The Song Fight Bulletin Board

Jefff wrote:

jack wrote:and to some people (not me), their belief in creationism is fact. at least to them it is. to them, faith is more powerful than science. and who is to say they actually are wrong?

Wait, I thought you were arguing FOR common sense.

i am arguing for the sake of arguing. and nothing stirs up a good argument like god and the right to smoke a butt.

Smoking bans are GREAT!!!
Now the wife and I can go eat, sit in the bar section and not be bothered by cigs OR kids. Best thing to happen!


I smoke, but I go outside.

jack wrote:we are bombarded by advertisements hyping the latest pill to cure whatever ails us (have a restless leg, take a pill!). will these new medications lead to side effects 20 years down the road?

I heard that Viagra could quite possibly lead to a permanent boner.
That would be a conversation starter.
I can see Caravan Ray now at a very important grand opening of the new wallaby tunnel, with news cameras, the Mayor, the sixth grade 4H club, and John pitching a tent as he gives his speech. Then every time he turns sideways to point to the tunnel, everyone in the audience looks like this

i think farting in public should also be banned. i mean, that methane gas can't be good to breathe, even if nobody has ever died from breathing someone else's farts (i wonder if a study was ever commissioned here...maybe silent but deadly is more than just an expression)

plus, it's kind of rude too.

Calgary's got some kind of smoking ban - I'm glad. I don't like smoke - some smells bad, and some is too tempting. I'd rather not smell it. I think it should be allowed in bars though - go into a bar at your own risk, but don't smoke around a bunch of kids outside.

Smoking is for addicts. I am anti-freeze. I am also more appropriate in another thread... so I'll head over htere.

Smoking bans are wrong, plain and simple.
The government has no right interfering with a private business.
Everyone, including nonsmokers, should oppose such bans.
I dont smoke cigarettes, I used to but I quit. I oppose this oppression.

The way these legislations are written, it even makes it impossible for a business owner to set up a well ventilated room, for the exclusive use of smokers. During say lunch break. Even if non smokers are never required to go there, its still illegal to have a smoking room.

But then this isnt a health issue.

It never was never will be.

Its a control issue, its another small step.


Its interesting to note that when Hitler assumed power, his first major propaganda war was against smoking, culminating in a series of smoking bans similar to the type we are seeing today.
His reason was the same also. The Fabien slip of control. And we know how that turned out, right.


Dont give an inch, cos they'll just take another and another and another etc.

Dont be a good german. Fight for our rights and freedom. They aint gonna last for long, at the rate we are allowing them to be taken. And we wont get em back.

Take home point: Remember this has nothing to do with health or cost or even the environment. Its all about contolling peoples lives.


PS I also believe government has no role in banning guns or drugs or anything. I mean surfers get eaten by sharks, should we ban surfing, or sharks.

Me$$iah wrote:surfers get eaten by sharks, should we ban surfing, or sharks.

Sharks that eat surfers in public places.

So they're trying to make Ball State's campus smoke free. Which means you can't even smoke outdoors anywhere on campus.

Most retarded thing ever. I voted against it. I don't know what's going to happen.

The scary thing is that people I consider to be intelligent voted in favor of it.

Me$$iah wrote:
1. Its interesting to note that when Hitler assumed power, his first major propaganda war was against smoking,

2. Fight for our rights and freedom. They aint gonna last for long, at the rate we are allowing them to be taken. And we wont get em back.

3. Take home point: Remember this has nothing to do with health or cost or even the environment. Its all about contolling peoples lives.


4. PS I also believe government has no role in banning guns or drugs or anything. I mean surfers get eaten by sharks, should we ban surfing, or sharks.

1. Then alcohol, then drug use, then Jews, then friends of Jews, then...

2. Too late. Well, too late for using the current system to do it. Leading to number 3.

3. I disagree, it's not about controlling LIVES as much as it's just about complete control and control of dissent. I don't think they actually care about our health. (well, perhaps building a healthy army <i>is</i> on their minds, they, their... them...)

4. I'm no where NEAR a gun nut. However, I do believe there is an ominous reason that there is gun control. Anyone remember how we revolted against the monarchy? We stored caches of weapons. Thats the main reason the forefathers added the right to bear arms right into the bill of rights. Now try that these days. All of a sudden your church is a COMPOUND and you'll always be out gunned by the people in charge.

Now, we gotta stop talking about this stuff out loud.

Consider me a good German, I suppose.

But I promise I'll vote against the concentration camps. (I promise!)

No you wont.

If, indeed, you are a 'good german' you will see that when the government tells ya that camps are needed for your security, then you'll vote for them.

I mean otherwise the terrorists will win.

You'll go along to get along.

