Re: Are we protected from Junk Food Corporations?

From: Mark (mlowry3_at_bellsouth.net)
Date: 09/02/04 

Date: 2 Sep 2004 07:20:15 -0700

nolionnoproblem@hotmail.com (DonQuijote1954) wrote in message news:<4e4a3f58.0409011738.4188dde6@posting.google.com>...
> mlowry3@bellsouth.net (Mark) wrote in message news:<5ee850fe.0409011013.1fa7e469@posting.google.com>...
> > rangerhasten@yahoo.com (Wolfbrother) wrote
> >
> >
> > > Again just go ahead and ignore the fact that so many parents are
> > > irresponsible and unfit. Does that mean that their children must
> > > suffer? OF COURSE the responsibility lies with the parents!!! BUT
> > > THAT DOES NOT MAKE IT SO! That does not change the fact that some
> > > parents are simply not responsible. So you are saying oh well those
> > > kids are fucked, too bad?? That is exactly what you and others are
> > > saying. Not to mention the children that have no parents in the first
> > > place. Many unfit parents simply cave into their childrens nagging
> > > because they dont give a *** they just want to shut their kids up.
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > I've long been an advocate of an aptitude test before one is allowed
> > to breed. Call it totalitarian if you want, but how the hell else are
> > you going to keep morons from breeding more morons?
> >
>
> OK, Dr. Mengele, what else you propose? Maybe using the poor as
> Guinnea pigs? You sure are an animal lover...maybe a German Shepherd?
> ;)
>

It was a joke. But doesn't it seem a little perverse that you have to
get a license to have a dog, but anyone is allowed to have kids? I've
seen cycles of inept people breeding more of themselves all my life.
Some call it the cycle of poverty or some such, but I think it is
simply inept people, who never saw anything different out of their
parents, instilling the same values (or lack thereof) in their own
children.

Eastern Kentucky is full of the descendants of the first
westward-bound settlers who got 100 miles into the trip and said,
"Y'all this is too hard. Let's just stop here." That's an
over-generalization, I know, but if you had spent time there you would
know what I'm talking about.

> > Regulating fast food TV commercials isn't the answer because after you
> > do that, what's next? TV shows with too much violence (which the
> > moron parents let their too-young kids watch)? Magazine articles with
> > "unsuitable" content? Badmouthing of one's children? Alcohol
> > consumption in any amount if you happen to be a parent? Unwed
> > parenthood?
>
> We should allow again cigarettes in the hands of children. Oh, alcohol
> too. "Play hard, live short" could be the slogan...
> >
> > Idiots will always find a way to behave like idiots, often in front of
> > their children. The only way you can change that is to have the
> > government take total control of every aspect of child-rearing...i.e.
> > put them all in orphanages.
>
> And have them work 12 hour shifts so they learn the value of hard
> labor.

Have you ever seen little Amish kids working in the fields? Do you
think they are being abused by, or do they benefit from, hard work?
Work is not a bad thing, you know.

> >
> > OR...you can expect grownups to take a little responsibility for their
> > actions, and NOT give them some kind of whiney "out" by letting them
> > sue every Tom, *** and Harry for poor outcomes that they, the
> > parents, ought to have been responsible for in the first place.
> >
> > Mark, MD
>
> The parents don't take responsibility for their actions, but does the
> government? Last time I heard they were blaming everybody but
> themselves in having f***ed up in Iraq, not to name on every major
> social issue right here in Amerikkka... ;)

Just my humble opinion, but I don't believe that anyone deserving of
national office would ever actually run for it. But don't get me
started...

Mark, MD