In our fair state, gay marriage has been brought to legislation. The local newspaper ran a story on it. There were many comments posted, and I happened to feel the need to blather on...
By the end of the day, there were over 120 posts, several of them mine.
Here's my stand.
I think this is where biology trumps theology. This is where our biochemistry is saying "The world is overpopulated and cannot sustain the people we have, so we need to stop breeding!" Or maybe it's God's cruel joke to all you Bible thumping hypocrites, and He is saying "I have too many children to take care of, so I will make a certain percentage of my children love each other, even though they may be of the same (M/M, F/F), so they don't make more, but to take care of the ones I have." I would much rather have two people who love and care about each other taking care of a child than two people who hate each other fighting over whose weekend it is to take care said offspring. Just because a "marriage" (the ceremony of commitment between two people who love and care for each other) is allowed to take place, doesn't mean that it degrades the marriage to my husband. That would be like saying "Anyone who has an online bachelor's degree is degrading to the bachelor's degree that I have". The piece of paper is the same, the amount of time, effort and work is the same, so why is the outcome different? It's not. So live and let live, and quit whining about how "marriage" is between a man and a woman, and that it's so we can procreate. If you can't take care of a dog (cat, any animal) why should you be breeding? How many kids out there are in foster care because their parents don't give a hoot where they are or what they're doing because they are too busy boinkin' their latest lust? How many kids are abused and not reported? How many go hungry because the parents can't take care of them? How many are sexually assaulted by family members because they're too scared to "come out of the closet" so they keep it in the family? The couples that I know who have conceived through invitro fertilization, who take the time to go to parenting classes, who spend time with their children have, love their children very much. Are you Bible-Thumpers going to say that because a man and a woman can't conceive naturally that they shouldn't have science help them out? Some will, I know, but some won't! So why are you going to sit there and complain when two women who love each other go to a sperm bank and do invitro? It's not like it's a "WHOOPS! The condom broke!" or "Honey...my pills failed"! They are consciously making a decision to take care of another life, unlike some people who breed like rabbits and pump kids out so they can get an extra paycheck. Many people have said to me "Oh, you'll understand when you have kids" And I have replied "The only kids I will ever have will have four legs and fur" and that drew chuckles and rolling of the eyes, but it seems like everyone EXPECTS couples to have kids, and when they don't, its "why not?" And my husband and I are happily married. And everyone thinks we're weird because we've made the decision not to have children. Where does it say in any written law that couples are expected (other than socially) and must raise 2.5 kids, and be constantly strapped for cash? Oh, RIIIGHT... NO WHERE! So stop complaining that working men and women want the same rights that working men and women have. It shouldn't even be an issue. It's discrimination, and an abomination to the freedom to choose who you spend the rest of your life with
No one seemed interested in responding, so I wrote to that effect
One responded with:
M: Perhaps people here didn't care to read an epic-length dissertation that covers a multitude of issues. Most posters address one point at a time and use the responses to adjust their positions. If other points are needed, those are addressed in subsequent posts. It keeps the discussions more direct.
I responded with:
All the questions posed go back to the same point. There is no logical reason for heterosexuals to stand back and point fingers at homosexual people for wanting EQUALITY, aside from fear. Fear stems from the unknown and perceived danger that homosexuals pose a threat to the heterosexual way of life.
People retorted with defining marriage by website "x" and saying it is against God's will for gays and lesbians to marry.
I responded with:
Were we to believe everything that dictionaries and encyclopaedias define *currently defined language* and willing to accept what they say is the unbendable, undeniable, unchallengable, then we would still believe that the world is flat (Fear of the unknown), that the Earth is the center of the Universe (Fear of the New), and women who float are, indeed, witches (Fear of that which we do not understand) who need to be stoned or tied to the largest boulder and rolled down the highest hill in town. THEREFORE: The definition that was submitted as gospel by Rusty according to some website states: 4. a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other IN THE MANNER of a husband and wife, without legal sanction: trial marriage; homosexual marriage, can be extrapolated into defining that, yes, 2 men or 2 women can be married, but currently, without legal sanction. What is before the legislature is to change the "Without Legal Sanction".
