In case Justacarolinian doesn’t come back to read this, I can sort that one out for you: He can read minds. It’s quite awesome…

During his studies, Calhoun coined the term “behavioral sink” to describe aberrant behaviors in overcrowded population density situations and “beautiful ones” to describe passive individuals who withdrew from all social interaction.

the implication of your argument has just shifted to blaming homosexuality on some “root” psychological trauma… I seriously hope that’s not the case.

Well Sh|t.

Think about this: prior to the ban, were you ever asked if you would like your food cooked with or without trans fats? Of course, the answer is no. Prior to bans, where was the choice for those who understand how badly trans fats rape you in the ass and want to avoid them? Banning trans fats is good for everyone, except that it will drive down profit margins for businesses who think it’s okay to save money by feeding their customers poison. Trans fats are not food, they’re toxic compounds that resemble fats.

Anyway, no one is taking trans fat away from anyone. Americans are still free to sit in their double-wides and cram it down their throats all day long if they like. And I’m sure that’s what the founding fathers had in mind when they wrote all them fancy words about freedom.

@PB – refer to my question to Froo: when do you think the government should intervene for the public’s best interest? Should the government stop treating drinking water? After all, shouldn’t it be my choice to ingest dangerous bacteria in my water if I want too? Are you in favor of legalizing all drugs? Should we stop pasteurizing milk and setting speed limits?

With regard to your argument that these are moral issues, I concede that maybe there are those who feel the need to try to make them moral issues, but there are plenty of good reasons that these measures exist that have nothing to do with morality. Cite me some legislation on smoking or trans fat that makes reference to morality, otherwise we’re arguing about what “some people think,” and really, who cares.

School was great actually, it’s a fabulous class: The World of the Short Story. We read some Sherman Alexie, some Louise Erdrich, and some Salinger.

Hehe – I always thought that was a wonderful cop-out for xgens. They get to be as ’sinful’ as they like and it doesn’t mater, cause ‘God will forgive them’.

Vacuumhead

With regard to privatized group health care, the cost you pay is based on the morbidity/mortality of the total insured group, not just your personal use, so the health trends of all of an insurance provider’s members affect everyone’s rates.

With regard to smoking, I believe that indoor smoking bans were, for the most part, created to protect workers in those environments, who had to spend a full work day in a smoky environment whether or not it was their personal choice to smoke.

I think it’s funny that you’re so bothered by the trans fat ban – of all the things you could be worried about, you’re upset that states want to reduce heart disease? Good grief!

- Health issues aren’t inherently moral issues. The unhealthiness of trans fats isn’t a matter of “belief” – trans fats are not healthy, and obesity puts a tremendous strain on our country’s resources from a health care perspective.

- Same goes for smoking. Who thinks smoking is immoral? I have never heard even the most staunch opponent of smoking approach the topic from a moral perspective.

The rest of your post is a bit of a rant, not sure where you’re going with it.

I am actually really anti most ideas about “natural” vs “unnatural” since civilisation has turned most of that upside down or irrelevant for most imaginable discussion topics. But. If I do come across one of those who want to explain why homosexuals should be oppressed with the argument “it ain’t no natural, it ain’t”, I’d begin with probably about 50 posts back and forth on what the usable definitions of “natural” would be.

And yes, I recognised you as not being any of that sort of nutjob, so yeah – I’m just interested in the ideas of who/what is most useful for our species survival, and also the other sidetrack you and SB were discussing – what are instincts today, and when do they get rendered null, void and moot. (Or “mute”, as it were.)

And seriously, I am really not fighting hard for anything here, I am just discussing rather vaguely around some intriguing concepts.

Onto SB saying that liberals don’t push morals onto other people, I disagree. I know we had this arguement before. I think the liberals forcing Religions to accept that the definiton of Marriage is between consenting adults. The constant push to outlaw “Hate Speech” all the while pushing for paintings made of the Virgin Mary out of cow dung is “Free Speech”. Or perhaps Obama forcing me to pay for a health care plan I will get no benefit from, or the push to outlaw certain foods (trans fats anyone), or the cigarette taxes or fuel taxes, or other taxes the liberals impose to help curb my behavior (ie setting up morals). Both sides do it. It’s ridiculous, and the catch 22 is you can’t really have a set of morals without somehow pushing someone else’s morals away. It’s the glory of free will.

The internet is a fantastic resource if you know how to qualify your sources.

O but you have, dear wrist slashing friend. YOU EXPECT HIM to practice what he preaches. It may not be a federal law, but he broke YOUR law of “practice what you preach”, and therefore YOU have the right to stick the scarlet letter on him and parade him through the streets!

So, have you publicly confessed EVERY TIME you failed at one of your morals? If you did not, you also lived a lie!

HYPOCRITE!

Come on girl! Time to fess up to all your failures, or hold your tongue about other people’s failures.

Now here is something you may not understand about Christians. If you say you are a Christian you say you are a sinner. You say that you fail miserably on a daily basis to live up to the standard or morals you embrace. That is why you need Grace!

If you do not fail, you do not need Grace, and you do not need to be a Christian.

“but I did not profess otherwise”

No one can “profess otherwise” and still be a Christian.