[ilovetv]

Puritans told to "stay out of my bedroom".....but "move into my kitchen"......

"Puritanism in the historical sense is as dead as the Salem witches. The religious group that settled in New England outlawed theater, rejected any form of sex except marital intercourse, banned celebration of Christmas and spent hours in church listening to horrifying depictions of Hell.

But the term has come to be a synonym for any disapproval or discouragement of carnal pleasure. Sexual puritanism has receded even among devout Christians, who generally see nothing wrong with husbands and wives gratifying each other however they please.

In society as a whole, things have changed even more drastically. Virginity is no longer held up as an ideal for young people; TV has an abundance of flesh and raunch; and the majority of Americans no longer see homosexual acts as "always wrong."

Most people don't think it's their place to tell others what sort of sexual behavior is acceptable. With few exceptions, it has become a private matter of individual preference. Laws against sodomy are extinct. Divorce is easy to get. Your sex life is off-limits to government regulation. Busybodies have little impact on policy.

But puritans haven't vanished. They've merely changed the subject. The expansion of freedom in matters of sex has coincided with a shrinkage in matters of health. New Yorkers would laugh at laws policing sex, but they elected a mayor who has no problem trying to control other physical indulgences.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg brought forth a ban on large sugar-laden beverages, which this week was struck down by a state court. But the idea won't go away that easily: The city will appeal the ruling, and other cities are considering similar laws....."

The Tyranny of the Virtuous
The Tyranny of the Virtuous - Reason.com

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by ilovetv

Puritans told to "stay out of my bedroom".....but "move into my kitchen"......

"Puritanism in the historical sense is as dead as the Salem witches. The religious group that settled in New England outlawed theater, rejected any form of sex except marital intercourse, banned celebration of Christmas and spent hours in church listening to horrifying depictions of Hell.

But the term has come to be a synonym for any disapproval or discouragement of carnal pleasure. Sexual puritanism has receded even among devout Christians, who generally see nothing wrong with husbands and wives gratifying each other however they please.

In society as a whole, things have changed even more drastically. Virginity is no longer held up as an ideal for young people; TV has an abundance of flesh and raunch; and the majority of Americans no longer see homosexual acts as "always wrong."

Most people don't think it's their place to tell others what sort of sexual behavior is acceptable. With few exceptions, it has become a private matter of individual preference. Laws against sodomy are extinct. Divorce is easy to get. Your sex life is off-limits to government regulation. Busybodies have little impact on policy.

But puritans haven't vanished. They've merely changed the subject. The expansion of freedom in matters of sex has coincided with a shrinkage in matters of health. New Yorkers would laugh at laws policing sex, but they elected a mayor who has no problem trying to control other physical indulgences.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg brought forth a ban on large sugar-laden beverages, which this week was struck down by a state court. But the idea won't go away that easily: The city will appeal the ruling, and other cities are considering similar laws....."

The Tyranny of the Virtuous
The Tyranny of the Virtuous - Reason.com

It appears that the pendulum has swung the other way: We got rid of the Puritans only to be plagued by the unpure. That is to say the overweight and obese who want unlimited new taxes to pay for their healthcare (i.e., bypass operations, stints, and many other items related to being overweight).

Overall, taxes are so high for New York City dwellers (for those who pay taxes) many of them are moving away to other places. They are leaving in droves. And yet, those who are left behind still demand their free services like bypass operations etc.. Taxpayers in New York City pay federal, state and city taxes. When you add in all other taxes like property taxes etc., about 60% of their income goes to taxes.

Meddling in other peoples lives also applies to people who keep reaching into your pocket for more money to pay for their unhealthy lifestyles.

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

It appears that the pendulum has swung the other way: We got rid of the Puritans only to be plagued by the unpure. That is to say the overweight and obese who want unlimited new taxes to pay for their healthcare (i.e., bypass operations, stints, and many other items related to being overweight).

