namelesstavern.net

Arlos wrote:How many times do I have to say that my vision of health care is one where DOCTORS make the decisions on medical issues? Not middle managers looking to preserve bonuses? I've said repeatedly that I don't think health care should be allowed to be a for-profit industry. It should be forced to become non-profit, so that there's no longer a financial incentive to deny necessary procedures in order to preserve a profit margin.

Once we have that, and have insurance companies that are no longer profit based, the government's role in universal health care is simply to pay for insurance for all of its citizens. Thus relieving employers of the necessity for doing so, making it easier for small business to operate AND making it easier for companies like the big 3 automakers, who are currently crippled by payments they have to make for medical insurance for retired auto workers.

You honestly think the government would keep their fingers out of it? They'd be messing with it left, right and center. THIS has to made a law because of XYZ and THAT has to be federally mandated because of QRS. They pay the bills...they call the shots.

It'd also be used as a political ploy. "X party wants to take away/reduce your medical benefits but Y party is your friend and we'll not only save you but increase your benefits!"

Arlos

I know what you're saying, but I don't think you can paint with as general a brush as you'd like to.

the original point of the entire thread was mainly to discuss whether or not breaking the law was the proper way to challenge your belief that a law was unjust

I don't think prostitution should be illegal, but I don't think the best way to fight the law is to go and pay for a bunch of hookers and serve time in jail

that just seems retarded

Clakar wrote:Truth be told my biggest beef with illegal drugs is that if alcohol is legal, then this should be a base line of non-prescription mind altering drugs, yet most drugs, pot in particular, has been proven to be less harmful than alcohol, but is illegal and if you look into the history of why it is, you'll see it was pharmaceuticals that paid government to make it illegal, not the people.

I don't disagree with that at all. 99% of laws are arbitrary(it doesn't change the fact they're laws tho, which has been my point all along)

Clakar wrote:While he claims we listen to the US propaganda machine on health care, HE is wrapped up in his own anti-pot propaganda machine, talk about a hypocrite

quick, reference anything negative I've mentioned about pot, other than the FACT that it's illegal

I make a lot of negative comments about pot heads, but not about pot itself. maybe if you weren't baked you'd be able to tell the difference

Whether or not breaking a law is the best way to achieve change in the law is a debate that could go on forever. It is, however, inarguable that it *CAN* be successful, if you get enough people doing it. This is irrespective of what the law is or what it is prohibiting. The main element is whether or not you can get enough like-minded people ALL breaking the law so as to achieve critical mass, as it were, so you reach the point where you HAVE to be paid attention to, and thus force the chance for actual change.

The difference between issues is, of course, that for some issues it is far easier to find enough like-minded people to reach that critical mass. Civil rights was an important enough issue to reach that level fairly rapidly. Whether or not fighting allowing governmental control over our bodies can also achieve critical mass is as yet unknown. Completely different issues, but the same process, which is what I have been driving at all along.

The philosophers' point is that each of us has our own moral code, and sometimes we may encounter a law that, were we to obey it, would force us to violate our moral code. Their argument is that in such circumstances, the only MORAL thing to do is to refuse to obey the law, and knowingly accept the consequences of that decision. Whether it will change anything, who knows. But nevertheless it is a moral obligation to not follow laws that would break your code of morality. Just be prepared to pay the price for your moral convictions. Thoreau was, he was jailed multiple times, because he could choose no other way and maintain his code of morality.

-Arlos

Arlos is sexy.

I don't think you're ever going to find a way to convince me that wanting to get high is a moral issue

Except the fight isn't about "wanting to get high," it's about wanting to have control over our own bodies and what we can and cannot do with them, and not cede that control to the government. Do you support the government making blowjobs illegal? They did in many US states. Would you consider fighting for the legality of blowjobs to be a moral issue? It's the SAME issue, just different aspects of it.

-Arlos

don't be a fool, this IS about wanting to get high. You can pretend it's not all you like

don't worry tho, I totally support your right to give as many blowjobs as you want tho

Arlos wrote:Except the fight isn't about "wanting to get high," it's about wanting to have control over our own bodies and what we can and cannot do with them, and not cede that control to the government. Do you support the government making blowjobs illegal? They did in many US states. Would you consider fighting for the legality of blowjobs to be a moral issue? It's the SAME issue, just different aspects of it.

-Arlos

A better comparison would be Prostitution and Drugs.

Sex workers should be legal.

Retired wrote:Sex workers should be legal.

Why? Welfare not cutting it anymore?

Jay wrote:

Retired wrote:Sex workers should be legal.

Why? Welfare not cutting it anymore?

Jay wrote:

Retired wrote:Sex workers should be legal.

Why? Welfare not cutting it anymore?

It should be legal because if you can give it away for free, then you should be able to charge someone for it.

Pot should be legal because more harmfull mind altering drugs are legal and the reason it is illegal was not the peoples will.

Drugs in general should be regulated because the GOV will never be able to snuff it out, EVER, yet folks are ok with dumping billions into a bottomless pit.

Corn shouldn't be used for fuel because it will create even a larger "dead zone" in the gulf. Grass clippings and things like this should be used for fuel (saw a neat read on msn this morning about using sugar as a battery (e.g. green limitless batteries) made by Sony though :\ ).

bablings off

ClakarEQ wrote:Drugs in general should be regulated because the GOV will never be able to snuff it out, EVER, yet folks are ok with dumping billions into a bottomless pit.

ya currently this is bottomless pit is called iraq.

what makes you think the "war on drugs" is any different?

It isn't any different but the point still remains.

ClakarEQ wrote:Pot should be legal because more harmfull mind altering drugs are legal and the reason it is illegal was not the peoples will.

quick, show me the polling results that show the majority of people want pot legalized

I wouldn't care if it was legalized...does that tell you something?

No.

That's cuz you're a dork.

Tikker wrote:

ClakarEQ wrote:Pot should be legal because more harmfull mind altering drugs are legal and the reason it is illegal was not the peoples will.

quick, show me the polling results that show the majority of people want pot legalized

You miss the point tikker.

You show me the numbers when it was made illegal, that it was a majority that did it.

I have that answer, and you can't show me those numbers because the GOV made it illegal without any regards to the majority or minority. It was a law put in place by the GOV in order to make it appear like they care about protecting you. You were not asked, it was not on a ballet.

Had it not been made illegal, there would be no debate and there would be no issue, it would be like booze today. However attempting to remove a law is far more difficult than stopping a bill from becoming law (and as I understand it, even that is a huge undertaking).

no, you're the one asserting that it was done against the will of the people

the burden of proof is on you to bring numbers that back up that statement

What a fucking tool lol

Pot was made illegal against the will of the people.