Ban Sugary Drinks but Legalize Pot?

[emilynghiem]

New York City appeals ?soda ban? ruling

Am I the only person who questions this push to ban sugary drinks while there is a movement to legalize pot?

The Mayor argues it is to "encourage" people to make the conscious choice of sugar intake.
Well what about drinking and smoking, then?
???

What should we do, have a third level of laws (such as "health and safety" ordinances)
to "discourage" abusive or addictive excesses that is bad for one's health and "encourage" counseling and rehab (without micromanaging or punishing through civil/criminal laws).

And let everyone opt in and make their own localized decisions as to what they want or don't want; so if you are for pot but against soft drinks, you can vote for that per district?
Am I the only one having trouble wrapping my mind around this
???

 

[Meister]

Good thread. A lot of these people are liberals and want smokers to pay for higher healthcare premiums, I just wonder if they believe the same for smoking mother nature. I bet not.

 

[konradv]

Smoking and excessive drinking are already being discouraged and sugary drinks aren't being banned. FAIL!!!

 

[Meister]

They sure are trying to get the big gulp banned in NY. At least there is one judge who isn't a nut.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Am I the only person who questions this push to ban sugary drinks while there is a movement to legalize pot?

....When sugary drinks pretty-obviously make you stupid as shit??

​

 

[emilynghiem]

Smoking and excessive drinking are already being discouraged and sugary drinks aren't being banned. FAIL!!!

I thought anything with over 16 whatever of sugar blah blah blah
was restricted in the ordinance with exceptions for drinks that have milk
(I guess like shakes that are supposed to be fattening?)

how are you going to police that?

are you saying this proposed restriction is failing?

I agree it is problematic to enforce, but I thought the Mayor was pushing for it!
Is this not correct?

Also how is the movement across several states to legalize pot discouraging smoking? Isn't that encouraging it, and motivated by people who want to smoke? Am I imagining that?

Who's the one on crack here?
If it's me, by golly, I want to know.
Maybe I should get on the stuff, if it will help me understand how other people are getting this!

 

[there4eyeM]

Other than they are happening at the same historical moment, what do these two have in common? How is marijuana prohibition even remotely related?

 

[emilynghiem]

Am I the only person who questions this push to ban sugary drinks while there is a movement to legalize pot?

....When sugary drinks pretty-obviously make you stupid as shit??

​

I see nothing "stupid" about Sarah Palin being credited for
taking on the "good old boy" politics that was corrupting the GOP in her state.
Give credit where credit is due.

All people have both strengths and weaknesses.
Just because the media likes to take one side, doesn't mean you have to limit
your perception of people to just what you are fed in the media that doesn't have
time to go into depth.

You really miss out that way. I find there's a lot more to people, both good and bad, than what you can paint in a 30 second sound byte skewed for ratings.
You'd be surprised by looking deeper.

There's a lot more going on than the politics we see on the surface!

 

[Michelle420]

New York City appeals ?soda ban? ruling

Am I the only person who questions this push to ban sugary drinks while there is a movement to legalize pot?

The Mayor argues it is to "encourage" people to make the conscious choice of sugar intake.
Well what about drinking and smoking, then?
???

What should we do, have a third level of laws (such as "health and safety" ordinances)
to "discourage" abusive or addictive excesses that is bad for one's health and "encourage" counseling and rehab (without micromanaging or punishing through civil/criminal laws).

And let everyone opt in and make their own localized decisions as to what they want or don't want; so if you are for pot but against soft drinks, you can vote for that per district?
Am I the only one having trouble wrapping my mind around this
???

I am for soft drinks and pot

 

[emilynghiem]

Other than they are happening at the same historical moment, what do these two have in common? How is marijuana prohibition even remotely related?

If people are pushing legislation/ordinances for "health-conscious" reasons
then why isn't this being applied to the health effects and side effects of marijuana?

Why the selective use of legislation to push for regulating/managing "private"
consumer decisions in one case, yet fighting to get govt regulation out of others?

Besides the politics and agenda behind the arguments for
either pushing or opposing govt regulations in respective cases?

Like someone said, targeting the alcohol or cigarette companies financially, but wanting to decriminalize the independent marijuana growers and users?

