Published: Tuesday, March 12 2013 12:00 a.m. MDT
Yesterday, the Deseret News Editorial Board recommended that the state
micro-manage how restaurants can display liquor. Today, they editorialize
against New York City's ban on extra-large sugar drinks. Can the Editorial
Board decide if they do or do not support the Nanny State?
I think Mayor Bloomberg has done his part in bringing the issue to the attention
of the general public. Certainly others have been working hard to do the same.
But it seems to me that the judge did the right thing in striking down the law.
People should be able, and willing, to make those choices on their own without
coersion from the government. But hopefully Mayor Bloombergs's campiagn
will make us all more aware of the dangers that exist in what some
manufacturer's are passing off as "food."Likewise, I
think the legislation currently under consideration in the Mississippi
Legislature is just as wrong headed. That legislature wants to pass a law
prohibiting a requirement to print nutritional values of products sold in
grocery stores or restaurants, such as what Mayor Bloomberg required of New York
City restaurants. In my opinion that law would be equally as harmful as the law
just struck down in New York. If local municipalities want to make it a
requirements to print nutritional information on the food sold in their
communities, they should have the right to do that without "the
government" telling them they can't. It works both ways.
"Arbitrary and capricious." That is how most people describe the
"Zion Curtain" that the Deseret News was defending just yesterday.While I'm glad this soda law failed, this is more of the
pot/kettle/black from the Deseret News. Of course, its also because you can be
guaranteed that the Deseret News would shut down over night if their
tea/coffee/alchohol/nicotine-abstaining workforce couldn't plow through a
gallon of soda in the morning.They'd have to go back to being
an afternoon edition, at the very least.Everybody loves their own
Some elected officials seem to think that "rights" are bestowed on the
people by the government. They seem to think that being elected means that they
become our "mamas" and our "papas". They seem to think that
they have the right to force us to do right.That plan was soundly
defeated long before they were elected. Even though the concept of Kings having
all authority and all power is part of human history, that concept does not
belong in any government office in America. Here, the people have all rights
and the government is limited to doing only what the people allow it to do -
everything else is to be left to the people.Determining what we eat
and what we drink is not a duty that we have authorized the government to
handle. What happened in New York was a warning that if we are not vigilant,
elected officials will seize power and authority and then rule and reign as
though they had the right to tell us what is right and what is wrong - with
The government already has solved many of our health problems, by mandating that
certain foods be fortified with vitamins and minerals.Also by
helping to educate people of the dangers of cigarette smoking.This
is why people in general are living longer lives.
"They seem to think that being elected means that they become our
"mamas" and our "papas". They seem to think that they have the
right to force us to do right."But Mike. Isn't all really
a matter of degrees or issues?Do you think alcohol and drugs should
be unregulated? Do you think the govt should get out of the gay marriage issue?
How about prostitution and pornography?My experience is that people
want govt out of our lives unless we like what they are regulating.
DesNews, 3/11/13: "Legislators should not be embarrassed by innovative
state policies that place a minor burden on purveyors while protecting
vulnerable populations from exploitation. We trust the Utah Senate understands
the importance of this vital public health concern and will act appropriately to
preserve, and perhaps expand, Utah's sensible restrictions on the display
and dispensing of intoxicating beverages in restaurants."DesNews, 3/12/13: "He might have added, 'condescending, intrusive
and entirely ineffective.'"In both cases, the editorial
board opined on government intervention in the free market regarding sales of
lawful beverages with the intent of restricting consumption. In both cases the
laws were flawed in being inconsistently applied (not all restaurants have to
have a Zion Curtain, not all vendors must limit soda size) and without
documented effect.Apparently, the only thing condescending,
intrusive and entirely ineffective is the paper's editorial board's
opinion of its readers memory from one day to the next.
A recurring theme in these comments is for the right-wingers to almost never
discuss the issue at hand. Instead what we usually get are these grand
pontifications full of words like “liberty” and “rights”
and “tyranny” etc, etc, etc…It all reminds me of
the centuries long (and now completely lost) battle between the Catholic Church
and science. Whenever a scientific discovery was made that appeared to threaten
the orthodoxy, it was attacked in precisely the same manner – substitute
liberty, rights, and tyranny with scripture, church doctrine, and the state of
our souls. So here’s some advice – argue the merits of
the issue without reference to “scripture” (or any other abstract
buzz word). Not doing so just demonstrates the weakness of your own position.
Or keep doing what you’re doing and end up being about as
relevant as the Catholic Church is today regarding discussion on science (in
your case, politics).
"Apparently, the only thing condescending, intrusive and entirely
ineffective is the paper's editorial board's opinion of its readers
memory from one day to the next."Couldn't agree more. Any law I like is good and protects us from ourselves....except any law I don't like, and therefor is an intrusion and
The object goal of the business of farming, food processing, distribution and
sale of food is business profits. The most dependable way to increase profits
in any business is to increase the demand for the product. In the food
business, improving the taste and suppressing the “full” response
may be used. Fat people tend to eat more than skinny people. So
food producers use sugar to make people fat.
Get over these Anti-government rants and raves already.The FDA (Food
and Drug Admististration - a big bad Government entity) decides and dictates
what is/is not appropriate and allowed each and everyday.For me
personally? -- I LIKE having the Government over-seeing the shoddy,
anything for a buck, who cares if it kills you - midset of greedy
businessmen.The role of Governemnt is to defend and PROTECT
Aren't the liberals the ones who keep telling us that a woman has a right
to do with her body as she pleases. Why the hypocrisy. If a woman wants to put
32 oz of soft drinks into her body every day they have a problem with that?To "JoeBlow" it isn't about degrees of the issues. If I 2
gallons of Coke every day, does that effect anybody around me? Now if I smoke
cigaretts or drugs around you all day, will you be effected?To
"Open Minded Mormon" if the purpose of government is to defend and
protect its citizens, then why does your ilk support legalized Marijuana? Why
is it that your ilk is not enacting laws to make cigaretts and alchohol illegal?
Those are more destructive to people than obesity.
re: AggieScientist 5:48 a.m. March 12Agreed. Morality is subjective
& this is what happens when anyone (Bloomberg, the Utah legislature, etc,...
) start legislating morality.
Ilk is a funny word...
Just a couple of thoughts for Redshirt1701 - Mayor David Bloomberg is not a
liberal. He was a Republican and is now an Independent. Ron Paul, a
Libertarian who still wears the Republican ID Patch, and was a candidate for
President, suggested that heroin should be legalized. But as your letter seems
to point out, government intervention is opposed by whoever's issues are
being impacted. Both Liberals and Conservatives, Republicans and Democrats and
almost everyone in between, supports government intervention in our lives when
it serves our interests. But when it doesn't, or when it works against our
interests, we are strongly opposed to it. We could all use a 32 oz. glass of
humility and come to terms with that fact.
Redshirt1701Deep Space 9, UtTo "Open Minded Mormon" if
the purpose of government is to defend and protect its citizens, then why does
your ilk support legalized Marijuana?11:27 a.m. March 12, 2013 ============ Because, marijuana is safer than cigarettes or
alcohol.Remember that old ultra-con battle cry? --
"liberals" have no problem with Government action.We
"liberals" banned cigarette advertisements, and indoor smoking
[remember, that whole Government taking away FREEDOM thing?]We
"liberals" banned alcohol comsumption to pregnant women - much to the
corringe of the pro-Freedom at all costs factions.We
"liberals" have already passed laws banning cigarettes in vehicles with
children laws - [Utah is still playing the 20 year behiond catch-up on that
one]. For the record - as a whatever floats your boat
"liberal", I think banning softdrink sizes is a stupid idea.But, if I were a $27 Billion businessman turned mayor of New York City,
charging $1.89 per 12 ounce softdrink seems like a "Captialist" idea and
thing to promote the business bottom line.FYI - banning "cotton
mouth" quenching "munchie sized" drinks will reduce marijuana use in
and of itself ;-)
To "Open Minded Mormon" you say that marijuana is safer than cigaretts
or alcohol, but that itself says that marijuana is dangerous.You
point out that your ilk has banned things related to smoking and drinking, but
you have not outlawed smoking and drinking. Since you admit they are bad, why
has your ilk continued to allow them to harm US Citizens?
RedI believe that the large drink law was also stupid and an
overreach. I guess I am not the ILK you are referring to.It is very refreshing to be a moderate. One can criticize the stupid laws put
forth by both the left and the right.And, to be sure, they both do.
Just stop subsidizing inedible feed corn that gets turned into sugar. If welfare
queen farmers insist on the handouts, subsidize broccoli and carrots.
ECR 12:45 "Mayor David Bloomberg is not ..."His name is
Micheal, not David. Pay attention ECR!
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments