• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

No One is responsible for what you put in Your Mouth

No one besides yourself is responsible for what you put in your mouth?

  • Total voters
    43
Moot said:
I think it's ironic that a Libertarian would want regulations let alone the government to intervene on his behalf. So I guess it's okay for Libertarians but not for everyone else, eh?

As a side, there is a case going on right now in my neck of the woods where developers are trying to buy up property next to a river that people have been fishing for as long as I can remember. If they succeed, this would have the effect of not only making the river inaccessible to sport fishing but will likely pollute the river with fertilizers from yard runoffs and God knows what else destroying the natural flora and fauna that live along the river. And I can almost guarentee that someone like you would be fighting tooth and nail not to pay for the pollution cleanup that came from your property.

If there is a break down in morality, look no further than the people who claim to have morals and do everything they can to prevent others from having quality of life.
Click to expand...

How can it not be accessible, its a river? Their buying the whole thing? If it pollutes than it should be the one cleaning the river, dang skippy im not paying for someone elses mistake. Not to mention if the river has creeks ajoined to it that run off to other properties. Just as i state individuals be responsible for their action so should the individuals that are apart of that company.

Prevents them from having quality life? What is that supposed to mean?
 
Boo Radley said:
We also see a lot of water pollution here from Factory Farms. Come to any local state legislator meeting and you will find a lot of angry people. But they have not be able to stop it.
Click to expand...

And why do you think that is? Because government is protecting them instead of doing what i stated they should be doing? Crony capitalism at its greatest, you are starting to make my case for me.
 
LibertyBurns said:
And why do you think that is? Because government is protecting them instead of doing what i stated they should be doing? Crony capitalism at its greatest, you are starting to make my case for me.
Click to expand...

Protecting? No, not in how you mean it. There is nothing preventing them from doing what they do. Absent a law, or regulation, they can do on their property what the do. That is seeps into the ground water, and pollutes much of the area is not presently covered by law or regulation. I think you mistake want can be done.
 
I disagree, but solely on the basis that the consumer has to be able to inform themselves about what they're eating in order for you to say they're responsible for it. That isn't always possible, currently.

If that were always possible - and easy - then yes, people would be responsible for what they eat. But they can't be responsible if they can't inform themselves.

Consumers have the right to know what is in their food and how it was produced. At that point, they can decide for themselves whether or not to eat it.

The main exception to this, in my mind, is school-provided lunches, especially for children on a lunch program. In that case, the school and the government have assumed responsibility for the nourishment of the child, and they should be expected to provide something reasonably nutritious.

By the way, Wake: 2/3 of adults are overweight OR obese (actually it's a bit more than that). There's a difference between overweight and obese.

About 1/3 are obese, and another 35-40% are overweight.
 
Last edited:
LibertyBurns said:
Seriously? What would happen without the regulation? Every company would be going around throwing arsenic in there food? Wouldnt be making much money for long with all your customers dying.
Click to expand...

Study Finds High-Fructose Corn Syrup Contains Mercury
Arsenic in Apple Juice: A New Report Suggests Widespread Exposure | Healthland | TIME.com
VOC's in the Nation's Ground Water
Water pollution: Regulators, scientists question methods used to screen for lead in water - chicagotribune.com

Something is seriously wrong with anybody who is not concerned by what the above links discuss.
 
the only ones not responsible !!!! is anybody spoon fed here? you nevah know :shrug:;)

Spoonfed_Baby.jpg
 
Mya said:
the only ones not responsible !!!! is anybody spoon fed here? you nevah know :shrug:;)

Spoonfed_Baby.jpg
Click to expand...

...and it is the parents' responsibility to ensure what is being put in that mouth is healthful and nutritious and not leave it up to some advertising agency to tell them what is good for their child.
 
Neomalthusian said:
That is one fantastic photograph.
Click to expand...

thank you.... and the point is we are not babies? LOL so we can blame nobody for what is put in our mouths!:mrgreen:
 
You know - it was cheaper for me to just make our own babyfood :shrug:

It's not very often I use anything that pre-made. . .I tend to make my own - well - everythings (sauce, mixes, seasonings, batter)
 
Boo Radley said:
Protecting? No, not in how you mean it. There is nothing preventing them from doing what they do. Absent a law, or regulation, they can do on their property what the do. That is seeps into the ground water, and pollutes much of the area is not presently covered by law or regulation. I think you mistake want can be done.
Click to expand...

Thats why you need strict, well defined laws on property rights. Regulations are not the answer to malpractice.
 
LibertyBurns said:
Thats why you need strict, well defined laws on property rights. Regulations are not the answer to malpractice.
Click to expand...

I'm not convinced. Of course all of isn't property rights. Unsafe food isn't a property right issue. Nor is unsafe air.
 
Phys251 said:
Study Finds High-Fructose Corn Syrup Contains Mercury
Arsenic in Apple Juice: A New Report Suggests Widespread Exposure | Healthland | TIME.com
VOC's in the Nation's Ground Water
Water pollution: Regulators, scientists question methods used to screen for lead in water - chicagotribune.com

Something is seriously wrong with anybody who is not concerned by what the above links discuss.
Click to expand...

Lol first of all why do we use HFCS? Eh yea i know whoops didnt think about that. ;)

Apple juice, suing the crap out of them, thats malpractice.

Thats why I buy bottled water lol, i dont think the water where i live is safe at all. When im hungover, with no bottled drinks ill drink it though.

Ummm chicagos drinking water is government ran...
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm not convinced. Of course all of isn't property rights. Unsafe food isn't a property right issue. Nor is unsafe air.
Click to expand...

