PSA for the moral puritans of OT

[TheLonelyPhoenix]

Originally posted by: CheapArse
They only hypocrisy I could see is if someone jumped on someones back for smoking but thought doing crack was OK. Fast food in moderation has no where near the affect that even smoking in moderation does on the body. If you keep your body relatively healthy...you can reverse the negative effects of fast food. I dunno what the fvck you can do to get that sh!t out of your lungs....

Also, fast food isn't addictive and not ALL aspects of fast food are negative to the body.

The health risks increased by smoking decrease with time after quitting.

And you can stop arguing the details here, you're missing my point entirely. My point is that people do things every day that are bad for them - too much stress, eating wrong, not exercising, etc.

 

[dighn]

i couldn't care less as long as you don't stink up the air around me.

 

[TheLonelyPhoenix]

I'm rather sick of this argument, so let me say this before I gracefully exit.

If you judge people by how many decisions they make that you agree with, then you have issues.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: CheapArse
They only hypocrisy I could see is if someone jumped on someones back for smoking but thought doing crack was OK. Fast food in moderation has no where near the affect that even smoking in moderation does on the body. If you keep your body relatively healthy...you can reverse the negative effects of fast food. I dunno what the fvck you can do to get that sh!t out of your lungs....

Also, fast food isn't addictive and not ALL aspects of fast food are negative to the body.

The health risks increased by smoking decrease with time after quitting.

And you can stop arguing the details here, you're missing my point entirely. My point is that people do things every day that are bad for them - too much stress, eating wrong, not exercising, etc.

I got your point loud and clear...im saying its not a valid one to argue with. As Bigsm00th said, smoking has literally NO redeeming value health wise. I agree with him, its your decision to make, but making decisions that are not the best are differnt from making a bad decision. Eating fast food isn't a bad decision, its just not a good one. Not exercising everyday isn't a bad decision, it just isn't a good/great one. ETC.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
i still am firmly behind your right to smoke if you want to, but it is a bad choice.

I never said it was a good choice. Only that its a decision that everyone has the right to make for themselves, and no one should judge someone else for not making the same decision as them.

i want to agree with you on this, but i just cant. things that are a bad decision when you see it from any angle are hard not to judge. if you kill an innocent child, there is no redeeming value to that. no, im not so stupid to compare that to smoking, but it was a valid example of what i meant. smoking has no redeeming value that even comes close to outweighing the negatives.

exactly, though that example is harsh...

i know...i called it beforehand, though just using it to help express my point...

i know that sounds somewhat hyprocritical, but if something is a bad decision from all angles, i feel like it should be avoided under all circumstances. along with that comes inherent judgement since it is known the behavior is bad. dont get me wrong, i am not judging you as a person, just the activity.

Correct me if im wrong, but if your judging the activity...how can you not judge those who participate in said activity?

this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

 

[TheLonelyPhoenix]

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

Exactly what I'm trying to say. And that should be the end of it.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix
I'm rather sick of this argument, so let me say this before I gracefully exit.

If you judge people by how many decisions they make that you agree with, then you have issues.

If you don't agree with it, go fvck yourself

No offense, but your posts are very wishy-washy.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix
I'm rather sick of this argument, so let me say this before I gracefully exit.

If you judge people by how many decisions they make that you agree with, then you have issues.

i thought this was actually a very informative arguement since it usually ends in a flame fest and this one was going well for once...but if you want to leave thats cool. just FYI, i dont judge people based on the number of good/bad decisions they make. i judge people as people, not as robots that do clear cut right and wrong operations. if a person smokes, that doesnt make me think less of them.

 

[TheLonelyPhoenix]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix
I'm rather sick of this argument, so let me say this before I gracefully exit.

If you judge people by how many decisions they make that you agree with, then you have issues.

If you don't agree with it, go fvck yourself

No offense, but your posts are very wishy-washy.

Way to take me out of context. :disgust:

If you had left in the rest of that comment, you would see that I was criticizing someone else's right to tell me that I shouldn't be making decisions for myself.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

Exactly what I'm trying to say. And that should be the end of it.

roger that.

 

[mchammer]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: CheapArse
They only hypocrisy I could see is if someone jumped on someones back for smoking but thought doing crack was OK. Fast food in moderation has no where near the affect that even smoking in moderation does on the body. If you keep your body relatively healthy...you can reverse the negative effects of fast food. I dunno what the fvck you can do to get that sh!t out of your lungs....

