Illegal For Restaurants To Serve Obese Patrons?

[Paddington]

I'm just flat out against it like y'all.
Also, I have had days where I ate relatively little, but it included something unhealthy from a restaurant. I lost weight on those days since I burned more calories than I consumed. Go fig.

[Justin86]

[quote name='Paddington' post='1458577' date='Feb 11 2008, 03:13 AM']I'm just flat out against it like y'all.
Also, I have had days where I ate relatively little, but it included something unhealthy from a restaurant. I lost weight on those days since I burned more calories than I consumed. Go fig.[/quote]
But think of the fact that by eating anything you have to kill something.

The poor cow to be slaughtered for your hamburger(even if its just a tiny one ).
The poor cacao tree yanked from the earth to make you chocolate.
The poor parasite on your food that the FDA requires to be massacred for nothing more than wanting to give you malaria.

Regardless in order to eat, you have to kill something. Now Jesus said, "Thou shall not kill"...or was that Moses?...whatever, the point is "THOU SHALL NOT KILL", ok? Stop eating in the Name of Jesus..or Moses(whatever)!

We'd all be skinnier, no?

Edited February 10, 2008 by Justin86

[Paddington]

Ouch! I stand corrected.

[Mercy me]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1456583' date='Feb 6 2008, 05:47 PM'][url="http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-clinical-definition-of-obesity.htm"]Clinical definition of obesity[/url].
Smoke drifts. Tobacco is legal, and if one wants to kill oneself by using it, work away. Just leave me out of it.[/quote]

Let us look at the real statistics here. 60% of the people who die of lung cancer were not smokers. Check it out. The second hand smoking thing turned out not to hold water and yet all these laws were created in the name of "the public health." Now instead of discriminating against smokers we are discriminating against people who are heavy and people are getting upset? Why? It is the same concept.

[XIX]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1456561' date='Feb 6 2008, 05:16 PM']We don't need to give government more power over us for that. Just don't stand next to someone while they smoke.[/quote]
Yeah, have you ever been inside of a bowling alley?

If we allow people to harm us badly enough to potentially give us cancer, that's closer to anarchy than it is to conservatism. The government should at least have the right to tell people not to slowly kill me.

[XIX]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1458600' date='Feb 10 2008, 03:29 PM']Let us look at the real statistics here. 60% of the people who die of lung cancer were not smokers. Check it out. The second hand smoking thing turned out not to hold water and yet all these laws were created in the name of "the public health." Now instead of discriminating against smokers we are discriminating against people who are heavy and people are getting upset? Why? It is the same concept.[/quote]
Unless 40% of the population consists of "smokers," your statistics do not prove anything.

Say, for example, 20% of the population smokes, and 40% of people who die from lung cancer are smokers. That would mean that smokers are almost three times as likely to die from lung cancer than non-smokers. As it is, roughly 28% of the US population smokes, so if your statistics are true, then smokers are almost twice as likely to die from lung cancer. [url="http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/87373"]http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/87373[/url]

Besides, "death by lung cancer" is not the only way smoking can adversely affect your health. You could just get lung cancer and survive. Your life will be shorter no doubt, but you won't fall under the category of smokers who died from lung cancer. It also makes it harder to breathe. Having an inferior respiratory system may not kill you directly, but it's almost guarantee to shorten your lifespan. I'm not saying that smoking is objectively immoral; I am saying that "we the people" have no right to force "they the people" to inhale smoke against their will.

One final point: smoking may okay in certain circumstances, but addiction in general is objectively wrong according to the Catholic Church, because it saps us of our free will. So in a way, smoking laws perhaps uphold the law of God by discouraging addiction. And as we all know, the laws of man should reflect the laws of God.

[MissScripture]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1458600' date='Feb 10 2008, 02:29 PM']Let us look at the real statistics here. 60% of the people who die of lung cancer were not smokers. Check it out. The second hand smoking thing turned out not to hold water and yet all these laws were created in the name of "the public health." Now instead of discriminating against smokers we are discriminating against people who are heavy and people are getting upset? Why? It is the same concept.[/quote]
That's the point of the laws. Those laws were not made to protect the smokers, but the non-smokers, who get cancer and they don't even smoke!
And it's not at all the same concept. People who smoke are affecting the people around them directly --people who have asthma or are allergic to smoke are in immediate danger. People who are obese are not placing those around them at a health risk.

[Mercy me]

[quote name='XIX' post='1458611' date='Feb 10 2008, 03:49 PM']Unless 40% of the population consists of "smokers," your statistics do not prove anything.

Say, for example, 20% of the population smokes, and 40% of people who die from lung cancer are smokers. That would mean that smokers are almost three times as likely to die from lung cancer than non-smokers. As it is, roughly 28% of the US population smokes, so if your statistics are true, then smokers are almost twice as likely to die from lung cancer. [url="http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/87373"]http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/87373[/url]

Having an inferior respiratory system may not kill you directly, but it's almost guarantee to shorten your lifespan. I'm not saying that smoking is objectively immoral; I am saying that "we the people" have no right to force "they the people" to inhale smoke against their will.

