This is the thread for the Fox News "Daily Show for conservatives" thing

GZ I'm sick and tired of libertarians telling me that defending and promoting enforcement of labor, health and environmental standards is some kind of delusion we should unshackle ourselves from. Stop telling me what to do. And stop pretending that your standard of living and well-being is somehow unconnected from generations of political and human-rights movements that worked, fought and sacrificed so that you could enjoy the fruits of a society that hasn't yet managed to pollute all its rivers, allow banks and speculators to drive its economy into the ground, and drive all its citizens into an early grave with backbreaking, low-paid work.

"Buck up! You wouldn't have lasted a day on the Oregon Trail you buncha softies!" is not even close to anything I've said.
In fact, I have no idea what it could possibly have to do with liitation of personal freedoms.

I'm not 100% against government involvement in things like pollution(dumping, factory emissions, things that affect large areas) or fair labor practices(minimum wage, required to carry workers comp). I have a problem with the erosion of personal freedom.
Telling a business they can't allow their customers to do certain things is insane.
First it's smoking, next it's swearing, then it's questioning your leaders.
That's a 20 year journey, but it's quite possible.

1. A has occurred (or will or might occur); therefore
2. B will inevitably happen. (slippery slope)
3. B is wrong; therefore
4. A is wrong. (straw man)

This form of argument often provides evaluative judgments on social change: once an exception is made to some rule, nothing will hold back further, more egregious exceptions to that rule.

Note that these arguments may indeed have validity, but they require some independent justification of the connection between their terms: otherwise the argument (as a logical tool) remains fallacious.

i am shocked - SHOCKED - that you support government interaction in regulating harmful emissions you have nothing to do with, yet oppose it regulating harmful emissions that you personally enjoy

you, sir, are a true patriot

WOW you don't know anything about international economics or the realities of global trade.

Some people must have.
Some people have not.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
Some people will work.
Some simply will not.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
Like this: It's society's fault I don't have a job.
It's society's fault I am a slob.
I have potential no one can see.
Give me welfare. Let me be me!
Hey, Bud, you're livin' in the Land of the Free.
No one's gonna hand you opportunity!
Some people must have.
Some never will.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
I don't have a house. I don't have a car.
I spend all my money getting' drunk in a bar.
I wanna be rich. I don't have a brain.
Just give me a handout while I complain.
Or this: I wanna stay in bed and watch TV.
Go out weekends in a limousine
And dance all night takin' lots of drugs
And wake up when I wanna.
Hey, Bud, you're livin' in the Land of the Free.
No one's gonna hand you opportunity!
Some people will learn.
Some never do.
But they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.
Yeah, they'll complain and complain and complain and complain and complain.

He's a whore on the level of Mo Rocca, this is not that surprising.

1. that people really believe jimmy fallon brought the roffles over tina fey
2. bhopal
3. smart people wasting their time arguing with the funtionally retarded.

SRSLY. The only thing he ever did on that show is giggle and bat his eyes coyly at the camera.

1. do not EVER contest anything The GZeus says (cf. IMM, ILG, countless examples)
2. I will teach anybody how to install and run the killfile in firefox ok? I should write up a howto and post it to a thread.

"WOW you don't know anything about international economics or the realities of global trade."
So the complete debasement of the manufacturing base in the USA has nothing to do with everything saying "made in china" on it?
I thought people in this thread would be against big busiess CEOs getting richer as they lay off their union workers to put shildren to work.

"I think the GZeus is a Libertarian because he wants to buy Japan-only hentai PS2 games and the modchips to play them from Lik Sang."
Buh?
I don't have a PS2(kinda want one, but only for Katamari) and I was against Sony's actions because they(I believe unlawfully) interfered with free trade.
I don't buy from china if it's reasonably possible, in fact.
H-games are boring as hell, dude. I used to hit keys at random to 'play' one of them yars back before I could read japanese. Once I could read the dialogue I realised that the story I thought it in had was false and it was in fact retarded. (stunted, emotionally and socially, but I won't get into why)
Please excuse this rambling bumbling post but I don't like walking away from misunderstandings or weird slander.

GZeus, do you know that modern anti-smoking legislation - in every municipality and country where it's been adopted - has its foundation and justification in workplace health and safety? The "door" that was left open for this legislation to walk through was won over the last century in a disparate, gruelling set of battles to secure the right of workers to not be driven to an early grave simply because of the place they work.

What kind of door does it open, what kind of PRECEDENT does it set, to say that some lines of work are simply not deserving of workplace health safeguards? Because they are "dives", or unsavoury, or whatever other reason, big or small?

Republican=insult right there.
denial=lieing to oneself. I don't take well to being called a liar.

/\that's a list. They should be seperated by enter keys. Would you like me to add the HTML code to put bullet points? Wait, I suck at HTML...

Name other regularions that prevent people in a private establishment from doing something legal just because other people don't like it.
It gives a little wiggle room for crazy people to argue things like no gay kissing in public(this was argued somewhere in the USA a few years ago, I think). Such things wouldn't pass in the current political environment, but it would caus more mudslinging, erbal battles, and trench digging on both sides.
In the future that sort of thing might pass in some city, on the grounds it's bad for these good christian children as it;s against their relgion, and it impedes on their rights to live in a sin-free environment.

I'm going a bit far, but it's intentional and done to make a point.

Have you seen the filtration systems in current restaraunts? The distance between smoking and non? The fact the cigars and 'aromatic'(fucking vague enough to include about anything strong) cigarettes were already banned by the restaraunts and bars themselves?

And yeah, the audience a dive bar caters to smokes.
If you don't want to be around smoke don't work in a place that caters to smokers. That's basic logic, that.
People are also more prone to smoke when the drink(many theories as to why, I'm sure) so ...repeat.

Don't get in a boxing ring if you don't want to get hit.
This is not legislation of employees/workers in a workplace, it's legislation of CUSTOMERS.
Of THE PUBLIC.
There is a difference, though not enough for me to back the anti workplace smoking laws. Why not repeal them? What company's workers would allow their company to go back? What company would be crazy enough?

Basically the motivation I see is that anti-smokers got impatient and couldn't wait for the eventuality of restaraunts doing this themselves and decided to force the issue.

Um you don't think it has more to do with established health risks of second hand smoke more than "just not liking it"?

To be fair some people may think that watching same-sex kisses causes cancer though.

Read the legislation. It has nothing to do with customers. It has to do with workers and their right to have a full career in their place of employment without going to an early grave. It's that simple and yes, there is a difference between that and legislating what customers can or can't do with their own bodies. Because that's not the point. Note that cigarettes remain legal.

Don't get in a boxing ring if you don't want to get hit.

And don't smoke in a New York restaurant, bar or club if you don't want to get thrown out. When in Rome...

^^ whats your take on workers comp for employees who get cancer which couldve been easily prevented with a regulation of cancer-causing substances in their place of employment?

Futhermore: auto shop. Tell me how to get the work needed to get done there done in the winter without getting even more carcinogen exposure.
Workplace hazard. Goes with the territory.

I've already said this isn't a slippery slope argument.

The boxing RING analogy is an exageration to make a point.

In Japan there are no smoking bans, to my knowledge, other than on the trains. The shinkansen has a few smoking cars, though.
Thing is, more and more places have either no smoking at all, or a seperate room.
Still more smoking there than here, but it's not in style any more, and is just fading out.

Ya couldn't wait?

wow

Not if you work there! Unless you're ready to get fired. And then go work at one of those non-smoking bars that you have already said don't exist.