[Vision2020] Choices
Mo Hendrickson
hend5953 at vandals.uidaho.edu
Fri Jul 24 13:11:50 PDT 2009
One question Gary. I am hoping you can clarify this point for me...
How would my desire to marry my partner adversely affect you?
Your marriage, I am making an assumption that you are married, has no effect on me, so why would mine have any bearing on you? Why do you advocate for denying me and my partner a legally recognized marriage?
Not that I expect an answer but I thought I would put it out there. I guess anybody who is opposed to same gender marriage could answer this question. And so we don't head down the ridiculous path of marrying goats, I am defining same gender marriage as two consenting adults.
-Mo
From: lockshop at pull.twcbc.com
To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 12:41:22 -0700
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] "Please do not continue to confuse people with facts."
Another inconsequential argument. No valid
marriages are being rendered "null and void" and I'm not suggesting that any be
made so. I think that my views are quite consistant. I'm in favor of choice when
the choice doesn't adversely affect others who have no way of escaping my
decision.
What strikes me as strange is your notion that
your personally concocted idea of freedoms should be celebrated
and allowed to impact any and everyone with no regard for adverse
impact.
g
----- Original Message -----
From:
Joe
Campbell
To: the lockshop
Cc: TIM RIGSBY ; <starbliss at gmail.com> ; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 11:43
AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] "Please do not
continue to confuse people with facts."
So you think that the state should not be forced to recognize marriage?
If they were to say that conservatives with inconsistent views were not
allowed to marry, and thus your marriage was null and void, that would be fine
with you? Yipes! As I said, this is a strange kind of freedom!
And I'm not putting words in your mouth. I'm just pointing out the
implications of your own words.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 24, 2009, at 1:55 PM, "the lockshop" <lockshop at pull.twcbc.com>
wrote:
Is mis-stating my position really the only way
you can think of to try and make a valid point?
As I have said repeatedly, I believe that if
homosexuals can find someone who is willing to pronounce them man and man,
wife and wife, or man, wife, wife, or any permutation thereof then
swell, I wish them the best. What I am not in favor of is in my or the state
being forced to recognize it.
With regard to the abortion issue though
I've really got to admit that you've got me caught on the horns of a
delimma. How could I not see the similarity between making a choice
that has a 1 in 15 chance of potentially damaging the health of the
person doing the choosing and making a decision that has
a 100% chance of killing an innocent party?
In both of your examples the decision extends
to others who will not be given a choice to participate. Bar patrons and
employess do get to make an informed choice and as a result your comments
seem a trifle lame.
g
----- Original Message -----
From:
Joe Campbell
To: the lockshop
Cc: TIM RIGSBY ; <starbliss at gmail.com> ; <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 9:29
AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] "Please do
not continue to confuse people with facts."
You don't even think that ADULTS are able to make decisions about
whom to marry or whether pr not to have children, so stop pretending to
respect a person's right to make decisions for him or
herself!
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 24, 2009, at 12:11 PM, "the lockshop" <lockshop at pull.twcbc.com>
wrote:
It would seem that you, Mr. Moffet, and our city
council have a mighty low opinion of the intelligence of the patrons and
employees of bars and taverns. I can't speak for your students but, I
find it very difficult to believe that by the time a citizen reaches the
age of 21 in the United States he hasn't heard the
anti-smoking mantra to the point of nausea.
How lucky we are that there are people out there
who will take it upon themselves to prevent emancipated Americans from
making their own decisions with regard to the risks they take in
life.
g
----- Original Message -----
From:
TIM RIGSBY
To: starbliss at gmail.com ; vision2020 at moscow.com
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 7:47
AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] "Please
do not continue to confuse people with facts."
I would like to add the idea of this
saying,
"Don't let the facts get in the way of a good
story."
Either way Ted, you brought up some very valid points
that tend to be forgotten when people discuss tobacco/smoking
regulation and legislation. What scares me as a Health Teacher
is when I hear my junior high and high school aged students talking
about how safe, they think anyway, Hookah bars are. When asked
if they would ever smoke cigarettes, they claim that they won't.
Yet what these students don't realize is that they are actually
smoking tobacco at the high school hookah parties. What is even
scarier is a lot of the parents think that hookah is a safe
alternative as well.
The hookah bar closest to my house
in Boise is constantly packed with young people all of the time.
Often times, other substances are being laced into the tobacco as well
and these young people are unknowingly smoking illegal drugs along
with their fruit and tobacco mixture.
I predict in the not so
distant future, Boise and possibly the State Legislature will enact
legislation to regulate/control these hookah
establishments.