Haha, I love it. You're trying to tie smoking bans to Bush (who I can only assume is Hitler in this context, cuz who else would be?).

Smoking bans started during Clinton, before terrorism. In Colorado, they started in Boulder, which is populated by people who think exactly like you do about today's America vs. 30s Germany. The government didn't tell us to ban smoking, we as voters decided we wanted it. Where I come from, that's called exercising your rights.

Nope, sorry. Im not trying to tie Bush to smoking bans.
And anyway, Clinton is the same, cut from the same cloth. Evil, just like em all. Clinton, Reagan, both king Georges, Nixon etc.
Not that any of them 'run the show' anyway, they got their bosses and take theeir orders like everyone else

Im trying to point out that America, along with the rest of the world is heading toward a 1984esque future. Smoking bans are just another step along the road. If anything Im tieing fascism to smoking bans, irrelevant of who is imposing em, cos whomever it is they obviously want to exercise some level of control over the lives and businesses of the population they 'serve'

Yes, yes, the people exercised their rights and banned smoking, they held an election and the anti smoking lobby won. Great. So what about the rights of the smoker, or the business owner, I guess they are smokers therefore they have no rights, right?
And as we all know elections are never bought, stolen or manipulated.

Also people think what they are told to think, If they are told to vote to ban smoking the majority will. On the whole people are stupid.
As an example of this, ask around. The majority of Americans truly believe that USA is a democracy founded in christian values, because that is what they've been told their entire lives and for the lives of their parents and theirs. Despite this, this is wrong on both counts. Never a christian nation or a democracy. It was never intended to be. Please read the constitution.
USA is a secular constitutional republic, this is very different from a christian democracy.

I say again: smoking bans are designed to interfere with peoples lifes and take away rights. This is just a step down a dark road.

^
|
|
|
DRUNK POST HELL YES

Me$$iah wrote:Great. So what about the rights of the smoker, or the business owner, I guess they are smokers therefore they have no rights, right?

I think we still let smokers vote. Not 100% sure on that though.

Me$$iah wrote:Also people think what they are told to think, If they are told to vote to ban smoking the majority will.

So how do you know someone isn't just telling you to think all this bullshit?

Indeed, if you spent less time posting ignorant bullshit here and spent 10-20 minutes researching this specific topic you might discover that it was the tobacco companies who promoted the notion of framing the smoking ban debate as a matter of smokers' rights. For example:

http://eurpub.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/co ... t/17/3/306

So, you might think you're being clever and anti-establishment about this, but you're actually just being a tool.

Maybe you should stop wasting your anti-establishment ranting and paranoia on public smoking bans and start focusing them on the repeal of habeas corpus or something else that's real and important?

Me$$iah wrote:On the whole people are stupid.

I am struggling not to respond to this with an ad hominem attack... struggling...

Where I live, the no smoking in bars thing passed through about a year and a half ago. Do you know who was the most vocal opponent to it? The bar owners. I personally got asked by about 6 establishments to sign petitions for them. Bars are not supposed to be healthy places. (remember, they sell liquor there? Cigarettes may cause cancer, they stink, and it's pretty much established that they are bad for you, but they don't cause cirrhosis of the liver or make you violent or irresponsible, or make you crash your car)
I was pretty choked about it at first, but you get over it. It's kind of funny; here's a law that is supposedly brought about to 'protect' bar staff from second hand smoke, and, at least at the bars I frequent, virtually all of the staff smokes anyway.

That said, smoking is bad for you. People who smoke (myself included) should have the common courtesey to not do it around people it will bother. As for government interference, they should have left it up to individual businesses to decide for themself- the lobbyists don't care about the impact on business, they just push their agendas. And why the fuck hasn't tobacco products just been banned outright? Oh, right, because the government makes billions off of it. Fucking hypocrites.

Me$$iah wrote:Hitler.

Godwining this debate does not lend credibility to our side.[size=0]

Yeah yeah, I know, you didn't really break Godwin's law... but still.[/size]

are you still allowed to ride motorcycles in bars?

Denyer wrote:are you still allowed to ride motorcycles in bars?

Yes - but there is talk that the government wants to bring in laws to make full-face helmets mandatory in drive-thu motorcycle bars. It's the thin edge of the wedge, I tell you - the government-nanny-state gone mad! They'll be after the pig wrestling bars next.

Caravan Ray wrote:

Denyer wrote:are you still allowed to ride motorcycles in bars?

Yes - but there is talk that the government wants to bring in laws to make full-face helmets mandatory in drive-thu motorcycle bars. It's the thin edge of the wedge, I tell you - the government-nanny-state gone mad! They'll be after the pig wrestling bars next.

You know who else wanted to ban motorcycles in bars?