Free Republic

Any chance humans knew of this "10th planet" a looooooong time before now?

Canada can kiss our ass! Just exactly who do they think will defend their country if it were ever to be attacked? Their own bankrupt few-thousands strong military?

Canada needs to shut up and play nice or they might find themselves placed in the "US territory" category.

The Rich get Richer, and the rest of us get to be their slaves . . .

Welcome to the Brave New World

Sex is generally defined two ways (1) genotypically [ie. XX or XY] and (2) phenotypically - external manifestations of "femaleness" or "maleness," usually the sex organs, but also 2nd sex characteristics such as breast development, hair growth pattern, muscle mass, and bone development.

If you're XX or XO - you're a woman genetically and will look like a woman on the outside (although XO females are distinct). If you're XY, you're a male, with the rare exceptions of genotypically XY men, who have a mutation in the SRY gene (on the Y) or who have a mutated testosterone receptor, these folks will phenotypically be women (and should be treated as such).

You don't "change your mind" after the fact. People who want sex changes need a therapist, not a surgeon.

LOL! - NO ONE gets as big as the guys at the "Classic" unless they are on steroids (it also doesn't hurt to have an already pre-existing glandular problem either).

Steroids at the Classis? You bet!

"It's embarrassing," said City Manager David J. Norman. "We had a paralegal who did bad research."

Always someone elses fault - anyone doubt that the dumbing down of America is ticking along quite predictably?

?! - You can't make anyone undergo a surgical procedure, even if it save the life of another. I can't, and shouldn't, be able to force you to undergo surgery to give me a needed kidney or liver - to save my life - and neither should this woman had to of undergone any surgery, even to save the life or her children.

With that said - what OB makes a cut from pelvic bone to sternum? Even major exploratory abdominal surgery uses a smaller cut. C-sections usually are able to pull the children from the mother through a small horizontal (as opposed to verticle pubic to sternum) incision (~6-8 inches) just superior to the pubic symphysis. Most women's pubic hair even covers the scar.

A consumer-driven economy like ours is dependent on cheap, reliable energy. We had darn well better be ready to fight, or we'll fall back into a Dark Age.

The way I see it, it's a race between us and China for the oil, and we're a few steps ahead. As for the rest of the world - they can kiss our a$$es - and buy the oil we control at double.

How about if we save our blood and drill our own oil? Then we can put the terrorists money supply out of business. Seems too simple to me, but hey, who am I? Our wonderful senate blocks oil exploration of our land. They should be held responsible for the bloodshed.

Yeppers - I love the Polar Bears and Carribou as much as the next guy, but they're just going to have to live with pumps and oil pipes. The animals have been getting along just fine for quite a long time without help, and if placing some oil exploration in their habitat kills them off, well, obviously, they were not the "fitest".

People who say "no blood for oil" do not understand energy. Oil is the most precious commodity on the planet. Oil makes the world go round, and in order to keep our lifestyle in America, we better be willing to shed blood for oil.

But wrong? How does that fit with 'all things are lawful'?

"Lawful" as in pertaining to the Law - that which is explicitly written in God's word. In this instance, since Christ's death removed any need for a sacrificial law - this is not what Paul speaks to, but rather God's "10 biggies" + Christ's new commandment ("A new cammandment I give unto you, That ye love one another as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye love one to another" Jn 13:34,35). Basically, Paul is saying: God may not have a specific Law (Commandment) about an action - therefore such action is "lawful" - however, even if such is the case not all things are "expedient" - good - because they are NOT mentioned in the Law (Paul doesn't allow for an argument from silence). Paul implores the Church as Corinth not the "check it's brain at the door" - God's Law and moral behavior are based upon universal principles, and it is upon these principles that the Christian base his actions.

That should have read: addiction. I'm not sure "addition" has an moral implications . . .

25% of the population smokes. I say we must take actions and restrict the behaviour of the other 75% of the population that result in 75% of the deaths.

(?) No you have it wrong. "25%" are the percentage of people who died last year from chronic disease related to smoking :-)

Direct medical costs are paid for by the patient, or the patients insurance. Unless we have adopted a Nationalized health plan without my knowledge.

LOL - yeah it's called medicare and medicaid, not to mentioned all the uninsured that county and VA hospitals take care off. If everyone, smoker or not, were paying their medical bills you might have a point, but they're not, so you don't. :-)

This is a bogus number that can not be proven.

LOL - Oooops cannot counter this one, so it must be "bogus" :-)

Yes, but who defines a "bad" habit. You fail to address that. If it isn't you, who will you authorize to decide? The majorit? (Tyranny) Or a chosen group/individual decision maker? (Fascism)

None of the above - objective medical science and risk/cost analysis have shown that it is completely stupid for the government to continue to pay for people who are willfully and selfishly self-destructive.

You had not presented any actual data to "do the math".

Smoking is the single biggest self-controlable(?) contributing factor to chronic dz - the same diseases that cost the most amount of money to care for and treat.

(3/27/95)

A lot has happened since '95

1 Corinthians 6:12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

Interesting. Furthermore, we can see from this passage, even aside from the health related issues of the Temple, Paul makes it quite clear at the end of this quote, that Christian liberty is under the principle of self-control. Forms of selfish indulgence become wrong when they bring a person into bondage - addition.

Smoking costs more for HC (no data provided).

