Political Parties: Support or Defend Your Political Affiliations

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by JugBR

i think is a matter of education. you can eat a happy-meal sometimes, but you have to always eat food with vitamins, proteins and fibers. i dont like mcdonalds or burger king, but i like things even more toxic and fat than that. is tasty ? yes its tasty sure, but if you eat that all day youll be lookin like a fat pig.

so the education starts at home, with parental advisors and parental examples. now if mom and daddy likes eat happymeals, coca colas and french fries always and are both fats as pigs... its hard to educate the children...

It should not be the job of the local government (or any form of government) to decide what you can eat and what you cant eat. That is the job of the parents.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

My compliments to the moderators for this thread. Thanks also to FB for the cutting and pasting. Wish I knew how to do it.

You're Welcome! Everything you need to know in life you learn in Kindergarten.

That's where I learned to "cut & paste", but some kids just liked eating the glue... Sombody should make a law banning glue eating...

Originally Posted by renrich

A town council in Los Angeles may ban fast food outlets in one of the poorer sections in town. The reason is that the fast food is making the inhabitants obese. Big Brother anyone? Since obesity and subsequent poor health are major problems(so we hear) in the US would it not make sense, when we get socialised medicine, to moniter the diets of the obese?

Ok Renrich, you opened up this can of worms!!


The Republicans dogma is "Personal Choice" and "Keep Government out of the preople's business", yet they try to tell people what they can and can't do? Hypocracy?

You can smoke Marlboro's to ruin your lungs, and drink Jack Daniels until you can't stand up - no problem. But if you want to smoke a joint in the privacy of your own home - they will come and bust down the door!

How can one be just fine and the other a horrendous crime? Please explain.

The Bush administration sued California in Federal Court to prevent them from allowing terminal cancer patients from eating or smoking Mary J {to alleviate nausea}, which was voted & approved by the people in a referendum.

You want to bake hash brownies? Off to the slammer you go!

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

It should not be the job of the local government (or any form of government) to decide what you can eat and what you cant eat. That is the job of the parents.

Where is the respect for "States Rights"? Please point out to me where in the US constitution does it give the Federal Government the power to rgulate what people eat or smoke?

?erhaps they should just ban all "drugs" & "intoxicants"? Caffeine, Pot, Alcohol, Nicotine, ban 'em all!

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by freebird

Where is the respect for "States Rights"? Please point out to me where in the US constitution does it give the Federal Government the power to rgulate what people eat or smoke?

?erhaps they should just ban all "drugs" & "intoxicants"? Caffeine, Pot, Alcohol, Nicotine, ban 'em all!

You are preaching to the choir.

[ToughOmbre]

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

Back from holiday - been a while.

Welcome back Dan

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin;380797I

I believe in a free market with the neccesary restrictions. By neccesary restriction I mean: Breaking of monopolies, product quality control, environmental control, avertion of corporatism.... etc

Pretty much with you there.

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin;380797I

I believe that certain areas of society should remain under statecontrol (transportation, schools, police, hospitals, correctional facilities etc...).

OK

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

I believe in high taxes to cover education, health- and socialcare. I believe so not only out of humanitarian reasons but also for financial reasons. A broken uneducated person will strain society more than high taxes in the long run.

Living in New Jersey, I know what high taxes are. More money to spend, waste, steal. Can't agree on this one, not even close.

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

I believe in the right to abortion and in the complete banning of firearms.

I was pro choice right up to the minute I saw an ultrasound of my oldest son at 12 weeks after conception; been pro life ever since. To save the life of the mother, in cases of rape and incest, I can see abortion.

Partial birth abortion, minors having abortions WITHOUT parental knowledge or consent.....NO WAY in my value system.

In general, abortion cheapens life. I can't prove this but IMO when a girl/woman gives birth to a healthy baby and then throws it into a dumpster, I can't help but feel that the abortion mentality comes into play.

Complete banning of firearms? Deal breaker for me. One of our basic rights in America, the 2nd Amendment. Make guns illegal and guess who will still have guns....that's right, the bad guys.

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

I am split on the legalization of soft drugs

What do you consider soft drugs?

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

Views on age limits: Drinking: 15 years, Smoking: 18 years, driving: 18 years, voting: 18 years, 1st grade in school: 6 years

Agree with your age limits except for drinking. I know many 15 year olds drink but let's not make it easy for them.

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

I believe in armed intervention only as a last resort. But when it is neccesary it better damn well happen. The US/UK (and others - including my own country) invasion of Iraq and the EU's lack of an initial response in Yugoslavia epotomize what I believe is completely "wrong" choices regarding armed intervention.

I believe in the "last resort" option as well.

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

I believe in completely uninhibited free speach and expression - if someone wants to shreik "Heil!", to draw a cartoon of a religious profet, to burn a flag, or to make fun of the holocaust - thats fine - but don't expect me to sit idly by if something happens that I disagree with!

Free speech must be RESPONSIBLE speech. The old cliche still applies. You can't yell "FIRE" in a crowded movie theater.

TO

[freebird]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

You are preaching to the choir.

Personally, I don't smoke {allergic to any smoke}, but I couldn't in any event, in my job we have to pee in a cup every few months.

Is there anybody that can defend Bush's position on this?


Because it is often quoted as one of the crowning folly's of decadant European Socialism, eg. the "open" attitudes of the Dutch.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by Danielmellbin

I believe in the right to abortion

Yes Indeed! But why only up to 9 months? Why not round it up to a year?

