Rock n' Roll McDonald's
As anyone who lives in Massachusetts probably knows, sometime ago the city of Boston enacted a ban on smoking. Many communities already had such bans in place, and I hear rumors of a ban to come in Quincy, along with a statewide ban.
And across the state folks righteously nod their hands in approval, because smoking is a filthy habit and the politicians say it's for
the good of the public.
Trouble is, I get
reeaal nervous when politicians and other do-gooders start doing things
for the good of the public. Somehow it seems synonomous with
telling you what to do and
treating you like a child. Yeah smoking is a terrible and short of a cure for cancer, the world would be better off without them. That makes smokers and smoking an easy, obvious target - a good place to start, where the politicians won't get much push back.
But once the precedent is set, and it has been, do you
really think it will end there? Having righteously stamped out the dreaded coffin nails, do you think the people in power will resist further attempted modifications of your behaviour?
Not a chance. Next up on the list of targets -
the fast food industry. Here are some choice nuggets from that article:
The debate has spilled over into public policy, with proposals for a junk-food tax, limits on food advertising, demands for more details on labeling and lawsuits against food manufacturers. Several states are considering limits on sweets sold in schools; Some are debating whether to force chain restaurants to list nutrition information on menus.
Some say that Americans, from cradle to grave, are being influenced — even suffocated — by mountains of food promotions and gimmicks.
Kelly Brownell, professor of psychology at Yale University, calls all this the "toxic food environment ... There is no evidence that the federal government is doing anything to address the problem," Brownell says.
Lawyers are "salivating over the idea that these foods are as addictive as nicotine," said psychiatrist Sally Satel. "The term addiction can be stretched until it's meaningless. It's litigation addiction."
So - all of a sudden it's the Federal government's job to tell us what to eat? And the lawyers, of course, smell big freakin' $$$$$$$.
Ya know, the airwaves and the internet are filled with cries of conservatives blaming liberals, and liberals blaming conservatives for ruining the country. Ya know what I think the problem is?
The death of common sense and individual responsibility. People are willing to surrender their freedom for the false security of being told what to do, and for the ability to blame others for their own problems. Are you a big fat slob because you eat at Mickey D's 3 times a day? Don't charge of your life and hold yourself accountable for your choices - get a lawyer and sue. Blame the advertising. Blame the company. But whatever you do, don't acknowledge that you have the freedom to choose your own actions, and that sometimes those actions have real live oh-my-gawsh consequences. And most certainly do not acknowledge that those choices - and the consequences - are your responsibility.
I don't like other folks interfering with the minutia of my life. I don't any goverment - state, federal, or local - acting like some sort of surrogate parent. I already have parents, and they set me loose in the world a long time ago - to make my own decisions and suffer the consequences, good or bad.
If I want to smoke three packs of Lucky Strikes a day and top it off with five pounds of bacon, that's my business. If I want to exercise for two hours a day and eat nothing but organic foods, that's my business too. I certainly don't think it's the government's business to try and modify my behaviour at that level. Tell me not to rob banks or embezzle company money? Fine - those are reasonable restrictions. Try to alter my eating habits by taxing Big Macs? Now you're just being a fucking busybody.
Note I changed the name of this post from 'Banned in Boston' to the above. I can't believe I didn't think of that earlier.