People began attacking me with "Well, if you're ok with gays marrying, then you are ok with polygamists and poly amorists"
To which I responded with:
The definition is "a relationship in which two people have pledged themselves to each other IN THE MANNER of a husband and wife" The point is that two people can LOVE each other, and it cannot be a bond between three people. If you truly love someone, they are your soulmate, your ONLY true love, the one who COMPLETES you, then you have nothing left to give to anyone else in the same manner. If you do, then you need to have a discussion with your partner, because they clearly are not meeting your needs, and if given ample opportunity, a person who is not adequately having their needs met will find some way. (And yes, I am female, and have met my soulmate, and I love him with all of my heart).
Which received the "Can we form a committee to change a word?"
A quick research on Merriam-Webster (A dictionary I hold with authority) excavated:
Per Merriam-Webster Online, http://www.merriam-webster.com/help/faq/words_in.htm To decide which words to include in the dictionary and to determine what they mean, Merriam-Webster editors study the language as it's used. They carefully monitor which words people use most often and how they use them. Each day most Merriam-Webster editors devote an hour or two to reading a cross section of published material, including books, newspapers, magazines, and electronic publications; in our office this activity is called "reading and marking." The editors scour the texts in search of new words, new usages of existing words, variant spellings, and inflected forms—in short, anything that might help in deciding if a word belongs in the dictionary, understanding what it means, and determining typical usage. Any word of interest is marked, along with surrounding context that offers insight into its form and use. It is the definer's job to determine which existing entries can remain essentially unchanged, which entries need to be revised, which entries can be dropped, and which new entries should be added. In each case, the definer decides on the best course of action by reading through the citations and using the evidence in them to adjust entries or create new ones.
People then tried to argue that because a definition was lower on the list that it wasn't accurate.
I am just so fed up with so many people saying "it's a choice, it's not natural, it's sin." and that they shove their agenda down our throat. It's none of the above. Does anyone hear "EEEEEEEWWWWWWWW!" when seeing a man and woman kiss and hold hands in public? No? Then why should we not extend the same when seeing two men or two women kiss and hold hands! Put yourself in their shoes and think about the daily discrimination they face, and then when they stand up for themselves, they're "Shoving their agenda down our throats?"
Showing posts with label rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rants. Show all posts
Friday, April 24, 2009
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Obesity
OK, so I work for a hospital.
I realize that there are many conditions for which people seek medical attention, one of which is obesity, and generally not capable of moving more than 10 feet without having a little red go kart tote them around.
I saw a blurb on the news that "by 2046, all Americans will be obese".
Whoa. Hold the Twinkies, the Ho-Ho's, and the Milkshakes.
Does that mean that the Atkin's diet, anorexic jackasses are going to be eliminated? Right, they will all have died as a result of clogged arteries and heart attacks. But at least they'll be easier to carry down the aisle to the altar in a pine box.
How about the professional athletes?
Laborers?
Marathoners?
Distance cyclists?
Well, that begs the question, what is "obese?"
Obesity is defined as being above your BMI, which is calculated by your height, weight and sex. MY weight should be no more than 170, max, to achieve a "normal" BMI. I haven't seen that since I had mono.
In another article, I read they are going to stop pushing the "BMI" or body mass index as a method of judging if a person is healthy, even though they may be considered overweight according to their BMI. Take someone who is active (may not get quite as much exercise as they would like, but still able to ride a bicycle for 2+ hours at 16 miles per hour), has "normal" blood pressure, "normal" lipid profile, and "normal" fasting blood sugar, but tips the scale a bit higher than the "average" person. They are told they are "overweight" and made to feel guilty, stress about what they eat, and attempt to change everything they do to try and fit into a cookie cutter image that the government would like to promote.
I went to see my doctor for my annual physical. Ok, I know that I'm NOT the posterchild for a bikini advertisement, unless they slicked up Baby Shamu and slid him in. I don't pretend to be. I try to wear clothes that are fashionable and moderately flattering, but I prefer BDU's and army boots, which are anything but.
However, my doctor looked at me and said, without gleaning any background info about what I eat, do for exercise, etc, that "You should consider joining Weight Watchers...Not that we endorse them or anything, but we've had patients that were successful at weight loss."
******WHAM*******
Unsolicited, blatant, telling me that I'm a porker (thanks, as if I didn't know that already, you jackass. I needed another blow to my ego...don't worry, it will bounce off the blubber), and need to start running on the treadmill. I hate running. My boobs hit me in the face, and I get more workout in my chest than my legs, unless i duct tape and saran wrap them in one place. Instead of "advising me" to join some shitty, dehydrated, chemical flavored, mail order food company, that I can't afford, why don't you do a little research? Barriers to prevention? (Cost, I like the food I eat (homecooked, mostly organic, thank you), need new sneakers (that I can't afford right now), can't do push ups because my wrist hurts and if you'd give me two fucking seconds to take a breath you might actually hear that, my back is giving me crap, and add to the fact that you were just a complete ass? Take your suggestion, shove it sideways where the monkey stuffed the nut, and go find a class on compassion, you useless, arrogant, deaf, waste of a copay and my insurance dollars. Go write more on your precious journal.
In some ways, I applaud the Dove commercials that are trying to promote a young woman's self image, but produced by a company that tries to sell firming creams and help women keep their "youthful" appearance? uhh...OK...
I realize that there are many conditions for which people seek medical attention, one of which is obesity, and generally not capable of moving more than 10 feet without having a little red go kart tote them around.
I saw a blurb on the news that "by 2046, all Americans will be obese".
Whoa. Hold the Twinkies, the Ho-Ho's, and the Milkshakes.
Does that mean that the Atkin's diet, anorexic jackasses are going to be eliminated? Right, they will all have died as a result of clogged arteries and heart attacks. But at least they'll be easier to carry down the aisle to the altar in a pine box.
How about the professional athletes?
Laborers?
Marathoners?
Distance cyclists?
Well, that begs the question, what is "obese?"
Obesity is defined as being above your BMI, which is calculated by your height, weight and sex. MY weight should be no more than 170, max, to achieve a "normal" BMI. I haven't seen that since I had mono.
In another article, I read they are going to stop pushing the "BMI" or body mass index as a method of judging if a person is healthy, even though they may be considered overweight according to their BMI. Take someone who is active (may not get quite as much exercise as they would like, but still able to ride a bicycle for 2+ hours at 16 miles per hour), has "normal" blood pressure, "normal" lipid profile, and "normal" fasting blood sugar, but tips the scale a bit higher than the "average" person. They are told they are "overweight" and made to feel guilty, stress about what they eat, and attempt to change everything they do to try and fit into a cookie cutter image that the government would like to promote.
I went to see my doctor for my annual physical. Ok, I know that I'm NOT the posterchild for a bikini advertisement, unless they slicked up Baby Shamu and slid him in. I don't pretend to be. I try to wear clothes that are fashionable and moderately flattering, but I prefer BDU's and army boots, which are anything but.
However, my doctor looked at me and said, without gleaning any background info about what I eat, do for exercise, etc, that "You should consider joining Weight Watchers...Not that we endorse them or anything, but we've had patients that were successful at weight loss."
******WHAM*******
Unsolicited, blatant, telling me that I'm a porker (thanks, as if I didn't know that already, you jackass. I needed another blow to my ego...don't worry, it will bounce off the blubber), and need to start running on the treadmill. I hate running. My boobs hit me in the face, and I get more workout in my chest than my legs, unless i duct tape and saran wrap them in one place. Instead of "advising me" to join some shitty, dehydrated, chemical flavored, mail order food company, that I can't afford, why don't you do a little research? Barriers to prevention? (Cost, I like the food I eat (homecooked, mostly organic, thank you), need new sneakers (that I can't afford right now), can't do push ups because my wrist hurts and if you'd give me two fucking seconds to take a breath you might actually hear that, my back is giving me crap, and add to the fact that you were just a complete ass? Take your suggestion, shove it sideways where the monkey stuffed the nut, and go find a class on compassion, you useless, arrogant, deaf, waste of a copay and my insurance dollars. Go write more on your precious journal.
In some ways, I applaud the Dove commercials that are trying to promote a young woman's self image, but produced by a company that tries to sell firming creams and help women keep their "youthful" appearance? uhh...OK...