Here is a question to ponder. By
definition based on Idaho Code, what is a hookah bar categorized
as? A restaurant, a bar, a private club? If it falls under
the bar definition, then people under 21 should not be allowed
in. It seems as though hookah bars would fall into an undefined
gray area of the Idaho Clean Indoor Air Act. However, Moscow
seems to have covered hookah bars in their recent ban of smoking, I
could be wrong though.
" 'Politics is the art of controlling
your environment.' That is one of the key things I learned in these
years, and I learned it the hard way. Anybody who thinks that 'it
doesn't matter who's President' has never been Drafted and sent off to
fight and die in a vicious, stupid War on the other side of the World
-- or been beaten and gassed by Police for trespassing on public
property -- or been hounded by the IRS for purely political reasons --
or locked up in the Cook County Jail with a broken nose and no phone
access and twelve perverts wanting to stomp your ass in the shower.
That is when it matters who is President or Governor or Police Chief.
That is when you will wish you had voted." - Hunter S.
Thompson
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 21:39:45 -0700
From: starbliss at gmail.com
To:
vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject:
[Vision2020] "Please do not continue to confuse people with
facts."
The "Off List" response referenced, from someone I regard as one
of the most educated and honest Vision2020 participants, that I
received to my post below on tobacco regulation, is in total what is
stated in the subject heading of this post. Wise words, no
doubt, that I ignore at my own risk...
Notice there is limited or no discussion of some of the critical
facts my post presented: that tobacco (nicotine) is a
physically addictive drug, with underage tobacco addiction
common, raising questions if whether adult "choice" is in effect
regarding employees or consumers in tobacco related
decisions; that tobacco is the leading cause of premature death
(nuclear waste or energy or even nuclear weapons production is not
even close as a cause of premature death); that other drugs doing less
harm to society than tobacco are criminalized and prosecuted
aggressively, involving civil and human rights violations, yet
who among those opposing regulation of tobacco, will as
aggressively advocate for these drugs to be managed by free
choice and the marketplace, rather than a government "Big
Brother?" Some, perhaps... While there are others who should
know better playing some on this list as fools, for the sake of
debate, or political advantage, or popular image or whatever... Or
they are as deluded as those they are debating with...
My response to the "Off List" comment discussed here:
Ummm... OK, I guess... However, being an idealist in belief that
expressing the truth is morally mandated (where did I get that
dangerous idea? I''ll end up in serious trouble! Oh, I
forgot, I already am...), I may not comply. I recently read a
variation of this same expression in James Lovelock's "Revenge of
Gaia:" "Don't confuse me with the facts, my minds made up."
Lovelock was referring to this mentality regarding the rejection of
nuclear power by many in the environmental movement.
Ted
Please do not continue to confuse people with
facts.
-----
Original Message -----
From:
Ted
Moffett
To:
Moscow Vision 2020
Sent:
Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:55 AM
Subject:
[Vision2020] Tobacco: Targeting the Nation’s Leading Killer:
Centers for Disease Control
Tobacco (nicotine) is a physically addictive drug. Once
addicted, "choice" becomes a problematic concept. And many
people become addicted while underage, encouraged to continue
their addiction in bars, where cigarettes are often shared
between customers.
The fact tobacco is physically addictive is absent from the
comments of many opposing the smoking ordinance, as are the facts
regarding the magnitude of the damage. Comparisons
to other harmful behaviors are drawn (fatty food, etc.),
suggesting that a slippery slope of regulation will lead to
government control over too many aspects of life, but many of
these behaviors do not involve a drug addiction. Of
course alcohol has dramatic negative impacts. But workers in
bars are not forced to drink the drinks the customers
order, as they breathe the smoke of the customers.
I find it incredible that the health of workers exposed to an
addictive drug when they breathe in the workplace is approached so
callously. They can work elsewhere, it's announced with smug
authority, as if in this economy workers have the luxury of
choosing whatever job suits their fancy, rather than an urgency to
take whatever work they can find. If it was cocaine or
heroin or methamphetamine that workers were exposed to, the
attitude might be different.
Profits from exposing workers to addictive drugs in the
workplace should be protected based on free market, free choice,
adult responsibility? If this is the logic, where are the
protests against laws imposed on those selling
cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine, et. al., to consenting
adults, which can result in long prison sentences? Let the
free market decide! Why stand in the way of profits and
the free choice of adults?
If those opposing the smoking ordinance were consistent in
their outrage against limits on the free market, their ideology
might have more intellectual credibility. Instead, the
libertarianism proposed is inconsistent and conformist. Or
perhaps those opposed to the smoking ordinance will now protest
that bars do not allow legal cocaine, heroin or methamphetamine
use? Think of the profits to be made! And remember,
tobacco prematurely kills more people than those three drugs
combined...
If attempts were made to criminalize tobacco like cannabis
is, resulting in prison sentences, home invasions, for sale or
use, I would oppose this vehemently. But an ordinance
regulating smoking in bars does not stop any adult from legally
using tobacco products in settings where they do not expose
workers.
