No Food Stamps For Soda

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

More thread pollution about slippery slope. SODA. 40% of public school kids are obese in NYC. Many of these kids get food stamps. We are helping people, not hurting people by banning soda for food stamps.

It is not up to the govt to dictate to us what we eat. Period. The list of things that are supposedly bad for us is a mile long. I ask again, what's next? The idea that people who are on food stamps can't get soda will somehow cure obesity or even decrease it 1/2 of 1% is ridiculously naive. Helping people by taking away personal choice is dangerous. Banning schools from selling candy or soda? No problem. Banning people from buying soda with the money they receive from the govt? That's your slippery slope.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It is not up to the govt to dictate to us what we eat. Period. The list of things that are supposedly bad for us is a mile long. I ask again, what's next? The idea that people who are on food stamps can't get soda will somehow cure obesity or even decrease it 1/2 of 1% is ridiculously naive. Helping people by taking away personal choice is dangerous. Banning schools from selling candy or soda? No problem. Banning people from buying soda with the money they receive from the govt? That's your slippery slope.

You are not taking away personal choice. You are keeping people from starving....When you are off the government tit, you will be allowed to kill yourself like everyone else...including you.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

You are not taking away personal choice. You are keeping people from starving....When you are off the government tit, you will be allowed to kill yourself like everyone else...including you.

You are absolutely taking away personal choice. The govt should not dictate what you choose to eat or drink. Mandating what we can and can't eat or drink is an insanely blatant violation of civil liberties. Like I said before, What's next? Too much fat? Too much salt?

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

You are absolutely taking away personal choice. The govt should not dictate what you choose to eat or drink. Mandating what we can and can't eat or drink is an insanely blatant violation of civil liberties. Like I said before, What's next? Too much fat? Too much salt?

Why you can't see the difference of what welfare is, what is designed to do, and what you are arguing is beyond me...We are not having the same conversation.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Why you can't see the difference of what welfare is, what is designed to do, and what you are arguing is beyond me...We are not having the same conversation.

The reason is that you believe what you think is an absolute when clearly it is not. You want to break it down into black and white. In your mind soda is bad so banning it is justified. The problem is that soda is not bad or good. It is just one one of many drinks available and even the circumstantial evidence about obecsity and sugar dont matter to me as much as the rights of the people that your decree tramples on.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The reason is that you believe what you think is an absolute when clearly it is not. You want to break it down into black and white. In your mind soda is bad so banning it is justified. The problem is that soda is not bad or good. It is just one one of many drinks available and even the circumstantial evidence about obecsity and sugar dont matter to me as much as the rights of the people that your decree tramples on.

No, no, no....This is so incorrect. Look at the Westboro thread et all. I am as consistent as you could ever be.

This is not a subtle difference when you are talking about government money. This is where you and I differ. This is the same argument you tried to use in the tracks being subsidized thread, b/c they do it for casinos. This is your MO. You try desperately to change the subject when the truth is right in your face....Tax money. This is nobody's personal piggy bank, nor should it be. Am I saying we should outlaw welfare? No...God forbid someone who should be thrilled to get a handout, has to avoid a sprite which at 20 ounces has 16 spoons of sugar. Really not asking much here.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

No, no, no....This is so incorrect. Look at the Westboro thread et all. I am as consistent as you could ever be.

This is not a subtle difference when you are talking about government money. This is where you and I differ. This is the same argument you tried to use in the tracks being subsidized thread, b/c they do it for casinos. This is your MO. You try desperately to change the subject when the truth is right in your face....Tax money. This is nobody's personal piggy bank, nor should it be. Am I saying we should outlaw welfare? No...God forbid someone who should be thrilled to get a handout, has to avoid a sprite which at 20 ounces has 16 spoons of sugar. Really not asking much here.

It isn't the gov't money once they hand it over to you. Don't you think that people who are in the foodstamp program have paid taxes at some point in their lives? This idea that I have an "MO" is well, stupid. You believe that the gov't should have the right to tell you how you spend YOUR money once they give it to you. I don't. The Tracks/casino thing? You just don't understand the issues and/or are just plain wrong.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It is not up to the govt to dictate to us what we eat. Period. The list of things that are supposedly bad for us is a mile long. I ask again, what's next? The idea that people who are on food stamps can't get soda will somehow cure obesity or even decrease it 1/2 of 1% is ridiculously naive. Helping people by taking away personal choice is dangerous. Banning schools from selling candy or soda? No problem. Banning people from buying soda with the money they receive from the govt? That's your slippery slope.

Isn't this money supposed to be used to feed people that are hungry? I don't see any hunger being relieved with soda. Conservatives complain about the waste of their money. Well, this is a big waste of money.

[chucklestheclown]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Isn't this money supposed to be used to feed people that are hungry? I don't see any hunger being relieved with soda. Conservatives complain about the waste of their money. Well, this is a big waste of money.

Food stamps are to help people of low income buy food (and drink). If you have ever been thirsty on a hot day and chugged down a can of coke I don't see how you (I mean anyone) can possibly say a poor person should not be allowed to have a coke. 20 cokes...bad choice...one or two...go for it.