Friday, August 8, 2008
More on laziness
Tonight's babble?
Abuse of the state system
Our lovely state has opened it's doors to immigrants, which has been done for hundreds of years. Irish, German, English, French, Canadian, and I apologize to anyone whom I have forgotten. Back when these people were immigrating, they brought with them sweat, tears, muscle, and lots of hard work. How is this demonstrated? Ever seen the buildings in your "downtown" with the years on them? I highly doubt that they were constructed with the use of cranes. Farms? Stone walls? Roads? Ditches? Railways? Mills (woolen, paper, wood, you name it), and they did it. Sure, you had some people in there who wouldn't carry their own weight, however, they were few and far between, and those that didn't, didn't live for very long like that. The "poor farm" was alive and well. It was an era when people knew the value of a hard earned dollar, didn't take anyone or anything for granted, and to help thy neighbor was a way of life.
Fast forward to our current state of affairs.
We have opened our doors to a population who has immigrated to the US because of drug wars, war lords, over population, disease, and nonsustainable living. Some of this population is trying really hard to climb their way out of the devastation and squalor they live in by going to school, farming, getting a job, and making a living. For these people, Kudos. I laud these people. To the ones who are given a car and have the license plate "UBOTIT"...I have a special place in my heart for you...and it gets colder each time I see my paycheck having more taxes taken out.
We have people who sit around the house all day and collect a "pay check" from the government. For what? Breathing? Changing the channel? On the claim that they have a "disability". I don't discredit the people who have a TRUE disability (missing a head). Paralyzed from the neck down. Vegetative states. I know there are other injuries that make it prohibitive for someone to lift, walk, or anything else. Some people who have a limited list of psychiatric disorders. Being fat is not a reason not to work. Maybe if you actually went to work and had some structure, instead of walking from the couch to the refrigerator (or just have one installed next to the couch), you wouldn't be in that predicament to begin with.
However, I don't feel that we should give people who have never worked a day in their life to pay into social security SSDI.
I don't feel that we should GIVE housing to people who refuse to work. Want housing? Get something you can AFFORD. If all you can afford is a tent, well, at least it's a roof over your head. May not be the best, but it's not a payment you can just afford per month while you are in search of the elusive American dream that you will end up paying for until 20 years after you die at the ripe old age of 95.
I don't believe we should hand out food stamps for someone to purchase chicken nuggets, Sunny Delight, soda, and chips (and spend $40 dollars on the EBT card) followed by beer, cigarettes, and a smut magazine, and leave in a brand new 40k truck. Need food? Grow your own. Work on a farm. Sell the bling. Rhinestone covered thongs do not count as necessities.
I don't feel that we should give out health care. If you need it, fine. But after you receive it, volunteer. You have some sort of talent. Sorting paperclips could be a job for these people. Walk from one end of the hospital to the other taking lost people to the place they're looking for.
I don't feel we should "provide" child care. If you need child care, and can't pay for it, don't have any more kids! If you can't afford the one you've got, why breed more? Why work just to pay for child care?
School should be a place for learning, and not for "free care" (that you pay for in taxes) for 6 hours (8 if you count the hour each way for the bus). It's not romper room. You can't bounce off the walls for 5.98 hours of the day, and the other .02 hours you're in the bathroom. If you do something wrong, there should be consequences.
This brings me to the news of the day that has me wound.
Matthew has posted this
If you do something wrong, there should be consequences.
Killing someone is wrong. Even if it wasn't intentional, your actions have consequences. When playing baseball and you hit the neighbors window, you had to pay for it, apologize, get grounded, and not do it again. It was still an accident, but there were consequences.
12 years is nothing. It's an era of school. In Kindergarten, we all imagined that we would NEVER graduate. We eventually did. In looking back, we postulate where the time went.
Make him do something productive. Stamp license plates. Build furniture. Sweep up dust chips. Collect garbage on the side of the road. Shovel out fire hydrants in the winter. Live in hell until death (no visitors, no "day passes", no amenities, nothing), and maybe, just maybe, it will be halfway equal to killing someone.
Instead of giving satellite or cable t.v., weight room, 3 squares, a bed, and clean clothes, make it something people don't want. If there wasn't a stigma attached, and the whole moral compass that I have, I would say, damn, I can get all of that without doing anything? Sign me up! The sheriff who did the baloney sandwiches, yurts, and had the whole chain gang thing had it right. People didn't want to do that, so the crime went down. Shocker.
We have become a soft society. A society that expects things for free, not willing to work for them, and not realizing a lot of hard work (of someone) goes into that "pay check" that you get once a month to sit, be a sack of shit and breed like bunnies.
I understand that mistakes happen. However, I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples mistakes.
My wonderful, loving husband works in a machine shop as a second shift supervisor. Because of the nature of my job (working day time hours), his schedule of 3p-1a is a little prohibitive of seeing each other.
I take dinner to him most nights, (and in the almost 3 months he's been on this shift , I may have missed 3 nights), and it's usually something homemade, even if it's leftovers. I eat with him, and go home. Sometimes I get ice cream for the other guys, but I'm not there for long. I have things to do (feed the dog, clean up my hellish mess in the kitchen, etc)
One of his employees has a girlfriend. Not that unusual.
What is unusual, is that he brings his girlfriend with him, sits her in the break room with a laptop, and she sits and watches movies or surfs the internet.
Now, when I was a kiddo, and my mother would get called in to work (as an EMT-I) and didn't have someone to watch us, we would go with her. We took books, crafts, anything to keep us occupied until she was done. It didn't happen often, but it happened a couple of times. If I remember correctly, I usually ended up helping do something in the office.
Back to the girlfriend. She has 2 kids at home. And she lives with her father. Her reason for going to "work" with her boyfriend? "It gets me out of the house and I don't have to listen to my father and my kids scream". (She's younger than I am, and I'm gradjiated high school and 4 year college, and a little life experience, but not ready for the old folks home yet).
Whoa. Wasn't that part of the job description when you got pregnant and squirted out those screaming little brats?
Why aren't you at home, teaching them right and wrong, feeding them, putting them to bed? Oh yeah, that's right, you don't know the difference yourself, feeding is a drive-by from the burger joint, and bed is where you go to boink, oh, I'm sorry, put sedated limp rags of kids because you can't handle them!
Solution? Get a job. Get a residence of some nature. Make a living instead of leaching off me and the rest of society, and stop bitching about how horrible the life that you choose to make for yourself isn't the "elusive American Dream".
Abuse of the state system
Our lovely state has opened it's doors to immigrants, which has been done for hundreds of years. Irish, German, English, French, Canadian, and I apologize to anyone whom I have forgotten. Back when these people were immigrating, they brought with them sweat, tears, muscle, and lots of hard work. How is this demonstrated? Ever seen the buildings in your "downtown" with the years on them? I highly doubt that they were constructed with the use of cranes. Farms? Stone walls? Roads? Ditches? Railways? Mills (woolen, paper, wood, you name it), and they did it. Sure, you had some people in there who wouldn't carry their own weight, however, they were few and far between, and those that didn't, didn't live for very long like that. The "poor farm" was alive and well. It was an era when people knew the value of a hard earned dollar, didn't take anyone or anything for granted, and to help thy neighbor was a way of life.
Fast forward to our current state of affairs.
We have opened our doors to a population who has immigrated to the US because of drug wars, war lords, over population, disease, and nonsustainable living. Some of this population is trying really hard to climb their way out of the devastation and squalor they live in by going to school, farming, getting a job, and making a living. For these people, Kudos. I laud these people. To the ones who are given a car and have the license plate "UBOTIT"...I have a special place in my heart for you...and it gets colder each time I see my paycheck having more taxes taken out.
We have people who sit around the house all day and collect a "pay check" from the government. For what? Breathing? Changing the channel? On the claim that they have a "disability". I don't discredit the people who have a TRUE disability (missing a head). Paralyzed from the neck down. Vegetative states. I know there are other injuries that make it prohibitive for someone to lift, walk, or anything else. Some people who have a limited list of psychiatric disorders. Being fat is not a reason not to work. Maybe if you actually went to work and had some structure, instead of walking from the couch to the refrigerator (or just have one installed next to the couch), you wouldn't be in that predicament to begin with.
