Stephen James › Comments

give them time they are all focused on #080808. They can not be as agile as us. How can they follow the cloud, when the cloud doesn't know where it is going yet. - Jonathan Ferguson

Isn't anyone thinking of the CELEBRITIES? Damn news media! - abacab

But that's when it's sensational... - Clay Newton

the problems Georgia and Russia have been well know for awhile , ever since the Rose Revolution. Kinda why Georgia wants to join NATO , so Russia doesn't invade them....... oh wait - Carl Backstrom

Looks like we are back into 19th century "spheres of influence" politics. You'd think after the Cold-War everything would have been peachy. - Stephen James

Its also funny that twitter reports are faster than the AP now. - The Dude Dean

I don't think this would really have anything to do with being "too stupid to make decisions yourself." Sometimes it's really hard to know if something is bad, and it sucks that in most cases there's no way to get that information. Such as when the news first came out that Big Macs were like eating 3 entire chocolate cakes in one sitting. It isn't stupidity, it's not being informed. I think this is a good idea. - Allison

and now I realize you may be referring to the companies who don't release the information as being too stupid to make the decision themselves. so in that case, never mind the beginning of what I said, but I still think it's a good idea. but then again, I'm not an anarchist either. :) - Allison

The law doesn't stop people from making the decision. I, for instance, would eat a 430 calorie muffin if I damn well wanted. :) - Paul Whitaker

and in turn our bodies would accumulate another .12lbs ...if they wanted. ;) Which of course they do. lol - Melanie Reed

The world is a "pinocchio" scenario and most of what gets sold and offered is through the hands of a couple of wolf-like "pals" heading us off to Pleasure Island. Often the results of listening to the "salesman" of these goods and wares leaves us with the same "ears" and "tail" old Pinnoch sprouted. Temptation must be fought before the offer is ever made. The law, while, inadequate is an attempt to do that... whatever the motive behind it. And yes, it is "parental". But maybe we need that? - Melanie Reed

I'm referring to the government busybodies thinking you're too stupid to make decisions for yourself. That is exactly what this is, more government nannying. Because there's no possible way consumers could find out how many calories are in a muffin if there isn't a LAW with FINES attached to it. - Gregor Morrill

"How many calories are in this muffin?" If the supplier doesn't know the answer, the consumer is left with the choice to get it or not. And if they get it anyway, without knowing, then clearly they aren't *that* concerned about the calories. Common sense should tell them it's pretty bad for them. There is no reason the free market cannot supply these things, without using the threat of FORCE against people who are just making voluntary exchanges. - Gregor Morrill

A fair bit of consumers are pretty health conscious, so if the suppliers don't have answers to their questions about the health value of food, then those suppliers will find themselves losing business. The idea of suppliers showing health values for food is great, I have no problem with it. Passing a law forcing them to do it, is wrong. - Gregor Morrill

@Paul sure, for now there is no law that prevents you from making that decision, but surely you don't think this is where it stops? There's already other attempts at legislation (maybe even successes) that penalize / tax "unhealthy" foods. - Gregor Morrill

@Melanie, if you believe you need parenting, then it's perfectly fine for you to voluntarily seek that for yourself. It is wrong for you to seek that over someone else, though. This is the core of the problem with government - it's just using force against others. - Gregor Morrill

@Gregor Actually, I do think I need parenting...and I am glad that God includes me in such a group when He says "we would be called children of God" ( http://tinyurl.com/64hfu8 ) As far as seeking parenting over someone else, I stated the following: "The law, while, inadequate is an attempt to do that... whatever the motive behind it. And yes, it is "parental". But maybe we need that?" I made no statement to seek it but stated an acknowledgment of what ANY law at its heart does: it (in a way) "parents". - Melanie Reed

Indeed, the Bible tells us to respect these laws which are put there for our good (and which do not conflict with any of God's laws which supersede them). "For our good" implies a kind of parental attitude that is based in a healthy over sight. Overseeing is an activity associated with any "parental" activity be it an Employer, supervisor, warden, parent, or guardian. Our society has traditionally subscribed to this kind of guardian for order and our protection. It provides a basis for justice. - Melanie Reed

But I understand your concern over what you might consider an infrngment on your"freedom". The problem then becomes what is "freedom"? To a child in a large backyard against a 4 lane superhighway of fast traffic, freedom is an impenetrable fence around the perimeter of his.her home. They are free then to live in safety while enjoying the delights of a wonderful playground full of adventure and fun. Age enlarges the backyard but not the need for what is truly our freedom. - Melanie Reed

I disagree with the common Christian assumption that governments are placed by God and thus their laws are there "for our good". It's wrong to use force or coercion against the peaceful, voluntary actions of others. - Gregor Morrill

See my blog post on the non-aggression principle: http://gregorlove.com/gregorl... - Gregor Morrill

@Gregor please forgive me on contradicting the "assumption" aspect. The scripture informs us that earthly governments are not placed by God as ultimate authorities but they are left in place (for a limited time) by God as authorities under which Christians are taught to be in relative subjection - relative as to what laws are superseded by God. The point being to us as training to learn how to willingly submit to authority, which hopefully is fair and employed with justice. But sometimes it is not. - Melanie Reed

Oftentimes it is not. I have a hard time believing God "left in place" Hitler for his time. No one can ever answer me where government gets its authority over me to begin with. It's just existed all this time, so therefore it does. Circular. - Gregor Morrill

@Gregor I agree. You are right that there are some "imponderables" about God that even Job admitted by saying "that there are things too wonderful for me to know." (Job 40) God also conceals some matters from us and it is "glory on His part" to do so. (Ecclesiastes) But the point being that, more often than not, what is "circular" is but a paradox not clearly stated. See my response about this on your blog: http://gregorlove.com/gregorl... God does not leave us without comfort and hope. - Melanie Reed

@Melanie There's not really any paradox here, and my blog doesn't espouse a utopian notion of peace - a peace that is only achieved through God. It simply espouses the non-aggression principle and logically applying that to our lives. I disagree with your assertion that governments set out to answer aggression so that justice and freedom are served. As I demonstrated in the post, government RELIES on aggression. - Gregor Morrill

And still, no answer to how "government" gets its authority over me to begin with. Since this word apparently has magical and spiritual power to subjugate others, I'd like to declare the "Government of Gregor". Now that I'm a government, you and everyone else must submit to my authority. See how ludicrous this notion is? - Gregor Morrill

Something tells me I'm going to like the end, but not the means. I like mandatory information (i.e.- the Nutrition Facts on the labels of grocery store foods). I hope this doesn't hinder mom and pop stores though. I wish had a "if you have over so many employees, you have to do this" caveat. - Stephen James

I'm currently listening to "Cycles of American Political Thought" lectures and it looks like Gregor and Melanie are having a debate that goes back to John Wise and John Winthrop. Wise would say that democracy is the most Christian form of government and Winthrop would say that the elite were elected (in the Calvinist sense) by God to govern and they should decide the will of God in how to govern. - Stephen James