So is this part of a class or culture war and not about health per se?
???

 

[Pogo]

Sugar is a lot more dangerous than cannabis; it actually has detrimental health effects.

Whether either one deserves legislation are separate questions, but as a comparison between the two, there isn't one. In other words if you took these two substances (cannabis and sugar) and decided that one of them would be subject to some kind of government restriction in the public interest, then all the science would point you to sugar.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

It begins. With socialized medicine, your personal health concerns and choices become a matter of public interest. The stupidest animal in creation is the American public. It won't be long until you'll hear bitching about how old people put tremendous strain on the system.


No death panels, though. No, sir. That could never happen here.

 

[there4eyeM]

We should all be for adult freedom.

 

[FA_Q2]

Other than they are happening at the same historical moment, what do these two have in common? How is marijuana prohibition even remotely related?

If people are pushing legislation/ordinances for "health-conscious" reasons
then why isn't this being applied to the health effects and side effects of marijuana?

Why the selective use of legislation to push for regulating/managing "private"
consumer decisions in one case, yet fighting to get govt regulation out of others?

Besides the politics and agenda behind the arguments for
either pushing or opposing govt regulations in respective cases?

Like someone said, targeting the alcohol or cigarette companies financially, but wanting to decriminalize the independent marijuana growers and users?

So is this part of a class or culture war and not about health per se?
???

This is what you get when you allow the government to regulate morality – asinine bans on things that are ‘bad.’

We need to reject this nanny state bullshit and get back to sticking with freedoms. You should be able to do whatever the fuck you want as long as you are not invading my freedom, be it smoking pot, drinking sugar or anything else that your little heart might desire.

 

[Borillar]

New York City appeals ?soda ban? ruling

Am I the only person who questions this push to ban sugary drinks while there is a movement to legalize pot?

The Mayor argues it is to "encourage" people to make the conscious choice of sugar intake.
Well what about drinking and smoking, then?
???

What should we do, have a third level of laws (such as "health and safety" ordinances)
to "discourage" abusive or addictive excesses that is bad for one's health and "encourage" counseling and rehab (without micromanaging or punishing through civil/criminal laws).

And let everyone opt in and make their own localized decisions as to what they want or don't want; so if you are for pot but against soft drinks, you can vote for that per district?
Am I the only one having trouble wrapping my mind around this
???

I am for soft drinks and pot

Good for the "cotton mouth".

 

[LoudMcCloud]

Soda is worse than marijuana. Countless studies prove that.

 

[auditor0007]

New York City appeals ?soda ban? ruling

Am I the only person who questions this push to ban sugary drinks while there is a movement to legalize pot?

The Mayor argues it is to "encourage" people to make the conscious choice of sugar intake.
Well what about drinking and smoking, then?
???

What should we do, have a third level of laws (such as "health and safety" ordinances)
to "discourage" abusive or addictive excesses that is bad for one's health and "encourage" counseling and rehab (without micromanaging or punishing through civil/criminal laws).

And let everyone opt in and make their own localized decisions as to what they want or don't want; so if you are for pot but against soft drinks, you can vote for that per district?
Am I the only one having trouble wrapping my mind around this
???

While the soda ban is stupid, you point is off base. The ban is on large size soda, not all soda. There is no ban on soda, they are just banning the sale of big sodas. That doesn't mean you can't buy as many little sodas as you want or go back for as many refills as you want.

 

[LoudMcCloud]

I may be off base, but Im right.

 

[FA_Q2]

Soda is worse than marijuana. Countless studies prove that.

Wow.

No, not a single study anywhere shows that. Sugar is actually a required element for your body and is very healthy in proper levels. Pot on the other hand can be very dangerous in the wrong situation – say driving after getting high.

It is not about what is better for you and what is worse. It’s a matter of freedom. This tested government declares that a woman can kill an unborn child because it is her body but that she can plance in that same body a plant that can be grown in her backyard. That is asinine. It declares that she cannot buy a ‘large’ drink because the sugar in it. Also asinine.

When will we grow up and just let people make decisions for themselves.

 

[LoudMcCloud]

Wow, back. Thats not sugar in soda. Thats artificial sugar you genius. LOL.

Keep drinking soda you idiot. lol. I bet your fat too.