However, I don't feel that we should give people who have never worked a day in their life to pay into social security SSDI.
I don't feel that we should GIVE housing to people who refuse to work. Want housing? Get something you can AFFORD. If all you can afford is a tent, well, at least it's a roof over your head. May not be the best, but it's not a payment you can just afford per month while you are in search of the elusive American dream that you will end up paying for until 20 years after you die at the ripe old age of 95.
I don't believe we should hand out food stamps for someone to purchase chicken nuggets, Sunny Delight, soda, and chips (and spend $40 dollars on the EBT card) followed by beer, cigarettes, and a smut magazine, and leave in a brand new 40k truck. Need food? Grow your own. Work on a farm. Sell the bling. Rhinestone covered thongs do not count as necessities.
I don't feel that we should give out health care. If you need it, fine. But after you receive it, volunteer. You have some sort of talent. Sorting paperclips could be a job for these people. Walk from one end of the hospital to the other taking lost people to the place they're looking for.
I don't feel we should "provide" child care. If you need child care, and can't pay for it, don't have any more kids! If you can't afford the one you've got, why breed more? Why work just to pay for child care?
School should be a place for learning, and not for "free care" (that you pay for in taxes) for 6 hours (8 if you count the hour each way for the bus). It's not romper room. You can't bounce off the walls for 5.98 hours of the day, and the other .02 hours you're in the bathroom. If you do something wrong, there should be consequences.
This brings me to the news of the day that has me wound.
Matthew has posted this
If you do something wrong, there should be consequences.
Killing someone is wrong. Even if it wasn't intentional, your actions have consequences. When playing baseball and you hit the neighbors window, you had to pay for it, apologize, get grounded, and not do it again. It was still an accident, but there were consequences.
12 years is nothing. It's an era of school. In Kindergarten, we all imagined that we would NEVER graduate. We eventually did. In looking back, we postulate where the time went.
Make him do something productive. Stamp license plates. Build furniture. Sweep up dust chips. Collect garbage on the side of the road. Shovel out fire hydrants in the winter. Live in hell until death (no visitors, no "day passes", no amenities, nothing), and maybe, just maybe, it will be halfway equal to killing someone.
Instead of giving satellite or cable t.v., weight room, 3 squares, a bed, and clean clothes, make it something people don't want. If there wasn't a stigma attached, and the whole moral compass that I have, I would say, damn, I can get all of that without doing anything? Sign me up! The sheriff who did the baloney sandwiches, yurts, and had the whole chain gang thing had it right. People didn't want to do that, so the crime went down. Shocker.
We have become a soft society. A society that expects things for free, not willing to work for them, and not realizing a lot of hard work (of someone) goes into that "pay check" that you get once a month to sit, be a sack of shit and breed like bunnies.
I understand that mistakes happen. However, I shouldn't have to pay for other peoples mistakes.
My wonderful, loving husband works in a machine shop as a second shift supervisor. Because of the nature of my job (working day time hours), his schedule of 3p-1a is a little prohibitive of seeing each other.
I take dinner to him most nights, (and in the almost 3 months he's been on this shift , I may have missed 3 nights), and it's usually something homemade, even if it's leftovers. I eat with him, and go home. Sometimes I get ice cream for the other guys, but I'm not there for long. I have things to do (feed the dog, clean up my hellish mess in the kitchen, etc)
One of his employees has a girlfriend. Not that unusual.
What is unusual, is that he brings his girlfriend with him, sits her in the break room with a laptop, and she sits and watches movies or surfs the internet.
Now, when I was a kiddo, and my mother would get called in to work (as an EMT-I) and didn't have someone to watch us, we would go with her. We took books, crafts, anything to keep us occupied until she was done. It didn't happen often, but it happened a couple of times. If I remember correctly, I usually ended up helping do something in the office.
Back to the girlfriend. She has 2 kids at home. And she lives with her father. Her reason for going to "work" with her boyfriend? "It gets me out of the house and I don't have to listen to my father and my kids scream". (She's younger than I am, and I'm gradjiated high school and 4 year college, and a little life experience, but not ready for the old folks home yet).
Whoa. Wasn't that part of the job description when you got pregnant and squirted out those screaming little brats?
