Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
I don't understand. There didn't seem to be a problem when the same government moved to ban the advertisement of cheese. In this thread: http://www.collarchat.com/m_754702/mpage_1/tm.htm many seemed to think that; "Government knows best". Well, now that the cheese issue is covered - they can move on to something else - like your porn. You never know when you give up one liberty how the powers that be will interpret your submission and use it down the road. This seems to be a fine example. Many on both sides of the pond defended the government action. Why should this surrender of a liberty/freedom be viewed differently? From January 2007: quote:
I read this in today's Daily Mail: quote:
TV ban on adverts for cheese, the latest 'junk food' Cheese is to be treated as junk food under new advertising rules for children's television. Commercials promoting it will be banned during children's TV programmes and those with a large proportion of young viewers. The rules, which come into force this month, are part of a Government drive to reduce children's exposure to foods high in fat, salt and sugar. Much to the disgust of its makers, cheese is to be regarded in the same light as crisps, sugary cereals and cheeseburgers. In fact, under the criteria used by the Food Standards Agency to determine junk foods, such products are actually regarded as healthier than cheese. Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=426083&in_page_id=1770 Why are you so willing to surrender personal choice regardless if you personally take advantage of that choice or not? Sooner or later they'll get to something you like to do, eat, see, or drink recreationally or socially. That is my problem with the concept. Again the citizens aren't smart enough or are too easily influence to allow for personal accountability. How much do you need to blame someone else for your life, your over drinking, overeating, over-anything? Is the majority oriented submissive?
|