More than 1.7 million Americans die of chronic disease every year (~70% of total deaths); of these people 2/3 of these deaths are due to 5 chronic diseases (1)heart disease, (2) cancer, (3) stroke, (4) COPD, and diebetes [1]. Is smoking related to these same chronic diseases? "As many as 30% of all coronary heart disease (CHD) deaths in the United States each year are attributable to cigarette smoking, with the risk being strongly dose-related. Smoking also nearly doubles the risk of ischemic stroke. Smoking acts synergistically with other risk factors, substantially increasing the risk of CHD. Smokers are also at increased risk for peripheral vascular disease, cancer, chronic lung disease, and many other chronic diseases. Cigarette smoking is the single most alterable risk factor contributing to premature morbidity and mortality in the United States, accounting for approximately 430 000 deaths annually.[2]. Chronic disease accounts for more than 75% of the entire costs spent on medicine [1] - the same diseases caused by smoking! Direct medical costs of smoking alone are more than $75 billion, causing an additional $80 billion associated with lost production [1]. $33 billion is spent on heart disease, cancer, stroke, and diabete (3/4 caused by smoking) [1].

Japanese population suffers from other diseases (no info provided)

"The improvement in the health situation has already been reflected in a reduction in mortality rates, which has contributed greatly to achieving the highest life expectancy in the world. Until the middle of this century, deaths caused by infectious diseases such as pneumonia, bronchitis, tuberculosis and gastroenteritis prevailed in Japan. However, since the end of the Second World War, these diseases have rapidly decreased and have been replaced by so-called life-style related diseases such as malignant neoplasms, and heart and cerebrovascular diseases. Cancer has ranked first in the cause of death since 1981. The number of cancer deaths in 2000 was 295 484, and the death rate was 232.80 per 100 000 population. While Japan has been traditionally characterized by a greater tendency for stomach cancer and uterine cancer deaths than deaths from other types of cancer, deaths from these types of cancer have been declining in recent years. They have been replaced by an increasing number of deaths from lung cancer, breast cancer and cancer of the large intestine among other types of cancer, showing a trend towards the "westernization of cancer"." [3]

Increased costs for HC are acceptable if they are from behaviours approved by you

It's not about my approval its about paying for a bad habit - disproprotionately.

The extra taxes and premium costs directly funded by smokers doesn't keep up with actual costs (no actual costs provided)

Do the math smart guy.

Now, when exactly are you going to change your monikor?

After you kiss my ass :-)

"Health problems caused by physical inactivity cost the state an estimated $8.9 billion a year. Smoking-related health problems cost $6 billion a year."

NOT two mutaually exclusive groups, smoking just adds more cost to the laziness.

Correlation does not equal causation. If your statement is fact, why does the highest per capita smoking population in the world have the lowest per capita lung and heart disease rates in the world?

You are correct about correlation, but I am not merely making a statistical pronouncement. It is quite clear, and has been for some time, just exactly what damage occurs at the cellular level in smokers in the lungs, and elsewhere in the body. Medicine knows exactly why smoking is bad and why is causes disease. The stats only back this up. Lung CA only hits about 13-14% of the poulation, but 80% of this cohort are smokers. Japanese, as a population, get hit with other disease due to smoking.

The single biggest determinant for health problems is genetics, followed by diet.

You are right bad genes and diet do create health problems only to be exacerbated by other stressors such as smoking

So in some cases people should be willing to live with the consequences of their personal choices, but in others they don't need to be willing to live with the consequences of their personal choices.

As I said before having a family and smoking are fundamentaly different, if you disagree, then I'm not going to convince you on a political forum. One produces a family, one produces harm.

Fact: Smokers pay higher health coverage premiums out of their pockets. Fact: Smokers pay a little over $1 Billion in California. Fact: Smokers pay higher product costs as a result of the Master Settlement Agreement.

AND all this is still not keeping up with health costs for cigarette smoking realted illnesses - fact.

The way I interpret your statement is that you propose the employer pay the $500 for the non smoker and make the smoker pay their total $750. In essence you are advocating lower compensation for smokers.

Yes, you are correct.

Hmmmmm, do you advocate government mandated diets?

No I do not, but eating is fundamentally different than smoking - no equvalent. Furthermore, I would support not hiring obese cops as well because of the related costs. People who are obese - with a few notable exceptions (folks with metabolic abnormalities) - are lacking in self-control. Their eating is just as much an addiction as smoking, and shouldn't be rewarded.

In your view. . .but I challenge you to find one place in the bible that mentions smoking.

(here it comes) - So, in your opinion then, unless a particular activity is specifically mentioned, one cannot make a moral judgement based up the principle found in the Word of God? I don't remember seeing the word "abortion," "cloning," nor the use of other intoxicants such as marijuana, heroin, and methamphetamine - are all moral since not specifically mentioned? Is drinking the only immoral vice, then?

You see in 1Cor. 6 Paul is speaking specifically to sexual morality and he gives the principle for such a judgement - eg. the Body if the Temple of the Most High God. Are you saying that this same Godly principle cannot be applied to other selfish acts that hurt the body? Hmmmm? Think about it.

Let's try and wrap this up - point, counter point, is starting to take up too much time (it's my obsessive compulsive personality)

I support an added tax on cigs and alcohol (other drugs as well, if made legal) to help financially support the healthcare problems that each toxin created. While I don't buy your slippery slope argument (taxation of cigs/alcohol will lead to a tax of haircuts and water), the argument is not without logic. I think you have a real concern here outside of having a "cheap habit" (although I don't think you would mind if smokes costed less either). The governmet's misuse of these funds is an entirely different issue IMhO.

The reason gas prices are high in the first place is because of taxes and added extra ingredients, especially in Kali (I paid $2.22/gal when I filled up on Sunday). However, the current rise in gas prices more closely relates to increased demand, less supply, and a weak dollar. I don't expect gas prices to come down too much - we're running out.