# Govt. goes too far!!! NY legislates against fatty foods.



## crhoades (Dec 11, 2006)

Not sure whether to put this in the Political forum, defending the faith forum or what!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16051436/

Can we say unconstitutional!? Next thing, no caffeine, no chocolate...


----------



## Augusta (Dec 11, 2006)

crhoades said:


> Next thing, no caffeine, no chocolate...


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Dec 11, 2006)

When are these big government beaureaucrats gonna realize that prohibition tactics don't work?

Sigh...... This is the nanny state gone crazy. It's pretty scarry really.


----------



## CDM (Dec 11, 2006)

MrMerlin777 said:


> When are these big government beaureaucrats gonna realize that prohibition tactics don't work?
> 
> Sigh...... This is the nanny state gone crazy. It's pretty scarry really.



You give them too much credit by assuming they do these things for noble purposes.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Dec 11, 2006)

You mean our benevolent government would have designs that aren't noble?


----------



## LadyFlynt (Dec 11, 2006)

okay, I don't have a problem with them banning an ARTIFICIAL known health hazard. They can still sell fried foods...they just have to used natural oils to do it.

Now, caffeine and chocolate...they might as well bring back prohibition and it's problems...don't see it happening.


----------



## Richard King (Dec 11, 2006)

They'll have my trans fats when they pry them from my chubby swollen grease stained fingers!!!!!!!


----------



## crhoades (Dec 11, 2006)

Richard King said:


> They'll have my trans fats when they pry them from my chubby swollen grease stained fingers!!!!!!!


 Yeah...not seeing this law passed in the south...might spark another civil war-er- I mean war between the states.


----------



## Answerman (Dec 11, 2006)

Actually, I wouldn't mind the government banning many of the poisons that they have allowed to be put in our food and water supply. Flouride, MSG, Aspertame are among the dangerous chemicals that have plenty of evidence that they should have never been allowed into our food. Also, I always thought that allowing mercury in fillings was one of the stupidest things the government has ever done. With this kind of evidence, I am beginning to believe some of the conspiracy theories that I hear about using chemicals and drugs to pacify and stupify the general population. This is certainly true with the use of drugs like ridalin to treat active children. I sure am glad that I homeschool so the government can't destroy my children's mind and soul.

Don't get me wrong, I consider myself a theonomist so I definitely would like to get government out of 90 percent of the things that they are currently controlling, like education, social security, income tax etc. etc.


----------



## CDM (Dec 12, 2006)

Answerman said:


> Actually, I wouldn't mind the government banning many of the poisons that they have allowed to be put in our food and water supply. Flouride, MSG, Aspertame are among the dangerous chemicals that have plenty of evidence that they should have never been allowed into our food. Also, I always thought that allowing mercury in fillings was one of the stupidest things the government has ever done. With this kind of evidence, I am beginning to believe some of the conspiracy theories that I hear about using chemicals and drugs to pacify and stupify the general population. This is certainly true with the use of drugs like ridalin to treat active children. I sure am glad that I homeschool so the government can't destroy my children's mind and soul.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I consider myself a theonomist so I definitely would like to get government out of 90 percent of the things that they are currently controlling, like education, social security, income tax etc. etc.




To be clear, you are saying that it is good that a government can tell people what they can and can not eat. Right?


----------



## BJClark (Dec 12, 2006)

crhoades;



> Next thing, no caffeine, no chocolate...



You forgot meat..they will make is unconstutional to kill animals for food purposes, because they have all these new fake meat products on the market...worshipping the creation...and not the creator..


----------



## crhoades (Dec 12, 2006)

BJClark said:


> crhoades;
> 
> You forgot meat..they will make is unconstutional to kill animals for food purposes, because they have all these new fake meat products on the market...worshipping the creation...and not the creator..


 
My civil disobedience would be to buy black market chickens and raise them underground so I can have myself some fried chicken. And just think of the illegal chicken market. There could be a ton of money in trafficking chickens. Of course the govt. would make a ton of money on enforcing anti-chicken laws. We could have a "War on Chicken". Of course the taxpayers get stuck in the end. You guys will have to pay for my jail cell and slop as I rot away writing the next Pilgrims Progress...


----------



## CDM (Dec 12, 2006)

crhoades said:


> My civil disobedience would be to buy black market chickens and raise them underground so I can have myself some fried chicken. And just think of the illegal chicken market. There could be a ton of money in trafficking chickens. Of course the govt. would make a ton of money on enforcing anti-chicken laws. We could have a "War on Chicken". Of course the taxpayers get stuck in the end. You guys will have to pay for my jail cell and slop as I rot away writing the next Pilgrims Progress...


----------



## Augusta (Dec 12, 2006)

crhoades said:


> My civil disobedience would be to buy black market chickens and raise them underground so I can have myself some fried chicken. And just think of the illegal chicken market. There could be a ton of money in trafficking chickens. Of course the govt. would make a ton of money on enforcing anti-chicken laws. We could have a "War on Chicken". Of course the taxpayers get stuck in the end. You guys will have to pay for my jail cell and slop as I rot away writing the next Pilgrims Progress...



I love steak



but I think black marketing cows



would be a lot harder than chickens.


----------



## MrMerlin777 (Dec 12, 2006)

BJClark said:


> crhoades;
> 
> 
> 
> You forgot meat..they will make is unconstutional to kill animals for food purposes, because they have all these new fake meat products on the market...worshipping the creation...and not the creator..




"Soylent Green is people!!! It's PEOPLE!!"


----------



## Answerman (Dec 12, 2006)

mangum said:


> To be clear, you are saying that it is good that a government can tell people what they can and can not eat. Right?



Not exaclty, if a food additive has been demonstrated to be a type of poison, it would be tatamount to murder or causing some kind of debilitation. Similar to if a woman was putting a small amount of antifreeze in her husbands coffee each morning in order to eventually kill him. But if something is a ordinary food substance like animal, vegtable or grain than their should be absolutely no prohibition against eating such foods. I am simply saying that some of the chemicals that food manufacturers are allowed to put in our food, usually to enhance the taste or to act as a preservative, that have been demonstrated to be harmful (I realize that some line has to be drawn as to how you define hamful) should not be allowed to be used. Most of the general population know little about chemistry, so I would think that the government should have some role in protecting the citizens from practices that most would agree would be considered unethical if the truth about certains substances were known. I have three children and I want to be cautious for them, since I do not trust the government to be cautious enough for us. Also with the way that big businesses have been known to cut as many corners as possible with little or no concern for ethics, I would like to have some protection provided for the general population.

Of course, I feel that I'm in a catch 22, since I do not trust our fascist (a society controlled by big government and big business) system that we have had slowly imposed on us in this country.


----------



## Blue Tick (Dec 23, 2006)

This ban is stupid. Why don't they ban cigarettes, chew, and other addictive substances. Why don't they? Because they can tax the cigs and get plenty of money! Secondly, if someone wants to eat food fried in trans fatty oil that's their decision.


----------

