Karaoke Forums

Have a little tag on your shirt when going out that says "Please don't hate me because I'm sober"

Probably in the millions.  But medical science likes lots of hard core evidence.  These direct links are very hard to prove conclusively.

but don,  isn't this the same government that likes getting fat and happy off've the money it makes from cigarette sale taxes ?  They allow adults to buy them.  If they are willing to abet the sale of ciggies, this is another area I have probs with in this case.. IOW,  The defense atty, also being the prosecutor AND judge... It sort've comfuses me in regards to "free to choose as adults in the United States"

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

You need to now adays,  too many signs "Never trust a man that doesn't drink",  additionally I'm shy.  "Can I light that for you" is a great pickup line... I've found statistically (since I'm not good with pickup lines) it doesn't work as well when the woman doesn't smoke

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

Then I guess we the people have to insist that our legislators stop the government from profiting from cigarette and alcohol sales too.

I find it interesting that studies like these are not publicized...

http://www.forces.org/evidence/evid/second.htm

Though I am a smoker and I need to quit in a bad way.  I do not like to subject people to my habit.  If there is non smoking area I will obey the rules and not partake, because 1. it is the rule and 2.  i realy don't need to be smoking.  I don't complain a whole lot about not being able in certain places.  And I actullly find it appauling when going to some places that still allow smoking indoors.

I'm not so sure about the bars issue.  Perhaps they should have smoking and non smoking areas such as many restaurants do.  

If you get down into these studies they are all so confusing...You have one group of people saying oh gosh it's not bada for the guy standing next to you and then you have another groupsaying it is worse for the guy standing by the smoker than it is for the smoker..What in the world is that all about....

If people choose to run their business in a non smoking environment then so be it, they own the business and they can do what they want.  If the voters of an area decide that their city should be non smoking then so be it.

As a smoker and ones who wants to quit, in a bad way.  I can certainly see how these rules will help me going forward and they help my kids who do not smoke.  

Any way that is all I have to say about that....

_________________
Will sing or fish for food!!I'm not quite right!!

Well, I gotta go.  Maybe I should take up smoking to help with the weight loss? Might be worth a shot!  :yes:

Oh so true.

Hi Isis, thanks for checking the ingredients for me on the dinner tonight. It is much appreciated. GiGi and I will be over soon.

nope. don't bother.

_________________
[glow=darkorchid]Musica delenit bestiam feram[/glow]

EDIT TMI

Don,  It seems that at least in a systematic manner, this would've been putting the horse before the cart, and not doing things butt backwards.  An example-   (such as the extreme law that an area in Texas just went thru where people were afraid to even go into bars, and people were getting cuffed and locked up without even driving and in some cases arrested when even sober while at private Hotel lounges, where going to their room just meant walking down a hallway in the same building) It appears in many cases certain districts are heading more towards the prohibition days, alot of the laws hurting bars are actually anti-alcohol laws. (whether warranted or not I'm not stating for purposes of this context).  Rather than target folks that are "drinking" yet at the same time acknowledging it's an adults "right" to drink (although in Texas not be intoxicated in public), should the burdon of proof ever be put on the individual to prove his/her sobriety after it was subjectively determined he's drunk, hence cuffed and locked away ?  To me this is a display of blatant discrimination against alcohol, and those drinking, and it's a backwards way of saying "We are antialcohol, it's now illegal" because people have lost their rights before guilt is even established.. It's a blatant violation in a system of Juris Prudence.. It would have been more honest to dictate to bars "You are no longer allowed the right to sell alcohol", now while I KNOW that wouldn't go over well, in essence that is what such legislature was saying..  What Texas did IMO goes back to days of descrimination being legal.. That's just a backwards way of telling a district, if we don't like the way you look, we are going to now have a means of violating your constitutional rights, if not here and now,  tonight when we see you at a bar, and you have no recourse because we can always say "In our professional opinion, this person "we don't like" was drinking... It gives the police opportunity to abuse authority, It seems to me a first step BEFORE EVER putting the onus on the sober to prove sobriety, or substantiate a handicap,  balance probs, etc, even those that ARE NOT driving, to instead tell a district, "You are now a dry county" if we see you with a drink in your hand outside of your home, we can arrest you PERIOD... At least THAT would've been more honest.  Not the backhanded approach which is so obviously flawed and subjective it's horrifying and wrong in the United States today. It loses sight of what the actual goal was supposed to be "Driving while drinking".. The enforcement immediately was abused.  To make statements attempting to vindicate such a law by saying  "Alcohol causes people to dive from balconies and miss the swimming pool" is just saying... "We are TOTALLY antialcohol"

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

Chuck, your welcome on the food thing...man you have to go through a lot.  I checked every label at the store before buying it and if there was something I couldn't pronounce I decided we didn't need it....  So you are safe tonight...

