the gun culture. Is it worth all those preventable deaths just for some useless token of potential rebellion?

And that choice should be theirs to make. Government shouldn't be about telling people what to do and controlling their lives - if you give individuals responsibility over their own lives, they have to deal with the consequences of not doing so. If someone wants to spend all their money eating themselves to death then let them. It's their money and their health.

Absolutely. But that's the point, the government/pharma industry is controlling many lives in this respect. How much fear do they use to force new parents in to vaccinating their children (regardless of whether the vaccination itself is right or wrong)? Or how stupid are we told we are for using alternative methods to heal ourselves, because apparently those methods don't work and even if they have worked, we're still told they didn't work. If you don't conform to the idea of conventional healthcare your systematically told your a bad and stupid person. They still have much control over the mass population. Although I am hoping for change and to be honest I think awareness is increasing.

he americans were wrong they do need jamie oliver for education on food

I agree. Sorry if I seemed a lil offensive over your family joke by the way, I was joking myself.
 

Vashdaman

Za Warudo
Ooh, Ayase hang on. I think I just figured out why you posted that last bit. When I said that the price was their health, I wasn't talking about it being the cost of them eating Pizza. I was stating that people's health is ironically often the cost of their usage of conventional drugs to temporarily relive the symtoms of an underlying root illness, which is rarely tackled properly in much conventional medical practice. So in simpler words its like a drug addict, they have issues so they take some drugs for temporary relief become reliant and so in the end only become more unwell from the substances they are taking rather than deal with the underlying mental/emotional issues that drove them to drugs in the firs place.

OK, for the rest of my response please see Ryo chans birthday thread.


@vashdaman na its armless family joke.

Aha, nice one AF. Cause we we're just debating the right to bear arms and whatnot, right. Sharp man, I like it.
 

ayase

State Alchemist
vashdaman said:
And that choice should be theirs to make. Government shouldn't be about telling people what to do and controlling their lives - if you give individuals responsibility over their own lives, they have to deal with the consequences of not doing so. If someone wants to spend all their money eating themselves to death then let them. It's their money and their health.
Absolutely. But that's the point, the government/pharma industry is controlling many lives in this respect. How much fear do they use to force new parents in to vaccinating their children (regardless of whether the vaccination itself is right or wrong)? Or how stupid are we told we are for using alternative methods to heal ourselves, because apparently those methods don't work and even if they have worked, we're still told they didn't work. If you don't conform to the idea of conventional healthcare your systematically told your a bad and stupid person. They still have much control over the mass population. Although I am hoping for change and to be honest I think awareness is increasing.
Straying from the point a bit, but I see what you're getting at. Nobody is being forced to do those things though. Yes, they're being strongly advised, encouraged and advertised at but the same is true of buying a particular brand of crisps or soft drink. It's not my fault if other people are easily manipulated, we have to let them make their own choices for good or ill. That's the only way they'll learn.

Taking away people's rights whether deciding they can't have guns or telling them what to eat is taking away their ability to make an informed choice and learn from that experience. And every new piece of legislation that takes people's rights away from them (no matter how small) just makes them dumber and more dependent on the state, like parents making decisions for their children. Which of course the state loves, because like controlling parents they increase their power over people. That's what the people at the top want, to make us stupid and complacent and apathetic so that they can basically use us like slaves. Having these people make decisions for us is never a good thing.
 

Vashdaman

Za Warudo
Yes, they're being strongly advised, encouraged and advertised at but the same is true of buying a particular brand of crisps or soft drink

Hmm, I think it's a little more extreme in the case of medicine. When we tell our doctor's we've given up crisp's we're told "Good for you!" if we inform them we don't wish to vaccinate our children we're often told "Errr, You wanna be negligent parent, is that what you want to be? You child could die at any moment if un-vaccinated!!" And I'm not exaggerating.
But then I guess this reflects how much more powerful and profitable the drugs industry is compared to the fast food industry

aking away people's rights whether deciding they can't have guns or telling them what to eat is taking away their ability to make an informed choice and learn from that experience. And every new piece of legislation that takes people's rights away from them (no matter how small) just makes them dumber and more dependent on the state, like parents making decisions for their children. Which of course the state loves, because like controlling parents they increase their power over people. That's what the people at the top want, to make us stupid and complacent and apathetic so that they can basically use us like slaves. Having these people make decisions for us is never a good thing.

Aside from guns, I never suggested taking away any kind of right though. I do suggest raising awareness about the medicine industry and how better you can heal yourself, though.
 

Project-2501

Straw Hat Pirate
ayase said:
And every new piece of legislation that takes people's rights away from them (no matter how small) just makes them dumber and more dependent on the state,

Well, they were pretty dumb to start with...

But do you think the 'merican govt should legislate to help the dumb and the poor or should they be like the founding fathers and do their level best to protect the interests of the educated, wealthy elite?

After all the constitution was written by the 1% of the time.
 

ayase

State Alchemist
I certainly don't think any government which comes to power democratically in today's political climate can be trusted to help the people at the bottom. From the Enlightenment to the Industrial Revolution, enough of the 1% had a social conscience to make government about something more than protecting their own interests. Now I think the only fair way forward is to remove government entirely so that no-one, rich or poor, is afforded any protection at all. Things would soon level out then I think. Besides, it's not like I favour the people at either end of society: It's composed of little else but self-serving bastards, top to bottom. They should all be treated the same.
 

Project-2501

Straw Hat Pirate
The ones at the top "don't tax me any more, you get enough from me"
The ones at the bottom "give me more money!"

As ever though, it is better to give than receive :)
 
Top