Better yet, the mother should have the right to abort the child at any time up until the child is able to support itself.

About 14 years old for boys. Perhaps 12 years for the resourceful ones. Less for girls.

{In case it isn't blatently obvious, this post is just dripping with sarcasm}


Abortion is bad almost every way you look at it, people should be reponsible for their own actions, you can't just throw your kid in the trash if you get tired of it.

That being said, I thought that the "Roe" was a reasonable compromise by a court that was forced to act by the total abandonment of duty by Congress.

I would be totally against the Supreme overturning Roe v Wade, or deciding this in any way. What would be the point if New Jersey banned all abortions, yet you could walk across the river to New York where they had no restriction?

The only proper resolution for this question is for Congress to step up and decide the issue, not to try to dump it on the court.

Congress should make laws, Courts interpret them.

{I think thats a good idea, someone should write it into the Constitution}

[Learstang]

DerAdlerIstGelandet, would you please explain "Obama is a fruit."?

Learstang

[Marcel]

Originally Posted by ToughOmbre

Welcome back Dan
Pretty much with you there. ..

Not quoted the whole post. Seems like we have more in common than I thought TO. As you seem to consider yourself a right wing thinker, I'm still a little uncertain of what the US considers right an left wing.


I'm usually reluctant expressing my political believes thus I won't discus this in depth, but I consider myself a centre-left wing voter. Usually my ideas are about the same as our social-democratic party. But I see no problem in voting right wing parties if I think my country will benefit from that. We usually have a coalition as government (different than in the US) and I sometimes believe, depending on circumstances, a coalition containing both right and left can be healthy for our country..

What I really hate are the more extreme parties (left and right), I believe they shout more than they accomplish and populist parties, last category seems to be very popular here nowadays. I firmly believe a party should have a well founded program and long-term views and should not have a "go with the flow" program.

[Marcel]

Originally Posted by freebird

Because it is often quoted as one of the crowning folly's of decadant European Socialism, eg. the "open" attitudes of the Dutch.

Yes it is, but usually by people who never really lived here.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by Marcel

We usually have a coalition as government (different than in the US) and I sometimes believe, depending on circumstances, a coalition containing both right and left can be healthy for our country..

What I really hate are the more extreme parties (left and right), I believe they shout more than they accomplish and populist parties, last category seems to be very popular here nowadays. I firmly believe a party should have a well founded program and long-term views and should not have a "go with the flow" program.

Great Post Marcel, I am much in agreement, the extremes are not healthy.


What is your opinion on the legalization of soft drugs & prostitution? Holland has both, so it would be nice to hear your thoughts.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by Learstang

DerAdlerIstGelandet, would you please explain "Obama is a fruit."?

Learstang

It is just another way for me to say I do not like him and that I think he is a fake.

[Danielmellbin]

Freebird and TO:
Regarding abortion: I suspect I might have the same reaction as you TO (when seeing my unborn child). However one more problem with illegalizing abortion is IMO that it will not stop abortion. Rather it will just confine women to damp cellars with questionable doctors or just plain home made sharp sticks. As for making rules for when to make it legal (inces, rape etc...). First of all it kindof counterdicts the first point - that the unborns life is as precious as a born life. Furthermore I suspect the allegations of rape would skyrocket.

TO:
Pot, grass, weed, skunk and the likes are what I consider soft drugs (smokey stuff ). The reason I am split is that I have close friends who have fallen victim to these drugs. BUT - their status as illegal makes them a huge financial income to criminals and less safe than they already are. Two evils as I see it. However i lean towards legalization as it seems to have worked in Holland.

Prostition should be legal in my mind. Simply to avoid serious abuse, violent pimps and the likes. (and also a place of income for the bad guys).

Originally Posted by freebird

Yes Indeed! But why only up to 9 months? Why not round it up to a year?

Better yet, the mother should have the right to abort the child at any time up until the child is able to support itself.

About 14 years old for boys. Perhaps 12 years for the resourceful ones. Less for girls.

{In case it isn't blatently obvious, this post is just dripping with sarcasm}


Abortion is bad almost every way you look at it, people should be reponsible for their own actions, you can't just throw your kid in the trash if you get tired of it.

I disagree here because I do not see an unborn infant up to the 1st trimester as being a thinking entity. But there is not much to discuss here as there is just fundamental difference in our paradigms.

TO: Regarding free speach:
I disagree and agree - ofcourse people should use sound judgement before uttering something. But on principal - there can be no limits IMO. This has been widely debated here in DK after the muhammed cartoons.

[Matt308]

Obama is not a leader. He is yet another politician that wants to please everyone and his stated positions indicate that. Some of the posts above indicate that a politician/political party that behaves this way is to be desired. I loath elected officials who do no lead. Leadership requires fortitude and moral compass. And leadership may result in near-term decisions contrary to the majority of the populace.

That is one absolutely admirable quality of John McCain. He is a leader.

[JugBR]

Originally Posted by DerAdlerIstGelandet

It should not be the job of the local government (or any form of government) to decide what you can eat and what you cant eat. That is the job of the parents.

i agree with you, but would you agree with me, the situation could be even worst if the government decided people must eat just happy meals ?

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by JugBR

i agree with you, but would you agree with me, the situation could be even worst if the government decided people must eat just happy meals ?

It would not be worse, because no government would do that...