If worker freedom of choice was a valid argument to justify
the exposure of workers to tobacco smoke in bars, than OSHA could
be mostly eliminated. After all, if workers exposed to
hazards monitored or banned by OSHA don't want to work with those
risks, they can work elsewhere, as long as signs posted in the
workplace inform them of the risks. A "Big Brother"
government bureaucracy gone.
--------------------------
http://www.cdc.gov/NCCDPHP/publications/aag/osh.htm
The Burden of Tobacco UseTobacco use is the single most
preventable cause of disease, disability, and death in the United
States. Each year, an estimated 443,000 people die prematurely
from smoking or exposure to secondhand smoke, and another 8.6
million have a serious illness caused by smoking. For every person
who dies from smoking, 20 more people suffer from at least one
serious tobacco-related illness. Despite these risks,
approximately 43.4 million U.S. adults smoke cigarettes. Smokeless
tobacco, cigars, and pipes also have deadly consequences,
including lung, larynx, esophageal, and oral cancers.
The
harmful effects of smoking do not end with the smoker. More than
126 million nonsmoking Americans, including children and adults,
are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke. Even brief exposure can
be dangerous because nonsmokers inhale many of the same
carcinogens and toxins in cigarette smoke as smokers. Secondhand
smoke exposure causes serious disease and death, including heart
disease and lung cancer in nonsmoking adults and sudden infant
death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, ear problems, and
more frequent and severe asthma attacks in children. Each year,
primarily because of exposure to secondhand smoke, an estimated
3,000 nonsmoking Americans die of lung cancer, more than 46,000
(range: 22,700–69,600) die of heart disease, and about
150,000–300,000 children younger than 18 months have lower
respiratory tract infections.
Coupled with this enormous health
toll is the significant economic burden of tobacco use—more than
$96 billion per year in medical expenditures and another $97
billion per year resulting from lost productivity.
[A text description of this graph is also
available.]
The Tobacco Use Epidemic Can Be StoppedA 2007 Institute
of Medicine (IOM) report presented a blueprint for action to
“reduce smoking so substantially that it is no longer a public
health problem for our nation.” The two-pronged strategy for
achieving this goal includes not only strengthening and fully
implementing currently proven tobacco control measures, but also
changing the regulatory landscape to permit policy innovations.
Foremost among the IOM recommendations is that each state should
fund a comprehensive tobacco control program at the level
recommended by CDC in Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco
Control Programs–2007.
Evidence-based, statewide tobacco
control programs that are comprehensive, sustained, and
accountable have been shown to reduce smoking rates,
tobacco-related deaths, and diseases caused by smoking. A
comprehensive program is a coordinated effort to establish
smoke-free policies and social norms, to promote and assist
tobacco users to quit, and to prevent initiation of tobacco use.
This approach combines educational, clinical, regulatory,
economic, and social strategies.
Research has documented the
effectiveness of laws and policies to protect the public from
secondhand smoke exposure, promote cessation, and prevent
initiation when they are applied in a comprehensive way. For
example, states can increase the unit price of tobacco products;
implement smoking bans through policies, regulations, and laws;
provide insurance coverage of tobacco use treatment; and limit
minors’ access to tobacco products.
If the nation is to achieve
the objectives outlined in Healthy People 2010,
comprehensive, evidence-based approaches for preventing smoking
initiation and increasing cessation need to be fully
implemented.
CDC's ResponseCDC is the lead federal agency for tobacco
control. CDC’s Office on Smoking and Health (OSH) provides
national leadership for a comprehensive, broad-based approach to
reducing tobacco use. A variety of government agencies,
professional and voluntary organizations, and academic
institutions have joined together to advance this approach, which
involves the following activities:
Preventing young people from starting to smoke.
Eliminating exposure to secondhand smoke.
Promoting quitting among young people and adults.
Identifying and eliminating tobacco-related health
disparities. Essential elements of this approach include
state-based, community-based, and health system-based
interventions; cessation services; counter marketing; policy
development and implementation; surveillance; and evaluation.
These activities target groups who are at highest risk for
tobacco-related health
problems.
-------------------------------------------
Vision2020
Post: Ted
Moffett
Windows Live™ Hotmail®: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports
pics. Check it out.
=======================================================
List
services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG
- www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 /
Virus Database: 270.13.26/2257 - Release Date: 07/23/09
18:00:00
=======================================================
List
services made available by First Step Internet,
serving
the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
http://www.fsr.net
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus
Database: 270.13.27/2258 - Release Date: 07/24/09
05:58:00
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG -
www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.392 / Virus Database: 270.13.27/2258 - Release
Date: 07/24/09 05:58:00
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20090724/9a97ae50/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list