Why aren't you at home, teaching them right and wrong, feeding them, putting them to bed? Oh yeah, that's right, you don't know the difference yourself, feeding is a drive-by from the burger joint, and bed is where you go to boink, oh, I'm sorry, put sedated limp rags of kids because you can't handle them!
Solution? Get a job. Get a residence of some nature. Make a living instead of leaching off me and the rest of society, and stop bitching about how horrible the life that you choose to make for yourself isn't the "elusive American Dream".
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
More ranting
I do more than rant, honestly.
To give a bit of history, I'm an EMT-I practicing as an EMT, and have a day job working on data entry on trauma patients.
I have a BS in Community Health (READ: Prevention)
I have seen what happens when teenagers and others drink to excess (and more than I care to)
I was never a party animal in high school or college. I had other things to do. Like getting hurt.
Someone I know admitted to me today that she not only allowed, but purchased alcohol for her underage daughter and her daughters boyfriend, who were staying in one place.
Her philosophy "She's going to do it anyway. Why not let her do it? At least she's not driving." This is not the first time I have heard this philosophy, and it bothers me.
How about teaching your child some responsibility? That you don't need to have alcohol to have fun? That alcohol solves no problems, and usually ends up causing more in the end? Is a gateway drug, and can introduce a young malleable mind to start trying other things that may be less than legal?
How long is it before she decides, while at a party, wants to go for some munchies with a bunch of her friends and ends up wrapping her car around a phone pole and kills someone, or herself? People who drink and drive and kill/hurt people usually don't intend to do it (well, maybe some), and it's billed as an accident.
Why are we allowing our society to let this philosophy run rampant?
Why do we sit and wring our hands and say "How did this happen?" when someone dies from drinking and driving, or binge drinking, or stupid things that happen while drinking (falling off a deck and breaking a neck)?
Not that I'm in favor of prohibition, because then it just makes more money for certain groups.
I just wish people would be more responsible
To give a bit of history, I'm an EMT-I practicing as an EMT, and have a day job working on data entry on trauma patients.
I have a BS in Community Health (READ: Prevention)
I have seen what happens when teenagers and others drink to excess (and more than I care to)
I was never a party animal in high school or college. I had other things to do. Like getting hurt.
Someone I know admitted to me today that she not only allowed, but purchased alcohol for her underage daughter and her daughters boyfriend, who were staying in one place.
Her philosophy "She's going to do it anyway. Why not let her do it? At least she's not driving." This is not the first time I have heard this philosophy, and it bothers me.
How about teaching your child some responsibility? That you don't need to have alcohol to have fun? That alcohol solves no problems, and usually ends up causing more in the end? Is a gateway drug, and can introduce a young malleable mind to start trying other things that may be less than legal?
How long is it before she decides, while at a party, wants to go for some munchies with a bunch of her friends and ends up wrapping her car around a phone pole and kills someone, or herself? People who drink and drive and kill/hurt people usually don't intend to do it (well, maybe some), and it's billed as an accident.
Why are we allowing our society to let this philosophy run rampant?
Why do we sit and wring our hands and say "How did this happen?" when someone dies from drinking and driving, or binge drinking, or stupid things that happen while drinking (falling off a deck and breaking a neck)?
Not that I'm in favor of prohibition, because then it just makes more money for certain groups.
I just wish people would be more responsible
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Societal rants
We have a Walgreens going in our town. Keep in mind now we have a Rite-Aid, Walgreens, and a local Mom and Pop type pharmacy with in an elementary softball players throw of each other.
We also have a Wal*mart, a Grocery store, and several other well known chains in town.
The question is, why do people have problems with "big box chain stores"
This is my response.
Take your blinders off and read the writing on the wall.