See food found unsafe, such as all the poisons found in the products phys was talking about can be fixed with malpractice lawsuits. Even if the suit did fail, if you got enough publicity, the business would probably be done for. When it comes to air lawsuits can still be used, I posted on another thread talking about self ownership, an individual right, so in a sense you are your own property. Dont mistake this philosophy as me saying people are property to be bought and sold, well unless you so choose to be, such as prostitution. We can all agree air pollution is a health hazard.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
You know - it was cheaper for me to just make our own babyfood :shrug:

It's not very often I use anything that pre-made. . .I tend to make my own - well - everythings (sauce, mixes, seasonings, batter)
Click to expand...

Even with making/growing your own you have to watch out what you are putting on the crops.... After all we are what we eat!!!
 
LibertyBurns said:
See food found unsafe, such as all the poisons found in the products phys was talking about can be fixed with malpractice lawsuits. Even if the suit did fail, if you got enough publicity, the business would probably be done for. When it comes to air lawsuits can still be used, I posted on another thread talking about self ownership, an individual right, so in a sense you are your own property. Dont mistake this philosophy as me saying people are property to be bought and sold, well unless you so choose to be, such as prostitution. We can all agree air pollution is a health hazard.
Click to expand...

Long and time consuming. An history shows us, as this could always be done, that it does not deter companies. Law suits have been largely ineffective and I think we have enough of those running around. Some clear and appropriate regulation sets a clear standard and does a much better job.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
I disagree, but solely on the basis that the consumer has to be able to inform themselves about what they're eating in order for you to say they're responsible for it. That isn't always possible, currently.

If that were always possible - and easy - then yes, people would be responsible for what they eat. But they can't be responsible if they can't inform themselves.
Click to expand...

It has never been easier to inform ourselves. In the last 20 years it has become a thousand times easier.
 
Neomalthusian said:
It has never been easier to inform ourselves. In the last 20 years it has become a thousand times easier.
Click to expand...

In some respects yes, but there is some deception and misinformation running around out there, and it can cloud issues.
 
Boo Radley said:
In some respects yes, but there is some deception and misinformation running around out there, and it can cloud issues.
Click to expand...

The generally open and unregulated style of the interwebs is both it's blessing and it's curse...
Sure, you can find almost any info out there - but at the same time, you can find almost any false info out there.
 
There may be, but ignorance is a really a weak excuse nowadays because the information is so much easier to access. It's common general knowledge that processed foods are less healthy than natural foods, and that foods that taste awesome are, almost universally, unhealthy in any sort of excess.

Thirty seconds of searching for unhealthy ingredients found in food will enlighten a person. Find out about high fructose corn syrup, hydrogenated oils, monosodium glutamate, benzoate preservatives, artificial sweeteners, artificial flavorings, artificial colors. Learn about CAFOs and GMOs. It's super easy. Watch The Future of Food for free on Hulu.

It's all right there at our fingertips. The people who don't know are avoiding and ignoring and subconsciously justifying their habits or addictions to bad food. It's not because they don't know and can't find out. It's because they don't want to know or find out.
 
Not to mention, ingredients and their percentages are listed now (and have been for some time). Manufacturing and processing are no mystery.

It's like smoking, is there a single person on the planet who doesn't know now that smoking is bad for them? Is there a single smoker alive that can honestly say they didn't know it was bad for them? No, people can and do choose to engage in activities, consume things, they know are "bad" for them. The question becomes, do we allow government to take that choice away.

We're not talking about manufacturers or growers and the choices they make (commerce is regulated as it should be). We're taking about the choices of the end user and whether the end user or the government should make the choice.
 
clownboy said:
It's like smoking, is there a single person on the planet who doesn't know now that smoking is bad for them? Is there a single smoker alive that can honestly say they didn't know it was bad for them? No, people can and do choose to engage in activities, consume things, they know are "bad" for them. The question becomes, do we allow government to take that choice away.
Click to expand...

The question has become "do we continue to let government socialize to others the cost of people's self-sabotaging decisions?"

There's really no problem with government limiting our choices. The problem is that we have all sorts of choices and then can make someone else pay for its consequences (if those consequences are negative).
 
LibertyBurns said:
Lol first of all why do we use HFCS? Eh yea i know whoops didnt think about that. ;)
Click to expand...

WTF is that supposed to mean? You realize that corn lobbies receive billions of dollars in taxpayer money every year, right?

Apple juice, suing the crap out of them, thats malpractice.
Click to expand...

You think that lawsuits are the answer? Really?

Thats why I buy bottled water lol, i dont think the water where i live is safe at all. When im hungover, with no bottled drinks ill drink it though.
Click to expand...

Why u get hungover? Filtered water accomplishes much the same as bottled water does.

Ummm chicagos drinking water is government ran...
Click to expand...

Oh of course, that automatically makes it worse. :rolleyes:
 
Phys251 said:
WTF is that supposed to mean? You realize that corn lobbies receive billions of dollars in taxpayer money every year, right?
Click to expand...

Thats my point, subsidized corn, and high tariffs on foreign sugar, causing high prices on sugar. Now we use more HFCS due to its cheapness. Government unintentionally caused this, now regulation is the only way to fix it.

Phys251 said:
You think that lawsuits are the answer? Really?
Click to expand...

You have a deadly poison in my apple juice, my kids drink that!!! Dont think i can win that lawsuit?

Phys251 said:
Why u get hungover? Filtered water accomplishes much the same as bottled water does.
Click to expand...
Why get hungover? Excessive drinking of course haha. There are multiple types of water and different methods of filtration. As i said you wouldnt want to drink the water where im from. Though i dont think ill die, maybe it is unhealthy eh oh well.

Phys251 said:
Oh of course, that automatically makes it worse. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You want more government regulation because a government facility is not providing a quality service. Thats my point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom