Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Morgan in Denver
Any business or restaurant you may wish to visit is under no obligation to cater to your wishes. You have no right to force that business to adhere to your whims for health and enjoyment.

So I guess you would have also fought the introduction of health inspectors into restaurants. What about all of the food preparation guidelines that must be followed. I suppose that is merely the nanny state imposing its will on the free market?

43 posted on 03/08/2003 12:28:48 PM PST by ItisaReligionofPeace ((the original))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]


To: ItisaReligionofPeace
So I guess you would have also fought the introduction of health inspectors into restaurants. What about all of the food preparation guidelines that must be followed. I suppose that is merely the nanny state imposing its will on the free market?

Silly examples don't work. Food preparation for an unsuspecting public versus the legal right of a business to run their operation as they see fit by allowing a legal activity on the premises. Until you make smoking illegal, you have no right to insist on enforcing the nanny-state on a business.

Regardless, if there were no health inspectors restaurants would be open to law suits if they prepare anything that hurt unsuspecting patrons. As corrupt as many so-called inspectors are you may have a good point.

Smoking is hardly an unknown activity when you walk through the door. One wonders why in the world you would even want to go inside a business that has smoking? Why not just not go there? Is that so hard for you to understand? Are you incapable of making such a decision, meaning which places to patronize and which not?

49 posted on 03/08/2003 12:43:11 PM PST by Morgan in Denver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
So I guess you would have also fought the introduction of health inspectors into restaurants. What about all of the food preparation guidelines that must be followed. I suppose that is merely the nanny state imposing its will on the free market?

Please, this "argument" has been refuted so many times that it has scar tissue.

Restaurant patrons are not privy to the goings on in a restaurant kitchen, so health inspectors are necessary agents acting on behalf of the public.

On the other hand, restaurant patrons know from the minute they enter whether or not smoking is allowed. They can choose to leave or remain at that point.

Since you state that no restaurants in Florida allow smoking anymore, you should be in Nirvana.

So other than being here to throw gratuitous insults about smoking, and otherwise committing first-degree pecksniffery, what's your complaint?

51 posted on 03/08/2003 12:54:54 PM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
So I guess you would have also fought the introduction of health inspectors into restaurants. What about all of the food preparation guidelines that must be followed. I suppose that is merely the nanny state imposing its will on the free market?

Jeez, you guys need some new material. This one and the "pee in the swimming pool" are about due for the scrap heap, doncha think?

Here...I'll type slowly so you can understand...Government should protect the public from things the public cannot assess for themselves, like the temperature of the refrigerator or the cleanliness of the kitchen. It is NOT now and never has been government's right or mandate to protect the public from itself.

99 posted on 03/08/2003 2:24:00 PM PST by Max McGarrity (Anti-smokers--still the bullies in the playground they always were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
You're a real concept guy, but lest deal with reality, shall we?

"So I guess you would have also fought the introduction of health inspectors into restaurants."Yes. They are government employees, and are the high cost low quality provider. I would prefer a private industry sticker on the door like Underwriters Laboratory, or CE, or ISO 2002 or any of the hundreds of private organizations that require members to meet standards. They do it better and cheaper. Of course you must think that government schools have better food than private restaurants and same goes with public housing and transportation vs private.

" What about all of the food preparation guidelines that must be followed."Must? What is this, commandment by scribbling? People must not murder and it happens regardless. What objective evidence do you have that the mere existence of these codes, papers, forms, edicts, books, and other symbolic pronouncements from on high have improved anything?

" I suppose that is merely the nanny state imposing its will on the free market?"It is an attempt to force it's will, as much as our fat, lazy, incompetent government employees can have will.

99.99% of everything made or done in this country is done without the government. Why the other is proof that govie inspection prove the point is factually unfounded.

114 posted on 03/08/2003 4:06:35 PM PST by Leisler (Just a few more taxes to paradise!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

To: ItisaReligionofPeace
"So I guess you would have also fought the introduction of health inspectors into restaurants. What about all of the food preparation guidelines that must be followed. I suppose that is merely the nanny state imposing its will on the free market?"

Once Again, Let The Free Market decide. If you walk into a restaurant and it has a "D" health inspection rating, feel free to eat there...IF YOU CHOOSE.

In some States, I couldn't even order a steak prepared "rare"....or an egg "over-easy" because of so many people worried about what "Someone else is doing to THEMSELF".....by CHOICE by the way.

What's next?....a weight scale one must step on to order a 2 for 2 special at a fast food joint? All for the cost it means to others in health care costs? PLEASE.....

Freedom of choice carries responsibilty for one's choices and actions.....thanks to the trial lawyers however, no one is responsible anymore for their each "self" .....or the fact they can choose freely where they eat, drink, etc....or even what kind of vehicle they drive without someone "else" worrying about it.

My personal rights end where someone else's begins.......bottom line.....and the "Gov't", for the people, by the people.....forgot that many years ago.





161 posted on 03/10/2003 6:21:43 PM PST by JustSayNoNWO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson