More Freedom Loving Lefties On The March

Serapis said:
That is hardly a law.... it is a poor decision of a school administrator... If the parents want, they can probably get it overturned in a court or school board hearing... This is hardly big brother at all.... And to insinuate that the left is for abortions for kids is just plain asinine....
Click to expand...
Another person who didn't even to bother clicking the links and reading. Why even bother debating your point if you aren't going to even do the basic leg work.

The Mayor of the entire city of BOSTON wants to ban specific food items. Boston is not some lil Appalachian po dunk mountain town.
 
I have yet to see our rightist friends defending local laws by local governments, the suposed heart of every one of their "beeg government is eeeeevil" rants.
 
Serapis said:
That is hardly a law.... it is a poor decision of a school administrator... If the parents want, they can probably get it overturned in a court or school board hearing... This is hardly big brother at all.... And to insinuate that the left is for abortions for kids is just plain asinine....
Click to expand...

The gov can't tell a woman what to do with her body when she is pregnant, but if she gives birth the gov can tell her what to do with her childs body? I haven't been to high school in a long time, but from what I remember even the "healthy" stuff was about as fresh as a week old dog turd. I brought my lunch every day. So unless Jaime Oliver is behind the counter and they are buying groceries every day from Whole Foods, kids should be allowed to bring their lunch.

I guess with public schooling and the internet, soon parents can be absolved of all responsibilty for their children
 
I don't think that anyone is in disagreement over children bringing lunches that their family provided for them. In fact the odds are that if someone is responsable enough to give their kid a bag, they are reasonable enough to put something half way decent in there for the kid.
 
Personal responsibility, thats what this is about. the liberal retards don't believe in responsibility, they believe in Government force.
 
Please explain what you think socialized medicine is. I thought medicine was a for profit business model, owned by shareholders, corporations and organizations. There sure are a lot of private hospitals and Dr's and Nurses that we better go seize so they can fit your definition of social.... last time I checked, pharmacies, hospitals, Dr's all are in it for a living and they aren't owned by the govt... We may one day have socialized medicine, but the Health Reform Act certainly didn't bring it....

MrDank007 said:
Well with socialized medicine coming, you could see why they would want to hedge
Click to expand...
 
NoDrama said:
Another person who didn't even to bother clicking the links and reading. Why even bother debating your point if you aren't going to even do the basic leg work.

The Mayor of the entire city of BOSTON wants to ban specific food items. Boston is not some lil Appalachian po dunk mountain town.
Click to expand...

notice how you can pick the libs out by their argument every single time. was there any doubt that the libs would love these ideas? nope, because libs love telling other people whats good for them.

and someone says libs arent for abortion for children? wow, somebody better tell nancy, lemme get another facelift, pelosi. as i recall, she was pushing to get the law passed that parents didnt need to be notified, ever, if the kid wanted an abortion. my memory may have the wrong person but it was certainly libs that were trying to pass it.

and its libs who want to give our kids birth control in school without parent permission, but the parents are too fucking dumb to pack a kids lunch.

scary people you libs, scary people.
 
Serapis said:
Please explain what you think socialized medicine is. I thought medicine was a for profit business model, owned by shareholders, corporations and organizations. There sure are a lot of private hospitals and Dr's and Nurses that we better go seize so they can fit your definition of social.... last time I checked, pharmacies, hospitals, Dr's all are in it for a living and they aren't owned by the govt... We may one day have socialized medicine, but the Health Reform Act certainly didn't bring it....
Click to expand...

evidently social medicine has to do with forbidding parents to raise their kids.
 
A couple of friends and I were having a conversation the other day about things that were acceptable back in the day, but seem ridiculous now. I remember as a teen, racing down the freeway with a bunch of us packed into the back of a friends pickup truck. That was normal. My friend, who's a bit older, remembers when a person could be sitting in the passenger seat with their infant in their lap. Seems crazy now.

I imagine people will look back on the idea of schools making candy and soda available as snacks in the same way. I sure hope so.

Soda, candy, ice cream, cake; these are treats, not meals or every day snacks. Schools never should have been peddling this crap to kids, no matter how much extra money they can get out of it. Shouldn't need them damn pinko, commie libtards to stop it. A bit of common fucking sense should have cut it off before it started.
 
Serapis said:
So do you still believe that the Constitution doesn't have guarantees of rights?
Click to expand...
trying to change what was being argued so you don't look like a fool? The argument was not over whether or not the Constitution PROTECTS your rights, but whether or not it granted them. You plainly stated that the Constitution gives us rights. It does not.
 
Leothwyn said:
A couple of friends and I were having a conversation the other day about things that were acceptable back in the day, but seem ridiculous now. I remember as a teen, racing down the freeway with a bunch of us packed into the back of a friends pickup truck. That was normal. My friend, who's a bit older, remembers when a person could be sitting in the passenger seat with their infant in their lap. Seems crazy now.

I imagine people will look back on the idea of schools making candy and soda available as snacks in the same way. I sure hope so.

Soda, candy, ice cream, cake; these are treats, not meals or every day snacks. Schools never should have been peddling this crap to kids, no matter how much extra money they can get out of it. Shouldn't need them damn pinko, commie libtards to stop it. A bit of common fucking sense should have cut it off before it started.
Click to expand...

I agree. schools don't put vending machines in the hall to give kids choices, they put them there to generate revenue. They make more revenue by being full of stuff kids like. they wouldn't make a profit if it were full of fresh fruit and green beans and Distilled water. They do not force kids to purchase these bad foods either, but they do force kids to eat the schools food at their own expense.
 
social medicine
Click to expand...
the liberal retards don't believe in responsibility, they believe in Government force.
Click to expand...
Cmon guys these statements are pretty unproductive considering HC reform is far from socialized medicine and the fact that most American liberals follow pretty closely with a basically Rawlesian idealogy. For example, I'm pretty liberal but I dont support taking away from parents choice by banning sack lunches. It's just simply not justified. I also wouldn't support a citywide ban on certain foods, that sounds pretty ridiculous TBH.
 
You're a trip dude..... The bill of rights guarantees us personal liberties and limits what our government can do.... it certainly does give us rights, you just once again, want to play with semantics.... Another attempt at trying to win a discussion that you are once again wrong in.... You can define rights the way you want, you can't get around the fact that the Bill of Rights is so named and it part of the US Constitution.....

NoDrama said:
trying to change what was being argued so you don't look like a fool? The argument was not over whether or not the Constitution PROTECTS your rights, but whether or not it granted them. You plainly stated that the Constitution gives us rights. It does not.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dukeanthony
Be Prepared for more Of this in 2012
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
6K
Sandbagger
S
bsemaj
James E. Barber Sr. v. City of Vancouver et.al.
Replies
5
Views
2K
bsemaj
bsemaj
Finshaggy
Occupy
2 3
Replies
43
Views
3K
Finshaggy
Finshaggy
Doctor Pot
Letter from 2012 in Obama's America
2 3
Replies
47
Views
4K
TheBrutalTruth
TheBrutalTruth
CrackerJax
Global Warming... Oops, I'm Sorry It's Now Called CLIMATE CHANGE :lol:
19 20 21
Replies
415
Views
23K
perkie
perkie
Back
Top