Also, fast food isn't addictive and not ALL aspects of fast food are negative to the body.

The health risks increased by smoking decrease with time after quitting.

And you can stop arguing the details here, you're missing my point entirely. My point is that people do things every day that are bad for them - too much stress, eating wrong, not exercising, etc.

I got your point loud and clear...im saying its not a valid one to argue with. As Bigsm00th said, smoking has literally NO redeeming value health wise. I agree with him, its your decision to make, but making decisions that are not the best are differnt from making a bad decision. Eating fast food isn't a bad decision, its just not a good one. Not exercising everyday isn't a bad decision, it just isn't a good/great one. ETC.

This approach can get messy though. For example... Staying up late on ATOT.... ask your parents or whoever if there is redeming value.

I think the case of smoking is one of the many issues where we decide how much freedom of action someone who is entitled to group benifits gets. Group benefits is the way health insurance is done. Car insurance or home insurance is done case by case.

 

[TheLonelyPhoenix]

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
i thought this was actually a very informative arguement since it usually ends in a flame fest and this one was going well for once...but if you want to leave thats cool.

Its hedging flamewar territory... and I'm tired too.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th
i thought this was actually a very informative arguement since it usually ends in a flame fest and this one was going well for once...but if you want to leave thats cool.

Its hedging flamewar territory... and I'm tired too.

haha yeah i agree :thumbsup:

 

[Kerouactivist]

I hate the antismoking rhetoric as much as I hate the anti-drug......but, hey booze is still okay.....


people are generally stupid, feed something into their head and usually you will get a general response......

IMHO they should legalize drugs tax the sheet of of it and make a pack of marlboro golds about $20-$30 bucks fund free healthcare for everyone......

why demonize it.....?



These people are republicans and are not capitalist they are theocracy mongers...wishing to inject their value system into yours do not believe them they are the death of culture....the rapeists of life

 

[imported_Mike]

this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

Perhaps im beating a dead horse here, if so, I apologize. You think that smoking is a bad decision, which is an activity. I can see that, and you disagree with said activity and you judge it as a bad decision. So if someone makes a bad decision everyday(not referring to you TLP), wouldn't you not be judging them as a person who does this activity on a daily basis..as a bad decision maker. Or do the two not go hand in hand in your opinion?

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: bthorny
I hate the antismoking rhetoric as much as I hate the anti-drug......but, hey booze is still okay.....


people are generally stupid, feed something into their head and usually you will get a general response......

IMHO they should legalize drugs tax the sheet of of it and make a pack of marlboro golds about $20-$30 bucks fund free healthcare for everyone......

why demonize it.....?


These people are republicans and are not capitalist they are theocracy mongers...wishing to inject their value system into yours do not believe them they are the death of culture....the rapeists of life

what on earth are you talking about? none of us just spewed ignorant crap. unlike you, we provided insight into our arguements and argued the points, both general and specific.

the death of culture? puhhlease :roll:

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: mchammer

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: CheapArse
They only hypocrisy I could see is if someone jumped on someones back for smoking but thought doing crack was OK. Fast food in moderation has no where near the affect that even smoking in moderation does on the body. If you keep your body relatively healthy...you can reverse the negative effects of fast food. I dunno what the fvck you can do to get that sh!t out of your lungs....

Also, fast food isn't addictive and not ALL aspects of fast food are negative to the body.

The health risks increased by smoking decrease with time after quitting.

And you can stop arguing the details here, you're missing my point entirely. My point is that people do things every day that are bad for them - too much stress, eating wrong, not exercising, etc.

I got your point loud and clear...im saying its not a valid one to argue with. As Bigsm00th said, smoking has literally NO redeeming value health wise. I agree with him, its your decision to make, but making decisions that are not the best are differnt from making a bad decision. Eating fast food isn't a bad decision, its just not a good one. Not exercising everyday isn't a bad decision, it just isn't a good/great one. ETC.

This approach can get messy though. For example... Staying up late on ATOT.... ask your parents or whoever if there is redeming value.

I think the case of smoking is one of the many issues where we decide how much freedom of action someone who is entitled to group benifits gets. Group benefits is the way health insurance is done. Car insurance or home insurance is done case by case.

Redeeming value is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Therefore, if TLP believes that smoking does have a redeeming value...to each his own.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix
I'm rather sick of this argument, so let me say this before I gracefully exit.

