…another authoritarian arsehole spits out vile garbage. I really don’t have anything to add to the excellent filleting carried out by Chris. In a way, I agree with him, the likes of Waxman and Smith are doing us a service by pinning their nasty colours to the mast. We can see their wicked, misanthropic authoritarianism in plain sight.
First it was the smokers, then the drinkers and now the salad dodgers – and on each occasion the excuse has been a combination of dodgy statistics, junk science, made up limits and outright lies. All of which are to be seen trotted out as truth by both of these charlatans.
Read, absorb and learn. This is what the enemy of liberty looks like. Whose side are you on?
I have always been of the opinion that actions that do no harm to anyone else should not be illegal. If I want to smoke, drink, and have an unhealthy diet (as a matter of fact I don’t), that is no-one’s business but my own. I long to live in a world were people can make their own decisions and accept the concequences.
Part of the problem that we have in the UK is our tax-funded health service. These zealots like to think that by not looking after yourself you are putting an unfair burden on a service that everybody has to pay for. Back in reality land, it is people who live longer that cost the most, these morons should really be telling us to live life to the full and then die. This is actually the best option for everybody. But FFS let us all decide for ourselves.
“I long to live in a world were people can make their own decisions and accept the concequences.”
I remember that world – it wasn’t so long ago
🙁
It’s all about money: my MP replied that the smoking ban (and, presumably, what’s followed) was brought in to relieve the tax burden on the next generation (giving lie to the nonsense about protecting barworkers’ health). It would seem that in our politicos’ minds future decreasing tax receipts mean that we’ve to stay healthy and in harness for longer.
I disagree about the smoking ban – because I go to pubs a lot (I LIKE my beer) but I loathed the smoke.
However, somkers are still, thnkfully free to smoke as much as they like, without me having to breathe it.
What these arseholes, as you correctly describe them, want to do, is entirely different.
Because eating (and drinking, provided you hurt no-one else) is none of their business.
Reminds me of the house-stealers we had a month or so back.
Bastards.
Well, no, Greg, smokers are not free to smoke as much as we like – we’re not free to smoke anywhere, in company, that isn’t 50% exposed to the elements unless it’s in our own home (and I mean one that you own)or at sympathetic friends’ houses.
There is no danger of SHS – it was fabricated in order to demonise and denormalise smokers in the expectation that ostracism would have smokers quitting in their droves.
And that’s the crux of the matter: HMG decided that, if smokers wouldn’t give up despite the dire health warnings, they’d be damned well forced to. They used junk science to produce the lie of SHS and are now happily lying their little authoritarian way into controlling alcohol and food.
As Chris Snowdon says, “We tried to warn you, we really did. Now whose side are you on?” (Velvet Glove, Iron Fist)