Is Ron Paul's boat in Iowa being raised by Obama fans out to cause mischief?

[BigSkyBob]

  Some of Paul's views are so right wing they end up being far left!  If that makes any sense.

Just shows that right/left is overly simplistic.

I still don't understand the distinction that's made between regulating fattening food vs. drugs. It's left-wing to regulate fattening food, but right-wing to regulate drugs?

They're both harmful to the individual, and to society as a whole. They're both marketed to kids to get them hooked early. They both can make people disgusting and unbearable to be around. And both, in moderation, can be enjoyed by anyone with a modicum of self control without suffering the fatal consequences.

So why is one a left-wing predilection to regulate and the other a right-wing one?

When is the last time you read reports of women being raped by their dates after being feed french fries? When is the last time you read reports of women being raped by their dates after being drugged with Rohypnol?

[BigSkyBob]

  Some of Paul's views are so right wing they end up being far left!  If that makes any sense.

Just shows that right/left is overly simplistic.

I still don't understand the distinction that's made between regulating fattening food vs. drugs. It's left-wing to regulate fattening food, but right-wing to regulate drugs?

They're both harmful to the individual, and to society as a whole. They're both marketed to kids to get them hooked early. They both can make people disgusting and unbearable to be around. And both, in moderation, can be enjoyed by anyone with a modicum of self control without suffering the fatal consequences.

So why is one a left-wing predilection to regulate and the other a right-wing one?

When is the last time you read reports of women being raped by their dates after being feed french fries? When is the last time you read reports of women being raped by their dates after being drugged with Rohypnol?

When the last time somebody was raped because of marijuana? I believe alcohol is the more typical drug men use to get women to sleep with them.

I am pointing out the absurdity of asserting a moral equality between regulating french fries and Rohypnol. They are different in kind.

Now, you are free to argue that since alcohol is legal, and marijuana is readily available we just have to conclude that the horse if out of the barn, and Pandora is out of her box. so we might as well let men buy Rohypnol with legal impunity.

Is that your argument?

[BigSkyBob]

  Some of Paul's views are so right wing they end up being far left!  If that makes any sense.

Just shows that right/left is overly simplistic.

I still don't understand the distinction that's made between regulating fattening food vs. drugs. It's left-wing to regulate fattening food, but right-wing to regulate drugs?

They're both harmful to the individual, and to society as a whole. They're both marketed to kids to get them hooked early. They both can make people disgusting and unbearable to be around. And both, in moderation, can be enjoyed by anyone with a modicum of self control without suffering the fatal consequences.

So why is one a left-wing predilection to regulate and the other a right-wing one?

When is the last time you read reports of women being raped by their dates after being feed french fries? When is the last time you read reports of women being raped by their dates after being drugged with Rohypnol?

Errr... I'm pretty sure perfectly legal alchohol has been implicated in a lot more date rape situtions than Rohypnol.  Where do you guys get this hyperbolic nonsense?

Umm, women, generally, know when they are drinking alcohol. Rohypnol is colorless, tasteless, and odorless.

Again, you are free to argue that since thousands of women may very well be raped, annually, after [voluntarily] consuming alcohol we just have to throw our hands up and state that since, "The horse is out of the barn. Pandora is out of the box. And, the Rubicon has been crossed" on date rape we should turn a blind eye to men buying Rohypnol.

Is that your argument?

[BigSkyBob]

Again, you are free to argue that since thousands of women may very well be raped, annually, after [voluntarily] consuming alcohol we just have to throw our hands up and state that since, "The horse is out of the barn. Pandora is out of the box. And, the Rubicon has been crossed" on date rape we should turn a blind eye to men buying Rohypnol.

whoa.

Well, we were talking about drugs versus fast food, and, you decided to interject alcohol. Your point was, again?

[BigSkyBob]

I am pointing out the absurdity of asserting a moral equality between regulating french fries and Rohypnol. They are different in kind.

Well logic appeals to people like me a lot more than right wing "morals."  If you step back and look at it you can make a pretty good case that in and of itself the piss poor American diet does more harm to the country than illicit drugs especially if you eliminate a lot of the ill effects brought on by Reagan's dumb @$$ war on drugs.

Curious, are you claiming "left wing 'morals'" do assert a moral equivalence between regulating french fries and Rohypnol?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this your argument for legalizing the sale of Rohypnol between any willing buyer and seller? [Something along the lines of, "Since more women are date raped by other means, such as raw force, it doesn't matter than some lesser number of women are drugged and raped with Rohypnol."]

If "[my] masters" are attempting to keep me "servile," I would only note that they are doing a very bad job. In case you have forgotten, like folks in the Teaparty, I advocate a hostile takeover of the Republican party by conservatives.

[BigSkyBob]

I am pointing out the absurdity of asserting a moral equality between regulating french fries and Rohypnol. They are different in kind.