We can't be a sell sell sell society. We need to able to have goods and or services to sell. China isn't going to do us any favors by manufacturing everything. If it wasn't for "awful Corporate America" we wouldn't have half of the issues that we have. Since this is a capitalistic society, why is health care (something that everyone needs) such a lucrative business? While most health care facilities label themselves as "non-profits" you can't tell me that a physician must eat ramen noodles in order to survive. They make money. And why is that? Because insurance companies (who make oodles of money on patients who are healthy and do not use the services), and they contract to pay set amounts for certain services, and by doing so, drive the costs of health care up. So it's not the Mom and Pop's who can't afford to offer insurance because it is cost prohibitive and they can't financially justify it without passing it further on to the consumers. And it's not the big box chain stores who offer "health insurance" that will only pay for certain services that they approve, and only from providers that they choose. Meanwhile, they charge the poor shmucks who work for slightly more than minimum wage huge sums of money for the "benefits" they receive. This lulls people into a false sense of security and believing (because they don't read their policies) that if they are hurt or sick, they can go to the hospital and receive the care they need, and not be charged more than they make in a year. Apparently, people who have not worked in both big box chain stores and small Mom and Pop type establishments don't understand this concept (I have worked in both). The answer is not Dirigo Health, either, which is balanced on the soda/beer/flavored water/cigarette tax/anything else taxable, as well as siphoning off money from the money people in Maine pay into insurance to pad the balance. Nor is the answer socialized medicine, because you will still have the rich receiving the best care, because they can buy supplemental insurance while the poor and "nonsupplementally" insured sit and wait for appointments, hip replacements and knee replacements, usually dying from complications of said issue before it taking place.
Ask yourself, "Why are our taxes so high?"
Look at the social programs that we as a country have established, and how they are funded. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? How are they going to be bailed out? The government...and where did they get that money? That's right folks, every time you get paid and you see the "Federal Income Tax", we're paying for it. Because of questionable tactics and falsehoods made by eager homeowners (and not being a responsible, educated individual or couple), we have to pay for their stupidity.
If you spend more than you have, it's simple math. You'll be broke.
(a responsible) Mom and Dad won't bail you out. So why should the federal government and everyone who is paying taxes?
We also have a Wal*mart, a Grocery store, and several other well known chains in town.
The question is, why do people have problems with "big box chain stores"
This is my response.
Take your blinders off and read the writing on the wall.
We can't be a sell sell sell society. We need to able to have goods and or services to sell. China isn't going to do us any favors by manufacturing everything. If it wasn't for "awful Corporate America" we wouldn't have half of the issues that we have. Since this is a capitalistic society, why is health care (something that everyone needs) such a lucrative business? While most health care facilities label themselves as "non-profits" you can't tell me that a physician must eat ramen noodles in order to survive. They make money. And why is that? Because insurance companies (who make oodles of money on patients who are healthy and do not use the services), and they contract to pay set amounts for certain services, and by doing so, drive the costs of health care up. So it's not the Mom and Pop's who can't afford to offer insurance because it is cost prohibitive and they can't financially justify it without passing it further on to the consumers. And it's not the big box chain stores who offer "health insurance" that will only pay for certain services that they approve, and only from providers that they choose. Meanwhile, they charge the poor shmucks who work for slightly more than minimum wage huge sums of money for the "benefits" they receive. This lulls people into a false sense of security and believing (because they don't read their policies) that if they are hurt or sick, they can go to the hospital and receive the care they need, and not be charged more than they make in a year. Apparently, people who have not worked in both big box chain stores and small Mom and Pop type establishments don't understand this concept (I have worked in both). The answer is not Dirigo Health, either, which is balanced on the soda/beer/flavored water/cigarette tax/anything else taxable, as well as siphoning off money from the money people in Maine pay into insurance to pad the balance. Nor is the answer socialized medicine, because you will still have the rich receiving the best care, because they can buy supplemental insurance while the poor and "nonsupplementally" insured sit and wait for appointments, hip replacements and knee replacements, usually dying from complications of said issue before it taking place.
Ask yourself, "Why are our taxes so high?"
Look at the social programs that we as a country have established, and how they are funded. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? How are they going to be bailed out? The government...and where did they get that money? That's right folks, every time you get paid and you see the "Federal Income Tax", we're paying for it. Because of questionable tactics and falsehoods made by eager homeowners (and not being a responsible, educated individual or couple), we have to pay for their stupidity.
If you spend more than you have, it's simple math. You'll be broke.
(a responsible) Mom and Dad won't bail you out. So why should the federal government and everyone who is paying taxes?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