If you judge people by how many decisions they make that you agree with, then you have issues.

If you don't agree with it, go fvck yourself

No offense, but your posts are very wishy-washy.

Way to take me out of context. :disgust:

If you had left in the rest of that comment, you would see that I was criticizing someone else's right to tell me that I shouldn't be making decisions for myself.

My second quote is out of context after re-reading it, sorry.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

Perhaps im beating a dead horse here, if so, I apologize. You think that smoking is a bad decision, which is an activity. I can see that, and you disagree with said activity and you judge it as a bad decision. So if someone makes a bad decision everyday(not referring to you TLP), wouldn't you not be judging them as a person who does this activity on a daily basis..as a bad decision maker. Or do the two not go hand in hand in your opinion?

good point. i guess it depends on the activity. in this case, smoking is addictive, and just because smoking may be a bad decision, it is trivial at best in the grand scheme of things. i see where you may be confused at what im saying, and i will concede my point and admit it was confusing...it is just hard to explain without facial expressions and my hands...lol.

smoking doesnt make the person a bad decision maker IMO...but as i said, its situational. that is why its hard to debate this point. it is highly situational. if the bad decision was robbing banks, then i would say the person has issues. sorry if this didnt make sense, and no you arent beating a dead horse. when healthy debates arise on AT it is rare, so you cant talk about it too much

 

[TerryMathews]

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenixIts their life and their money, and they have the right to do what they please with both. If you don't agree with it, go fvck yourself.

A ha, but it's my money too unless we're going to remove all smoking dirtbags from Medicare/Medicaid.

When some 75 y/o chain smoker needs chemo + radiation because he's smoked himself to death, who do you think foots the bill?

 

[mchammer]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: mchammer

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: CheapArse
They only hypocrisy I could see is if someone jumped on someones back for smoking but thought doing crack was OK. Fast food in moderation has no where near the affect that even smoking in moderation does on the body. If you keep your body relatively healthy...you can reverse the negative effects of fast food. I dunno what the fvck you can do to get that sh!t out of your lungs....

Also, fast food isn't addictive and not ALL aspects of fast food are negative to the body.

The health risks increased by smoking decrease with time after quitting.

And you can stop arguing the details here, you're missing my point entirely. My point is that people do things every day that are bad for them - too much stress, eating wrong, not exercising, etc.

I got your point loud and clear...im saying its not a valid one to argue with. As Bigsm00th said, smoking has literally NO redeeming value health wise. I agree with him, its your decision to make, but making decisions that are not the best are differnt from making a bad decision. Eating fast food isn't a bad decision, its just not a good one. Not exercising everyday isn't a bad decision, it just isn't a good/great one. ETC.

This approach can get messy though. For example... Staying up late on ATOT.... ask your parents or whoever if there is redeming value.

I think the case of smoking is one of the many issues where we decide how much freedom of action someone who is entitled to group benifits gets. Group benefits is the way health insurance is done. Car insurance or home insurance is done case by case.

Redeeming value is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Therefore, if TLP believes that smoking does have a redeeming value...to each his own.

Yea, I just don't want it to affect my health and don't like having to pay when they sick. Also, since the smokers are arguing that they can make the choice to smoke even though there are risks, information regarding the risks should be available and they would do well to look at it.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th

Originally posted by: CheapArse

this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

Perhaps im beating a dead horse here, if so, I apologize. You think that smoking is a bad decision, which is an activity. I can see that, and you disagree with said activity and you judge it as a bad decision. So if someone makes a bad decision everyday(not referring to you TLP), wouldn't you not be judging them as a person who does this activity on a daily basis..as a bad decision maker. Or do the two not go hand in hand in your opinion?

good point. i guess it depends on the activity. in this case, smoking is addictive, and just because smoking may be a bad decision, it is trivial at best in the grand scheme of things. i see where you may be confused at what im saying, and i will concede my point and admit it was confusing...it is just hard to explain without facial expressions and my hands...lol.

smoking doesnt make the person a bad decision maker IMO...but as i said, its situational. that is why its hard to debate this point. it is highly situational. if the bad decision was robbing banks, then i would say the person has issues. sorry if this didnt make sense, and no you arent beating a dead horse. when healthy debates arise on AT it is rare, so you cant talk about it too much

Very true, smoking is addictive...at which point the decision making is not really all there as it becomes habbit. I guess therefore in the case of smoking, you can judge it purely as an activity and not entirely the person making the initial decision.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: mchammer

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: mchammer

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenix

Originally posted by: CheapArse
They only hypocrisy I could see is if someone jumped on someones back for smoking but thought doing crack was OK. Fast food in moderation has no where near the affect that even smoking in moderation does on the body. If you keep your body relatively healthy...you can reverse the negative effects of fast food. I dunno what the fvck you can do to get that sh!t out of your lungs....

Also, fast food isn't addictive and not ALL aspects of fast food are negative to the body.

The health risks increased by smoking decrease with time after quitting.

And you can stop arguing the details here, you're missing my point entirely. My point is that people do things every day that are bad for them - too much stress, eating wrong, not exercising, etc.

I got your point loud and clear...im saying its not a valid one to argue with. As Bigsm00th said, smoking has literally NO redeeming value health wise. I agree with him, its your decision to make, but making decisions that are not the best are differnt from making a bad decision. Eating fast food isn't a bad decision, its just not a good one. Not exercising everyday isn't a bad decision, it just isn't a good/great one. ETC.

This approach can get messy though. For example... Staying up late on ATOT.... ask your parents or whoever if there is redeming value.

I think the case of smoking is one of the many issues where we decide how much freedom of action someone who is entitled to group benifits gets. Group benefits is the way health insurance is done. Car insurance or home insurance is done case by case.

Redeeming value is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Therefore, if TLP believes that smoking does have a redeeming value...to each his own.

Yea, I just don't want it to affect my health and don't like having to pay when they sick. Also, since the smokers are arguing that they can make the choice to smoke even though there are risks, information regarding the risks should be available and they would do well to look at it.

Smoking is addictive though and I suppose the enjoyment that someone gets out of smoking could out weigh the 0 redeeming health values.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: TerryMathews

Originally posted by: TheLonelyPhoenixIts their life and their money, and they have the right to do what they please with both. If you don't agree with it, go fvck yourself.

A ha, but it's my money too unless we're going to remove all smoking dirtbags from Medicare/Medicaid.

When some 75 y/o chain smoker needs chemo + radiation because he's smoked himself to death, who do you think foots the bill?

TLP said this earlier:

Insurance companies make smokers pay higher premiums as it is. and some company insurance plans given out to employees often require that they make a policy of not hiring smokers, in order to give lower rates to everyone else. In other words, your point is
moot.

if what he said is true, then they really arent causing as big of a monetary issue as it may seem. if they pay more insurance their whole life but die from another cause, it was just more money paid to the insurance company. i do not know statistics, so this isnt really worth arguing, but i would imagine it has all been worked out through the insurance companies to make sure they arent paying out of pocket and, if they were thinking of the customers, it is semi-fair.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Originally posted by: CheapArse

Originally posted by: Bigsm00th

Originally posted by: CheapArse

this may be a battle of opinion, but IMO, i can judge TLP for his smoking and call that a bad decision, but that doesnt make him less of a person. it just means i think he is making a bad decision, but it stops there. to me that is judging the activity and not the person. feel free to disagree, thats just how i see it.

Perhaps im beating a dead horse here, if so, I apologize. You think that smoking is a bad decision, which is an activity. I can see that, and you disagree with said activity and you judge it as a bad decision. So if someone makes a bad decision everyday(not referring to you TLP), wouldn't you not be judging them as a person who does this activity on a daily basis..as a bad decision maker. Or do the two not go hand in hand in your opinion?

good point. i guess it depends on the activity. in this case, smoking is addictive, and just because smoking may be a bad decision, it is trivial at best in the grand scheme of things. i see where you may be confused at what im saying, and i will concede my point and admit it was confusing...it is just hard to explain without facial expressions and my hands...lol.

smoking doesnt make the person a bad decision maker IMO...but as i said, its situational. that is why its hard to debate this point. it is highly situational. if the bad decision was robbing banks, then i would say the person has issues. sorry if this didnt make sense, and no you arent beating a dead horse. when healthy debates arise on AT it is rare, so you cant talk about it too much

Very true, smoking is addictive...at which point the decision making is not really all there as it becomes habbit. I guess therefore in the case of smoking, you can judge it purely as an activity and not entirely the person making the initial decision.

ah, that is what i wanted to say, but it just didnt come out that nicely.