Overall, taxes are so high for New York City dwellers (for those who pay taxes) many of them are moving away to other places. They are leaving in droves. And yet, those who are left behind still demand their free services like bypass operations etc.. Taxpayers in New York City pay federal, state and city taxes. When you add in all other taxes like property taxes etc., about 60% of their income goes to taxes.

Meddling in other peoples lives also applies to people who keep reaching into your pocket for more money to pay for their unhealthy lifestyles.

Actually, NBC News reported last evening that NYC gained more population than it lost in 2012. NYC gained more people than it lost in 2012, reversing decadeslong trend - DailyFreeman.com

I guess they're all tea drinkers.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by gomoho

I doubt that obesity is causing financial ruin. It's probably more like exhorbitant wages for city workers with outrageous pension plans.

I don't know what the exact costs are for different items in the city budget and, unfortunately, I don't have the time to do the research. Perhaps you, or someone else, might give it a try.

But I can tell you that Bloomberg does not agree with you. I found an article online with the following heading:

"Mayor Bloomberg says costs of treating obesity will bury all of us"
You would think they would give a dollar amount in the article but I didn't find any.


Note: In previous posts I mispelled Bloomberg. Sorry!

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

Who really has the right to tell someone that they must pay for the healthcare of someone who has health issues related to being overweight or obese?

I don't think it is a rights issue. I believe we should pay for the healthcare of someone that volunteered to go into the military and go to Iraq even though they knew it was bad for their health. I feel it is the responsibility of those of us who are fortunate enough to have money and health to care for those that do not no matter what the circumstances are that put them in that position. I don't think they are sick or poor on purpose.

[Golfingnut]

Originally Posted by rubicon

Well I believe that Bloomberg is on to something. i don't like the idea of people having more money than me. so what I am going to push for equal distribution of all monies so that everyone of us has enough to fly to Bermuda on the weekend.

Actually, I think it is really shortsighted to believe that the cause for someone being obsese is concentrated on a big gulp.

I guess some folks who believe that another person, organization government can have the right to dictate to them means that the reasons for living in america was somehow lost on them. for me give me liberty or give me death "" down with bloombergers once and for all

And by the way when Bloomberg manision on the water sinks in the sea all homeowners will foot the bill to have it paid for nd subsidze it for insurance

What in the world has happen to the true individuals. John Waynewhere are you when you are needed As my hero Popeye says "I can't stands no more.

John Wayne was a fictional actor in many western films. The man that played that actor was Marion Morrison from Iowa. He smoked to much and drank to much and died of stomach cancer. God rest his soul.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by pooh

Needs to start in the schools, in advertising....everyone is trying to make a buck....but it might not....and even if it doesn't, officials must tread lightly when it seems they will be forcing food decisions upon the masses.

It needs to start in the schools you say. Well, that seems logical but local vendors, like burger joints etc., don't want teachers telling students that burgers, fries and a coke are bad for them. They will say that they pay taxes too and they don't want their tax money going to nutrition teachers who will tell kids that fast food is bad for their health. And just a reminder: The food industy is very powerful.

If they do teach it in school, they will be told not to say that anything is bad. Don't forget they will have to be mindful of possible lawsuits from the food industry. Teachers will be told to just say what is good. Therefore, it will be so watered down that it will be nearly worthless.

Right now it seems like food decisions are being forced through emotional manipulation from advertising. Kids, and their parents, are bombarded with advertising everyday. And processed foods are everywhere.

We as Americans take our freedoms for granted....until someone decides we are unable to make choices on our own....right or wrong, we still have the right to decide what we, as individuals, will ingest. All this over cup size....just imagine what it would be like if actual food portions came under scrutiny.

Allow me to remind you: No food has ever been banned and no one is talking about banning any food.

