If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I was merely pointing out that this will be the next thing to come under fire, I thought that was obvious. But it's irrelevant to the thread, so nevermind.
only difference is ...it's called business not state but ...before long ...you won't be able to be self employed ...start your own anything.
digital money and big corps are seeing to that right now.
no chpoice ...no choice ...no choice.
all in the name of your well being of course.
most of you are daft enough to buy into it all.
To be honest I think the ultimate aim of the likes of ASH is a ban on smoking altogether and given that they have most MPs in their pocket it could happen one day. Consistently lobbying for anti-smoking education in schools they’ll have undoubtedly went a long way to creating the right future public climate. I mean, if I think back not that long ago to when I was at primary school – then, if an adult started smoking there’s no way it’s something I’d feel strong enough about to scream how disgusting and filthy smoking is. And I’m pretty sure there wasn’t amongst my peers. Sure, smoking was seen as illicit, for adults and a dirty habit the ‘bad’ kids took up but it’s not something kids screamed with disgust about, overall we were pretty indifferent at least from my experience.
Now among children now that indifference has been replaced with a pretty vocal opinion. In principle that’s not really a great problem; smoking is a bad habit and something that should be discouraged amongst children – but is it really the State’s job to be spoonfeeding children on what’s right and wrong - on something that when it comes down to it is legal and should be up to the individual? What else are children being taught to be disgusted about? If this isn’t already indoctrination what kind of precedent has been created within the education system for programming children what to think? Klintock (I’m guessing, correct me if I’m wrong here) would say that’s long been the case in schools; while I don't know if it always has been so it increasingly seems to be the case.
I would indeed. So would most educationalists, that's why it's important to teach the "right" values.
A Marxist position. Read some Gramsci.
I'd just show them how to count, read and write and point them at the library.
thankyou!
they were trying to argue earlier that passive smoking isnt really damaging... fucks sake... what an addiction does eh
Well partly directed at me because I supported the ban.
The big difference there is that the fox has no choice in the hunt. Unless it just wants to die of course.
And no, I don't agree that people should be forced to wear seatbelts anymore than bikers should be forced to wear helmets - NB we don't force bikers to wear leathers, and you should see the injuries caused when the idiots who wear shorts crash...
It's also completely irrelevant.
For the smoke to affect you , you have to put yourself in the way. It doesn't drift into your lungs over miles etc you know.
This is where the no cmoking pubs idea would have worked - assuming that non smokers chose to use them. If there was a market, then they would exist without Govt interference.
If the Govt was all for the health arguement then there would be bans on many foods, exercise would be compulsory, there would be no combustion engines and we would all be forced to wear factor 28 everytime the sun comes out. It's a bullshit argument really.
Yes COPD (lung disease) will be a big killer in the next few years, yes it's expected to be the fourth biggest killer in the world. But that isn't reason to justify this law. It is the choice of people to smoke - just as many heart attack wictime will h=ave easten shite food and not exercised enough.
NB I note no-one who favours this law has addressed the taxation issue.
You can even argue when they die by this they cause mental harm through trauma to freinds and family. But I wouldn't personally. Just a point.
Only if smoking numbers drop.
Currently smokers pay more tax than they take out in health care.
Why not?
So?
Isn't that the drivers choice, isn't that part of the choice of the person in the front?
Would they have been forced to sit there?
Well, you cant do much driving from anywhere ELSE in the car. And if you didn't know the person in the back wasn't wearing a belt, you logically assumed they were, and they didn't ask, then you in no way gave consent. So it is much like smoking. I don't ask when I light up in a pub. I would never go without a seatbelt when sitting behind someone though. I guess that makes me a hipocrite, or just a person who realises that Passive Smoking is not as bad as it is made out to be. Don't like it? You actually have a choice, go somewhere people don't smoke maybe! You don't get a choice when someone hasn't belted up. I can see you smoking a cigarette and choose to take action.
Oh another note, ever noticed how when you are smoking, the wind ALWAYS changes to blow the smoke towards people near you?
Or we could put smokers out of the way? Why should people be pushed out of where they want to go because of someone elses bad habit?
As some smokers have suggested, make a non-smoking area... but i bet they would be moaning when they are sat in their smokey corner in a pub or club not able to go where they want while smoking...
But that the problem isn't it?
When they came for the foxhunters you were silent because you supported the ban.
And when they came for smoking in pubs kermit is silent because he hates smoking in pubs.
And when they shot Harry Stanley I was silent because I believe that sometimes police are put in stressful situations where they make mistakes.
Now that's not to say we were individually wrong, but we have ignored civil liberties when its conflicted with our other beliefs.
You missed the point I was making. Again.
[ETA]
My point is, that the view that the structures of the state exist to enforce the dominant idealogy is a Marxist view, developed further by the Italian communist Antonio Gramsci. The concept of hegemony comes from his writings.
Then learn to communicate better, or give me an address I can go learn mind reading or mentalism, then. :rolleyes:
Yeah I know. The state wouldn't exist if no one believed it. It's essential that the meme is passed on to as many as possible then, that's just how viruses work.
Oh god, not memes. You really a weirdo.
While its quite true that if everyone tomorrow stopped believing in it it wouldn't exist. However, thats not really likely is it? The people who have the power aren't going to give it up and they can do things like throw you in jail or shoot you. What you gonna do when they come for you because you don't have an ID card? Close your eyes and whsiper "I don't believe in you"? How the fuck is that gonna help?
Your thinking on this is on the level of a teenager whos just discovered that life isn't fair.
Good lord no.
Then they will have my cold dead body, but not my obedience. (Cheers Ghandi) Besides, you really should ask my questions to one of these people sometime, you might be surprised at the results. You should go and learn how individual humans work, mate.
Same as I always do. Ask them questions and let them meet themselves. When that can't happen any longer well, we'll see. I always believe the person I am talking to, all parts of them.
yes please.
Like smokers pubs perhaps?
I was hardly silent. I was very noisy in fact
But, as I said, I don't see hunting as a civil liberty issue. It's a cruelty issue. Give the fox a choice, and I wouldn't complain.
muse- your posts seem to suggest (indeed, say) that smokers are the "moaners", which I haven't generally found to be the case. In fairness that will probably change, a lot, now though. Like I said, what do I care, since by 2007 I'll be in a country where I'm pretty confident smoking won't be banned.
With that, I've got nowt left to say. No point flogging a dead horse, as they say! :thumb:
No one is going to die.
please tell me you will visit
close your eyes and it will go away eh? You're a card aren't you?
Perhaps your kind offer in the latter could be extended to the former ? I would be interested in seeing the strong evidence you allude to.
So we should really ban alcohol in pubs as well, to protect employees as well as patrons.
Besides, alcohol breath is far more stinky and disgusting than cigarrete smoke, believe me.
Which is kind of my point. You don't treat it as a civil liberties argument (even though its the Government taking away the freedom of people to do something).
But we all do the same, which is why civil liberties go as we're divided and conquered. If everyone agreed and were willing to defend the liberities of things they don't agree with Government would find it harder to reduce the liberties that we individually support.