Gosh darn Kappy, I am trying to fix thanksgiving dinner and you bring up one of my most favorite topics!!! getting arrested in bars in Texas for being drunk...Hmm....Gotta go baste the turkey....I'll have to catch up on this one in aa little while...  

or i can just say if anyone wants to know about this they can go to thread called"Don't drink in a bar in Texas...Gosh Kap I can't remember the name if it....

_________________
Will sing or fish for food!!I'm not quite right!!

Not necessarily drunk Sharon,  EVEN for having Parkinsonian symptoms, or getting up from a table in the sweltering heat after drinking water or coffee, and getting a dizzy spell.... You are arrested for that first..  Questioned later,  assuming authorities wish that.."But he looked drunk to us" was enough of a defense..  Under that current law,  that would've been founded... "Arresting the handicapped".. Never admitted to of course, but "legal", just a form of Dejure discrimination (or is it DeFacto I'm thinking of)  ???????, I don't remember which is which, been YEARS... and I'm too tired to look the words up. The counties DIDN'T want people drinking, that was the bottomline.. Even at the expense of non-drinkers being punished just by being at a bar..


<the composition of my last two posts sucks, but I'm tired>

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

I didn't read through all the posts, so I don't know what topic this
has turned into.  LMAO So this is off topic on topic.

They have linked diabetes to pop with sugar in it. There was a study done that
proved if you drank a certain amount of sugar pop you were more apt to get
diabetes. I'm sure they will use this in their arguement to tax sugar. If this gets passed it will probably lead to people suing the soda companies for making them fat and sick.
It is a ficious circle. I say everyone should be responsible for them selves and what they put in their own bodies.

_________________
[shadow=pink][glow=deepskyblue]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
[updown]~*~ MONKEY BUSINESS KARAOKE~*~ [/shadow][/updown][/glow]

Steven.....It's nothing more than a continuation of things that started 30 years ago-maybe even before that.....Crybabies in our society have been screaming for silly laws to protect them from life itself....or laws that promote their minority lifestyles....and we have been passing those laws...but when a particular law doesn't pass, law enforcement stretches their authority by enforcing their intrepretation of the law hoping the crybabies will shut up and/or vote to re-elect them.

Guns, smoking, drinking, helmets and whatever else they decide is unsafe is ammo for the crybabies....While homosexual marriage is ok.....

Right now the world is becoming more and more 'fundamental'...You got the sinful liberals competing against the religous conservatives and common folks are caught in the middle....Both sides are going to extremes to counter the other....and it's happening all over the world....We here in the West are considered evil sinners  to the muslim world cause we promote women's rights and homosexual marriage.....and at the same time others in this country fight back against all that by building bigger churches and attacking all/anything that seems sinful.

That's why I live out in the country and mix with folks who are middle of the road...We here still believe every person has the right to determine their own destiny, and that not all men are sex offenders, and that it's ok if you want to smoke, and that it's cool if you ride a Harley naked and without a helmet, and that it's ok if you drink, and that it's ok if you think queers are queer, and that it's ok to slap your wife or husband when they do something really stupid, and that it's ok if a woman likes to cook and clean her nest, and that it's ok if your mom and her mom and her mom and your dad and his dad and his dad all thought the same way, and it's ok to tell your kids 'no'.

As far as fat people go.....I like my women a little fluffy.....I really like reaching over and squeezing some fluffy stuff and not hitting any sharp edges when I decide to get ruff with them....And if she gets a little too fluffy, I sure as heck ain't gonna blame/sue McDonalds...I'll just show her the stove and explain how it works and what I like.

Sorry missed some of this,  I was over on AOL talking to Atty's.  I'm suing them cuz the vision in my right eye isn't as good as before I had an AOL account  LMAO. GoldStar too... Too bad Nanou is no longer in business making monitor's because I want to sue them too... Oh yeah,  and Porn,  that can make you go blind too !

Hmmm Maybe even Viewsonic...

I need to look up frivolous lawsuits,  like 1 million for spilling McDonalds coffee on lap... amazing

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

 You have quite a way with words Keith!

This  was an impulsive drunk post but i am pleastnly surprized by the intelligent responses to this post . And mkes me feel I'm not the only old conseritive fart around

The insurance companies have to be behind this.   It's costing all of us higher premiums with more and more sick people.    Look how fast the insurance companies eliminated the common-law marriage deal, after 9/11.   They had to pay out too much for domestic partners, so they had the law changed in a very short time.   They took care of saving themselves a lot of money.   The same with over weight people.   It will save them money.   So it will happen, if that's what they want.    They have the $$$$$$power$$$$$$    :worship: