Supersize sodas are bad for you but marijuana is OK! – by Dan Weber – The latest actions by New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg are a great example of how Liberals and those who want the government to control our lives really think. For them, the facts don’t count – the only thing that matters is that we conform to their ideas of what a perfect society should be like.
First the facts; while the Mayor didn’t approve the smoking of marijuana, by favoring the removal of the laws against possession, he effectively endorsed it. Our medical science has proven that smoking other substances like tobacco has adverse effects on our health. Tobacco contains many chemicals that harm the human body. Some people are affected more than others, but overall tobacco is not healthy.
Marijuana also contains many chemicals that likely are harmful – essentially smoke is not good for our lungs. That is common sense, an element missing from the Liberal thought pattern.
They argue that since we legalized alcohol we should do the same for pot. Again some facts; alcohol is a natural product, occurring in the foods we eat. Some forms of alcohol have been proven to be healthy. Red wine contains substances that are good for our heart. Beer contains food products and both taken in limited quantities are not harmful. While it can be argued drinking small amounts of liquid containing alcohol could lead to alcoholism, limited amounts are not addictive. However, just like tobacco, marijuana becomes addictive. The overwhelming majority of drug addicts began by using marijuana, then progressed to cocaine, heroin and other harmful substances. Another fact the Liberals want to ignore.
Some commentators refer to the government controlling all aspects of our daily lives as the “Nanny State.” The people depend on the government for basic necessities such as food, housing, health care and even income when they are not working. This system has proven to be an effective way for liberal politicians to be elected and stay in power. Recall voters saying they voted for President Obama because he would help them pay for their mortgages!
In return for theses benefits, the people have much of the money they earn taken away in taxes and they lose more and more of their individual freedom. An example of this is Obamacare, where patients lose the right to select their own medical care in return for promises that the government will pay their medical bills when they require it. Or, in the case of Mayor Bloomberg, the government decides which foods we are allowed to eat in return for their guidance in keeping us healthy. After all, they are doing it for our sake since we likely will make mistakes if left to our own judgment.
AMAC, the Association of Mature American Citizens thinks otherwise. Our members feel the traditional methods that worked in the past are the way to go. Yes, our individual decisions may sometimes be wrong. But, any honest evaluation of the results of letting us have freedom to make decisions on our own would show that it is more effective than following government dictates, the warped thinking of equating regulating food with regulating drugs notwithstanding.
P.S. Note for the Mayor: Overall American consumption of added sugars decreased between 1999-2000 and 2007-2008, according to new research involving more than 42,000 people. Intake of added sugars decreased from 100 g/d to 77 g/d, and two-thirds of the decrease was the result of decreased soda consumption. www.ajcn.org