Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DanTex

(20,709 posts)
14. This clearly has nothing to do with discrimination or bigotry. It is a public health measure.
Fri Nov 1, 2013, 06:53 PM
Nov 2013

How about food inspections, are you opposed to those? Is it wrong for the government to tell me I can't buy a piece of food because it's after the "expiration date"? What if I'm willing to roll the dice to get a lower price?

What about medical licenses. If I to get want surgery from a used car salesman, should I have that choice?

Are you in favor of legalizing all drugs? And making all pharmaceuticals available without prescriptions? Including things like global anesthetics and paralytics?

If you answered "no" to any of those questions, you might want to reconsider, and realize that this is a more nuanced issue than you give it credit for.

This is not about morality, it is about health. It's not saying that drinking big sodas makes you a bad person. It also doesn't ban drinking a lot of soda.

What it does is prevent vendors from making profit by selling harmful substances in large quantities. And, for the record, the NYC trans-fat ban is not widely ignored at all. It is widely followed, because restaurants don't want to lose their licenses. http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/16/health/nyc-fat-ban-paying-off/

There is no reason to believe that any stores or vendors in NYC are going to ignore the big soda ban either. This isn't regulating a personal activity, it is regulating a commercial activity.

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #1
What choice is being taken away? NYC Liberal Nov 2013 #9
Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2013 #15
it's about adjusting a dysfunctional environment. KittyWampus Nov 2013 #18
Good... Tikki Nov 2013 #2
Great news. JaneyVee Nov 2013 #3
To those who think we can outlaw obesity customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #4
Do you also disagree with NYC's ban on trans-fats? DanTex Nov 2013 #5
I can quote you all kinds of "science" customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #8
Actually, no, the science does not support discrimination against gay or lesbian people. DanTex Nov 2013 #10
Sorry, didn't mean to ignore that customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #12
This clearly has nothing to do with discrimination or bigotry. It is a public health measure. DanTex Nov 2013 #14
How have all those things worked out? customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #24
Wow, so you really are a full-on Ayn Rand/Milton Friedman libertarian. No regulations at all. DanTex Nov 2013 #28
I'm a sugar addict who is actively working to eat better and control my addiction, but I can tell liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #45
Most people aren't sugar addicts. DanTex Nov 2013 #53
that's why there are different sizes. If you want a small get a small. If you want a large get a liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #59
It's not a ban on drinking, it's a ban on selling. DanTex Nov 2013 #64
how much of my life do want to control? Why not let the republicans tell us who we're allowed to liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #66
Again with the preposterous analogies... DanTex Nov 2013 #69
You are doing a great job on keeping the focus on the issue. Luminous Animal Nov 2013 #75
Just because some people have peddled junk science NYC Liberal Nov 2013 #11
So, if a current theory of science customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #13
Except nothing is being banned. No choice is being removed NYC Liberal Nov 2013 #39
It starts out that way customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #52
What is the "current theory of science" on being gay? morningfog Nov 2013 #49
That it's a normal expression of human sexuality customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #56
Legislation has been effective in reducing smoking. morningfog Nov 2013 #58
Because being denied a Big Gulp at 7/11 is exactly like outlawing sex Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #60
Are you seriously comparing sexual orientation with public health issues? uppityperson Nov 2013 #16
I'm talking about human nature customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #25
Drinking soda is not human nature in the same way sexual orientation is human nature Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #31
In my original response customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #67
You really want to dig deeper with your comparision of drinking a small soda and outlawing sex? Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #71
Sexual orientation and drinking large soda is in no way comparable. Now you also seem to be uppityperson Nov 2013 #42
Did you really just compare drinking soda to being gay? Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #19
What I compared customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #27
Sorry, serving soda in a smaller cup is nothing like banning a sexual orientation Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #33
It is incredibly absurd, and that is being generous. morningfog Nov 2013 #50
And here's the hated "Double Gulp" warrant46 Nov 2013 #37
Its 64 Ounces !! warrant46 Nov 2013 #38
Fun fact: NYC residents have one of the highest life expectantly rates in the USA JaneyVee Nov 2013 #29
How is obesity like homosexuality? morningfog Nov 2013 #48
Attempting to legislate away customerserviceguy Nov 2013 #81
Banning handguns is a horrible example. DanTex Nov 2013 #90
Good. There is no "ban"; it's a limit on portion sizzle. NYC Liberal Nov 2013 #6
So how do you feel about the ban on trans-fats in NYC? DanTex Nov 2013 #7
how do you justify having the government tell me what I can or cannot do? Illinoischick Nov 2013 #22
The government does that all the time. DanTex Nov 2013 #23
Using that argument binds you Union Scribe Nov 2013 #30
Quite the opposite. DanTex Nov 2013 #32
And I've yet to see any benefit. Union Scribe Nov 2013 #34
People consume less when it's readily available. That's the point. DanTex Nov 2013 #35
Drug warriors do not argue for regulation, they argue for criminalization Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #40
+1 daleanime Nov 2013 #65
Oh my, how many fallacious comparisons have I SEEN here! alp227 Nov 2013 #43
Do you support the FDA regulating the safety of your food? Bjorn Against Nov 2013 #26
Seeing as how (artificial) trans.fats are unnecessary and generally dangerous at any dose, sir pball Nov 2013 #91
Good post. That's the first rational response I've gotten here. DanTex Nov 2013 #92
I'm good with regulations of inherently harmful substances or behaviors, sir pball Nov 2013 #93
I disagree with him but I am still voting for de Blasio. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #17
It exposes an ugly side of him seveneyes Nov 2013 #20
Hmm... pro-creationism, pro-gun, anti-DeBlasio... DanTex Nov 2013 #36
Hmmm...reading comprehension, pro-facts, anti-nanny for adults seveneyes Nov 2013 #41
Not this shit again... Throd Nov 2013 #21
Oh boy, here we go again!!! Beacool Nov 2013 #44
As much as I like the guy, I think he got it wrong here.....nt AverageJoe90 Nov 2013 #46
From what I could tell, most people thought Bloomberg was an asshole for pushing it badtoworse Nov 2013 #47
Well, Sarah Palin certainly thought that. DanTex Nov 2013 #62
I've lived in the New York area my whole life and work in Manhattan. badtoworse Nov 2013 #63
DeBlasio is ahead by some 30-40 points in the polls. DanTex Nov 2013 #70
Doesn't mean DeBlasio won't look like an ass if he pusges it badtoworse Nov 2013 #99
Really? Not a single person? That's quite an insular group of right-wing buddies you've got. DanTex Nov 2013 #100
You'd be surprised the broad spectrum of people you meet when you work in Manhattan badtoworse Nov 2013 #101
Umm... I live in Manhattan. I know just how broad the spectrum of people here is. DanTex Nov 2013 #102
so being liberal means you get to tell people what they are allowed to eat huh? What's next? liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #72
NYC banned trans-fats in restaurants. How do you feel about that? DanTex Nov 2013 #73
Way to lecture a NYer about NY. Union Scribe Nov 2013 #78
Umm... I live in Manhattan. DanTex Nov 2013 #88
Good! Obesity is an epidemic, like tobacco use. I say go for it. morningfog Nov 2013 #51
even with all the shaming, and taxes my father in law smoked for years. Right up until he had liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #79
Anecdotes notwithstanding, smoking and smoking related deaths have decreased. morningfog Nov 2013 #89
Not the smartest thing to say this close to the election. MADem Nov 2013 #54
Priorities, priorites, priorities. Glad he has everyone's health and welfare in mind. adirondacker Nov 2013 #55
who is stopping you from downing 2 sodas? La Lioness Priyanka Nov 2013 #57
Ok. So they ban anything larger than 16 ounces. Vashta Nerada Nov 2013 #61
Lots of ways around the ban. n/t PoliticAverse Nov 2013 #68
Nothing stops them from getting refills, that's not the point Hippo_Tron Nov 2013 #95
False equivalency. Vashta Nerada Nov 2013 #96
STD treatments and diabetes treatments both use resources that could be used for something else Hippo_Tron Nov 2013 #97
We all have a shared obligation to help others live more healthy lives. FarCenter Nov 2013 #74
I'm sorry, but I don't need you to help me live a healthier life. liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #76
Nope. You still get to own your own addiction. You can still buy a two liter Luminous Animal Nov 2013 #82
What a bozo Politicalboi Nov 2013 #77
"More aggressive." What if the ban on large drinks fails to reduce Skip Intro Nov 2013 #80
I hope he also combines the initiative with public health campaigns along the lines Luminous Animal Nov 2013 #83
Let me ask you - Skip Intro Nov 2013 #85
The government is not restricting how much soda you can drink.. Luminous Animal Nov 2013 #86
SCIENTIFIC evidence also shows that restaurant soda consumption isn't the problem. sir pball Nov 2013 #94
There are other ways this could be tackled. David__77 Nov 2013 #84
thank you for saying that in the right order. Most people want to tax unhealthy food to discourage liberal_at_heart Nov 2013 #87
On a personal level I'm all for trying to get people to drink 16oz of soda or less with a meal Arcanetrance Nov 2013 #98
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bill de Blasio vows to ma...»Reply #14