One final point: smoking may okay in certain circumstances, but addiction in general is objectively wrong according to the Catholic Church, because it saps us of our free will. So in a way, smoking laws perhaps uphold the law of God by discouraging addiction. And as we all know, the laws of man should reflect the laws of God.[/quote]

What I am saying is that no one is forcing anyone to go places where people are smoking. If you have a problem with people smoking then stay away from it. That is a personal decision. Don't inflict laws that discriminate against people who are doing something perfectly legal just because you and some others have a problem with it. You have a choice don't smoke and go places that don't have smokers. If there is a demand then business will fill it.

And just so you know, I have a very bad allergy to tobacco. So, I know that it is now and has always been possible to avoid smoke. I feel strongly on this because I don't like to see our rights as citizens forfeited in the name of public health. People laughed at me when I first said fought the smoking bans saying that the next thing they would go after is my French Fries. Well, they have changed how my French Fries are cooked and now they are not going to even let me in the restaurant to order them.

[Mercy me]

[quote name='MissScripture' post='1458624' date='Feb 10 2008, 04:16 PM']That's the point of the laws. Those laws were not made to protect the smokers, but the non-smokers, who get cancer and they don't even smoke!
And it's not at all the same concept. People who smoke are affecting the people around them directly --people who have asthma or are allergic to smoke are in immediate danger. People who are obese are not placing those around them at a health risk.[/quote]

They are not as health and cost tax payers more to because of it. We have Medicare in this country. This is how they defend this. It is the same way they argue smokers. It cost tax payers more to provide treatment for them.

edit - to correct spelling. Someday I will learn to type!

Edited February 10, 2008 by Mercy me

[MissScripture]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1458632' date='Feb 10 2008, 03:27 PM']They are not as health and cost tax payers more to because of it. We have Medicare in this country. This is how they defend this. It is the same way they argue smokers. It cost tax payers more to provide treatment for them.

edit - to correct spelling. Someday I will learn to type![/quote]
But there is also the more immediate threat with smoking, too, and the health issues affect more people from the secondhand smoke.
I agree that soemthing needs to be done about the obesity problem, but this is NOT the way to do that!

[Alycin]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1458629' date='Feb 10 2008, 03:23 PM']What I am saying is that no one is forcing anyone to go places where people are smoking. If you have a problem with people smoking then stay away from it. That is a personal decision. Don't inflict laws that discriminate against people who are doing something perfectly legal just because you and some others have a problem with it. You have a choice don't smoke and go places that don't have smokers. If there is a demand then business will fill it.[/quote]

Why should the large majority of people who DON'T smoke have to avoid public places because smokers are allowed there? That makes no sense. Have you ever tried to walk into a mall when 20 people were out front smoking? As a child I dreaded that 30 seconds or so where I had to try to hold my breath or ended up coughing my lungs up.

Or how about going into a gas station to pay for your gas, when you realize only after you set foot in the door, that smoking is allowed in there?

You HAVE to pay for your gas. You can't choose to leave without paying.... and you end up not only having to inhale 2nd hand smoke for any number of minutes (depending on the line, obviously) but you also walk out smelling like an ashtray.



And I'm a former smoker.

Edited February 10, 2008 by Alycin

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1458600' date='Feb 10 2008, 02:29 PM']Let us look at the real statistics here. 60% of the people who die of lung cancer were not smokers. Check it out. The second hand smoking thing turned out not to hold water and yet all these laws were created in the name of "the public health." Now instead of discriminating against smokers we are discriminating against people who are heavy and people are getting upset? Why? It is the same concept.[/quote]
So we now jump to the conclusion that tobacco smoke is the only cause of lung cancer?


lol

[Mercy me]

I know what needs to happen with obesity, get rid of desk jobs. Mine is killing me. I am not by any definition obese but I have to watch what I eat now because I don't get the exercise that I need to burn off the calories that I eat.

I do think that for those people at least in this country, where most of the cities were developed after the advent of the automobile have a real issue because we often can't realistically walk places and many jobs have become sedentary.

[Alycin]

[quote name='Mercy me' post='1458645' date='Feb 10 2008, 03:49 PM']I know what needs to happen with obesity, get rid of desk jobs. Mine is killing me. I am not by any definition obese but I have to watch what I eat now because I don't get the exercise that I need to burn off the calories that I eat.[/quote]

Watching what you eat is a good idea regardless of your weight. Junk food is called JUNK food for multiple reasons, not just because it is more likely to make you fat.


[quote]I do think that for those people at least in this country, where most of the cities were developed after the advent of the automobile have a real issue because we often can't realistically walk places and many jobs have become sedentary.[/quote]

I agree. I have a desk job. I would much rather have a job where I was moving around a bit more but hey... whatcha gonna do. Desk jobs are important.

I also could TECHNICALLY walk to work but it's 7 miles away from my house. That would add some time to my day.

[Mercy me]

I know, if I had to walk to work it would be walking a marathon everyday and I live relatively close to my office compared to others. I am grateful for my job and do like it.

I must admit that I like those salads that they are serving at Wendy's and Arby's.