I am so sick and tired of...

Chocolate is a "people food" that does not naturally occur in the wild. Using it as an example speaks directly to the point that I am making.

---My point was that people seemingly do not apply logic to long term (or chronic) conditions, consequences and problems. Noting that cancer is a disease commonly associated to "old people" substantiates my claim that people don't think long term, e.g. "I won't have to deal with cancer probably for another 30 years". Maybe their right. It still won't be enjoyable wasting away in agony while your family stands by helpless.

---I understand that health can be a crapshoot and people suffer terrible ailments in spite of their best efforts at avoiding them.

 

Human beings are omnivores. Dogs are carnivores. If you feed your dog table scraps he won't be having some of his nutritional needs met and I don't care whether your diet is all natural or all fast food. We have more cancer deaths today largely because we have less death from things like bubonic plague, cholera, typhus and a whole host of other bacteriological and viral killers. We have more heart disease largely because we spend too much time sitting on our collective behinds.

 

---Cancer rates climbing as a result of other death rates dropping is a good point. It definitely contributes to the numbers that we see. However, the differences between cancer rates among those that have a diet typical of the United States, United Kingdom and Scandinavian countries versus those whose diet is typical of Mediterranean countries is clear. That being said, the Mediterranean diet is imperfect. There is no "free lunch", so to speak, and regardless of how careful people are about their dietary habits things will happen.

---My beef is with the disregard and stupidity people approach things with. Diet is just one context. There are so many others, though. As I type this response I can clearly see where I am guilty of this, too. That is why I am sick and tired of it.

 

Nothing you do will keep you from dying eventually. The same diet that prevents cancer may well simply replace death by cancer with death by heart attack.

 

Christian businesses being forced to serve, despite it going against their beliefs

Chic-fil-a was tried to be politically pressured not to donate to FCS because that group.... gasp.... supports traditional marraige

NFL wide reciever was fined for tweeting #disgusting, whenever Michael Sam kissed his boyfriend upon the announcement he was drafted


....all examples of forcing lifestyle choices.

or, educate yourself on how to prevent kids. it's not hard

yes, actions do have consequences.... sex has a consequence.....

 

Change that to any business being legally compelled to provide service to anyone it doesn't want to for any reason and I agree with you.

Now you're just complaining about citizens of a free country exercising their free speech rights by voicing their opinion. I don't believe CFA was legally compelled to take any particular course of action, were they?. In a nation of free men, you will sometimes be subject to peoples' displeasure with your actions. Such is life. I don't see how this constitutes anyone being "forced to accept a lifestyle" as you have claimed.

The NFL is a private organization and as such is free to set its own rules. Again, I don't see how this constitutes anyone being "forced to accept a lifestyle" as you have claimed. You are free to express your displeasure with the NFL all you want.

Except for the first one, I'm afraid not. You do not have a right to not be offended. In the two latter cases, you were merely offended. You have not been forced to accept anything. Now if you open a deli and a Muslim customer complains to the government that you serve pork? Yes, that would be a case of being forced to accept a lifestyle choice. Or if you were forced to bake a gay cake...

 

Uh, yes, as I said: "careful where you point that thing."

 

I didn't say it was the govt... but it's still pressuring acceptance of your lifestyle choice or else.... that's shoving it down someone's throat.

again, has nothing to do with govt vs private.... I understand the difference.... but this is still PC police gone wild. The reciever should have said "I was talking about a joke I heard unrelated to Michael Sam getting drafted at that exact same time..." or "I was hacked". He admitted it, and got fined. Why? Because he didn't agree with homosexuality? again, forcing your beliefs through political pressures.... shoving it down our throats.

I wasn't forced to, but the dolphins reciever was, the CFA CEO was tried to be forced....

 

Stop quoting the bible people have needs and wants and it SHOULD be based on what they can AFFORD . If you don't like the wages your employer is paying , then FIND ANOTHER JOB !!!!!!

“Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Fail again. Fail better.” Samuel Beckett
“If you don't go after what you want, you'll never have it. If you don't ask, the answer is always no. If you don't step forward, you're always in the same place”. Nora Roberts

 

40 hours a week x8$ is 16640 a year....


I can garantee you can DOUBLE your income. all you have to do is find another 40 hour a week job at $8/hour.


if you don't want to work 80 hours a week, increase your skillset so you can get 40 hour a week job that pays more

 

Get a skill set and wipe away those tears...... Asians seem to find a way to remove all barriers, including language and EXCEL, NOW GET OUT THERE AND SOAR !

 

Well then what you're expressing is psychological discomfort. But unless you are forced by law to make a gay cake, for example, your are not being forced to accept anything. I know some people who might suggest that a lot of Christians have forced their beliefs on society, for example. I'll bet you'd disagree with that assertion. Yet when I look at the money in my wallet, it still says "In God We Trust."

So express your displeasure with the NFL.

The Dolphins receiver violated his work rules and demonstrated that actions have consequences.