Well logic appeals to people like me a lot more than right wing "morals."  If you step back and look at it you can make a pretty good case that in and of itself the piss poor American diet does more harm to the country than illicit drugs especially if you eliminate a lot of the ill effects brought on by Reagan's dumb @$$ war on drugs.

Curious, are you claiming "left wing 'morals'" do assert a moral equivalence between regulating french fries and Rohypnol?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this your argument for legalizing the sale of Rohypnol between any willing buyer and seller? [Something along the lines of, "Since more women are date raped by other means, such as raw force, it doesn't matter than some lesser number of women are drugged and raped with Rohypnol."]

If "[my] masters" are attempting to keep me "servile," I would only note that they are doing a very bad job. In case you have forgotten, like folks in the Teaparty, I advocate a hostile takeover of the Republican party by conservatives.

Why do you support the legalization of guns? People get SHOT by guns!

Your question makes no sense. Gun ownership is legal. I can only "legalize" something that isn't legal in the first place.

[BigSkyBob]

I am pointing out the absurdity of asserting a moral equality between regulating french fries and Rohypnol. They are different in kind.

Well logic appeals to people like me a lot more than right wing "morals."  If you step back and look at it you can make a pretty good case that in and of itself the piss poor American diet does more harm to the country than illicit drugs especially if you eliminate a lot of the ill effects brought on by Reagan's dumb @$$ war on drugs.

Curious, are you claiming "left wing 'morals'" do assert a moral equivalence between regulating french fries and Rohypnol?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this your argument for legalizing the sale of Rohypnol between any willing buyer and seller? [Something along the lines of, "Since more women are date raped by other means, such as raw force, it doesn't matter than some lesser number of women are drugged and raped with Rohypnol."]

If "[my] masters" are attempting to keep me "servile," I would only note that they are doing a very bad job. In case you have forgotten, like folks in the Teaparty, I advocate a hostile takeover of the Republican party by conservatives.

Why do you support the legalization of guns? People get SHOT by guns!

Your question makes no sense. Gun ownership is legal. I can only "legalize" something that isn't legal in the first place.

Not where I am, but anyway, do you support making guns illegal? After all, they kill people just like date rape drugs rape people.

Cutting to the chase, guns have legitimate uses, such as self-defense, and participating in the Militia, and, improper uses, such as armed robbery, and murder.

Would you care to explain what the legitimate uses of Rohypnol would be?

[BigSkyBob]

I am pointing out the absurdity of asserting a moral equality between regulating french fries and Rohypnol. They are different in kind.

Well logic appeals to people like me a lot more than right wing "morals."  If you step back and look at it you can make a pretty good case that in and of itself the piss poor American diet does more harm to the country than illicit drugs especially if you eliminate a lot of the ill effects brought on by Reagan's dumb @$$ war on drugs.

Curious, are you claiming "left wing 'morals'" do assert a moral equivalence between regulating french fries and Rohypnol?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Is this your argument for legalizing the sale of Rohypnol between any willing buyer and seller? [Something along the lines of, "Since more women are date raped by other means, such as raw force, it doesn't matter than some lesser number of women are drugged and raped with Rohypnol."]

If "[my] masters" are attempting to keep me "servile," I would only note that they are doing a very bad job. In case you have forgotten, like folks in the Teaparty, I advocate a hostile takeover of the Republican party by conservatives.

Why do you support the legalization of guns? People get SHOT by guns!

Your question makes no sense. Gun ownership is legal. I can only "legalize" something that isn't legal in the first place.

Not where I am, but anyway, do you support making guns illegal? After all, they kill people just like date rape drugs rape people.

Cutting to the chase, guns have legitimate uses, such as self-defense, and participating in the Militia, and, improper uses, such as armed robbery, and murder.

Would you care to explain what the legitimate uses of Rohypnol would be?

Insomnia treatment. Also, suicide.

There are people called "doctors" who write "prescriptions" for folks with insomnia.There are no legitimate uses for Rohypnol.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Self defense with a gun generally implies murder at some point.
[/quote]

No, it does not. Murder is "unlawful" killing, while killing in self-defense is lawful.

[BigSkyBob]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are people called "Police" who "arrest" people who commit murder. There are no legitimate uses for guns.

Tell that to women whom otherwise would be raped.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, suicide. Anyway, no "legitimate uses" could be used to ban a variety of drugs. Who defines what "legitimate" is?
[/quote]

Reasonable people acting in good faith.

[BigSkyBob]

When did anyone, ever, advocate for the legalization of rohypnol?  It's not a recreational substance.

Just about every so-called "libertarian" I have met. Their ideology doesn't specify the legalization of "recreational drugs." Their ideology rejects, on principle, any government regulation of any drugs.

If the government took their platitudes seriously, we'd see epidemics of parents giving their children performance-enhancing drugs such as steroids.