2006-12-09 13:19:08 · 19 answers · asked by luker 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Cultures & Groups ➔ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender
This is a gay issue because........?
2006-12-09 14:54:42 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In many ways.... NO, but consider this. Since the government is involved with health care, it has a right to try and regulate healthy eating in an order to save on tax dollars. Get the government out of health care and then they won't have a leg to stand on. They sold the American public a bill of goods when they started the health care business, and it keeps mushrooming every year. Time to stop and turn things around... there are better solutions.
2006-12-09 13:26:55 · answer #2 · answered by tmarschall 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Neither. i do not see any reason the authorities should be training human beings about the risk of trans fat or requiring eating places to inform human beings. If human beings opt to dodge trans fat, they can only ask. If sufficient human beings care, eating places will promote that they are trans fat free. as a matter of truth, this nanny state regulation is designed to make human beings care. the decision of even if to eat them should be left as a lot as us, even with the undeniable fact that the decision of even if to bypass to eating places that notify us about them should be left as a lot as us too. If human beings quite cared, eating places may be falling throughout one yet another to promote that they are trans fat free. even with the undeniable fact that the nanny state believes that human beings *might want to* care.
2016-11-25 01:42:24 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way! That's just wrong, because we have rights! and they are affecting alot of people by doing that. there should be a vote on that, instead of the government just stepping in.
and how do they know tht its just trans fat doing that? let us live our lifes, you darn government!
2006-12-09 13:22:20 · answer #4 · answered by Kj 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the government doesn't give a crap about trans fat. they don't make any money from that. If it was because they cared about our health, then why are they not banning cigarettes? there is just to much money there!!!!!!!!!
2006-12-09 13:47:12 · answer #5 · answered by rosebud 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they ban it in restaurants, they should ban it in stores too.... to be fair.
Processed foods in this country are horribly unhealthy and if the government began to impose regulations, maybe we could get healthy foods again at a decent price.
Best Wishes,
Sue
2006-12-09 13:21:44 · answer #6 · answered by newbiegranny 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, people should get no protection at all. Poison air, poison water, poison food, as long as somebody's making money its fine. (J/K!!) No, actually keeping people healthy is a good idea, its not only the right thing to do, it keeps taxes down, it keeps insurance rates from going even higher.
2006-12-09 13:22:27 · answer #7 · answered by jxt299 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
As right as it is for them to ban smoking in public buildings.
2006-12-09 13:39:24 · answer #8 · answered by feeltherisingbuzz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no. I support the government warning of such things but not the banning of. we should have the right ot destroy ourselves if we want to.
2006-12-09 13:23:07 · answer #9 · answered by Bistro 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What is this question doing in the Lesbian, Gay, etc... forum?
Governments can ban whatever they want... such as smoking in public spaces... or... you choose!
2006-12-09 13:55:47 · answer #10 · answered by guicoder 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES why not....why should young people like us care.....we dont vote till last Nov'06.....
Oh we are trying to wake up from our dreams.
2006-12-09 13:41:41 · answer #11 · answered by DON 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