And? Are you suggesting that people who hold opinions dissimilar to yours aren't allowed to express them?

 

Me saying you choose to be gay is a psychological discomfort....

CFA ceo donating to a FCS, a group that promotes traditional marraige, is a psychological discomfort.... works both ways. Meanwhile, gays are trying to financially ruin anyone who doesn't support gays.... Mozilla CEO, CFA, the dolphins wide reciever.

depends on your interpretation of the rule whenever you give gays more protections to call it equality

quite the opposite.... unpopular speech deserves the most protections.... I can't stand westburo baptist nut jobs.... but their right to protest following the rules, should be protected.

One thing about those whackos..... they know what the rule is, even if the people they make mad, don't. Doesn't make them right.... just makes what they said, allowable.

 

After reading this I rather cut it off with a rusty butter knife , are you serious .

 

Certainly. You are entitled to both hold and proclaim that opinion.

I agree to the point where these groups advocate government intervention--which is the precise definition of imposing your beliefs on others. You can have all the cultural traditions marriage you want--but when it comes to the government, the legal aspect must be viewed dispassionately and objectively... at least should we wish to call ourselves free.

Something they have every right to do.

I'm not sure I know what that's supposed to mean.

So what's the problem then? Why do you complain when "the gays" exercise their free speech rights?

Every form of expression is allowable by default... until such time that expression can be shown to constitute demonstrable harm... inciting a riot, yelling "FIRE" in a theater, etc..

 

you asked... "how is a lifestyle choice being forced on you"

I just showed numerous examples. You may feel justified in your reasons why, and that's fine... but whether it's by govt intervention like the Christian baker, or private organizations like the NFL being pressured into fining people who are find guys kissing "#disgusting" or just everyday people trying (unsuccessfully) to pressure CFA into submission.... it's all still trying to force your opinion on others

 

So you'll of course agree then that when advocates of traditional marriage urge us to boycott (or financially ruin as you'd say) Starbucks, Target, General Mills, REI, etc. because they either support SSM and/or provide benefits to same-sex partners, they are also trying to force their opinion on others. And then certainly, when you look at the legal definition of marriage in the remaining states that have not yet dropped the arbitrary gender stipulation from their statutes, those states are too trying to force their opinion on others. And when the National Organization for Marriage advocates a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT to have the federal government define marriage at the federal level, that is trying to force their opinion on others. You agree, of course.

 

absolutely....


I remember, when the baptist church said to boycott disney.... I didn't like that either and I went during that time. Even if I wasn't already planning a trip, I wouldn't have supported it.


I am confident my position remains non-hypocritical on the issue.

I am also confident, you do not take that same non-hypocritical stance on issues you agree with vs issues you don't agree with.

 

I appreciate your consistency. But I do need to make a distinction here. I don't have a problem with anyone boycotting Starbucks or Chick-Fil-A for any old damn reason they please. And I don't consider that "trying to force their opinion on others." I also don't have a problem with someone shouting from the rooftops that they don't like Starbucks or Chick-Fil-A for this and that reason. In this instance, no one is preventing you from enjoying your cinnamon latte or your chicken sandwich. In order for someone to "impose their opinion," in my view, they need to either force me to act or prevent me from acting. And this is usually accomplished through some legal means. A good example of this is the City of Chicago denying Wal-Mart an operating license within city limits because in the opinion of some Chicago elected and/or appointed officials, Wal-Mart does not reflect "Chicago values" or whatever bogus reason they concocted to keep Wal-Mart out of the city. In this case, opinions were clearly imposed on others who were prevented from acting by legal means.

Another example -- casino gambling. Some people don't like gambling. Well enough. But it is not enough for them to simply say "gambling is not for me, and I will not go to a casino." No, these folks have a desire to impose their opinion on others by advocating all kinds of restrictive laws on consenting adults who may wish to go play a card game for money or make a wager on a sporting event. Again -- opinion imposed by preventing someone from acting.

Finally, an example of the government forcing someone to act -- your cake-baker. Though I view it as bad business to refuse to serve people because you don't like them or their lifestyle, you should never be compelled through force of government action to provide a service or sell a product or operate your business in any way other than the way you feel like operating it. Every business and/or individual has the right, in my opinion, to simply state "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" and that's that. I think on this point, we agree.

So, based on that I think you can see why I disagree with your Chick-Fil-A and NFL arguments because nobody is prevented from getting a chicken sandwich or watching football. If Chick-Fil-A wants to put up signs saying "we do not serve our chicken to homosexuals" they are welcome to do it in my world. It's their damn restaurant. I think it would be a terrible business move... but you are also allowed to be a bad businessperson.

 

The main barrier to achievement that I can see is something called entitlement in which we have convinced now multiple generations that you are "owed" something rather than you have to "earn" something.

 

Oppressed Christians.

 

Please read carefully. I did not say entitlements. I said entitlement.