Also, some of us might take another freedom for granted: That is the freedom to aquire savings (for retirement etc..) and not have it all taxed away to pay for those who, for whatever reason, have decided to live unhealthy lifestyles. An obesity epidemic means an ever growing demand for tax revenue to pay for their healthcare.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by CFrance

Actually, NBC News reported last evening that NYC gained more population than it lost in 2012. NYC gained more people than it lost in 2012, reversing decadeslong trend - DailyFreeman.com

I guess they're all tea drinkers.

I think you missed my point; perhaps I didn't explain it well enough. When I said people are moving out in droves, I was referring to high income people who pay most of the taxes. They are moving out because they want to protect their income.

What kind of people moved in? I would bet they are mostly lower income people who have nothing to lose but everyting to gain from the liberal amount city services that are offered.

[Villages PL]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

I don't think it is a rights issue. I believe we should pay for the healthcare of someone that volunteered to go into the military and go to Iraq even though they knew it was bad for their health.

If you don't mind, here's where you went wrong with that analogy: Military people risk their lives to fight for our freedom and so they deserve to get healthcare on that basis. They are our heroes.

I feel it is the responsibility of those of us who are fortunate enough to have money and health to care for those that do not no matter what the circumstances are that put them in that position. I don't think they are sick or poor on purpose.

You are correct. I only ask where their right is when someone asks me where the right is for New York City to lower the soda size from 20 ounces to 16. No one is ever deprived of healthcare and no one is suggesting that anyone should be.

The city of New York wants to make this minor change hoping to nudge things in the right direction and thereby help save New York from it's fiscal problems. And I might add that it looks like a pretty darn good trade off for all the millions of people who don't pay any taxes. And for those who do pay taxes, Bloomberg is acting on their behalf by holding the line on taxation.

[gomoho]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

If you don't mind, here's where you went wrong with that analogy: Military people risk their lives to fight for our freedom and so they deserve to get healthcare on that basis. They are our heroes.




You are correct. I only ask where their right is when someone asks me where the right is for New York City to lower the soda size from 20 ounces to 16. No one is ever deprived of healthcare and no one is suggesting that anyone should be.

The city of New York wants to make this minor change hoping to nudge things in the right direction and thereby help save New York from it's fiscal problems. And I might add that it looks like a pretty darn good trade off for all the millions of people who don't pay any taxes. And for those who do pay taxes, Bloomberg is acting on their behalf by holding the line on taxation.

I think where your argument raises the hair on the back of my neck is when you say "make this minor change hoping to nudge things in the right direction" so who decides what is the right direction and when it should stop. That is a VERY slippery slope to head down.

[Heartnsoul]

Bloomberg is a complete idiot and if people don't see it's about CONTROL more than soda than they deserve him in NY.!! No gov't should be big enough to TELL us what we can and cannot have!! I am a health fanatic myself but in no way, shape or form do I feel it is MY business to tell you what you can and cannot eat. People make choices and therein lie the consequences. That's what our country is supposed to stand for - the FREEDOM to make choices.

[cbg150]

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

I don't think it is a rights issue. I believe we should pay for the healthcare of someone that volunteered to go into the military and go to Iraq even though they knew it was bad for their health. I feel it is the responsibility of those of us who are fortunate enough to have money and health to care for those that do not no matter what the circumstances are that put them in that position. I don't think they are sick or poor on purpose.

Nice to see some human compassion on display here! How does a discussion about providing consumers choices and incentives to consume reasonable portions morph into I won't pay for you! When did people become so selfish?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CFrance]

Originally Posted by Villages PL

I think you missed my point; perhaps I didn't explain it well enough. When I said people are moving out in droves, I was referring to high income people who pay most of the taxes. They are moving out because they want to protect their income.

What kind of people moved in? I would bet they are mostly lower income people who have nothing to lose but everyting to gain from the liberal amount city services that are offered.

I get your point, but then... if taxes are so high that people are moving out, how could the lower income people afford to move in?

I need to check this out further, Villages PL.

[graciegirl]

How about...........if everyone drank diet coke?

[gomoho]

Gracie - lots of bad stuff in that as well - probably next on the hit list!