Really? This is an evangelical website? Because, in my Bible, which I’m confident you’ll claim is the basis for your ideas, has a lot about helping people, helping the poor, the sick, the defenseless. It has nothing in it about mocking people who need help. Along with preaching the gospel, Jesus healed the sick. Now that the issue of healing the sick takes center stage, Christians rally themselves to ensure that the least amount of sick will get healed, as long as they can keep more change in their pockets? The Bible also has nothing in it that encourages Christians, en masse, to undermine their government. Quite the opposite–it explicitly teaches, on several occasions, that Christians are submit to the governing authorities, to pay their taxes, and that being “rich” is one sure-fire way to demonstrate to the world that you are not interested in the Kingdom.

Christians, of all people, should be the ones who champion the cause of health care for all. Unless, of course, they’re more concerned about “mammon” than about the lives of others. As far as taxes go, Jesus said, “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s”. Caesar’s government killed Jesus, and Paul, and both of them clearly teach that you should pay taxes and submit to the government. Caesar’s government tried to exterminate Christianity, and still the Bible teaches you to pay taxes and submit to the Government, which is established by God. Jesus’ revolt was not political–”my kingdom is not of this world”–and, if he were here today, he would have added “if it were of this world, you would have seen an army of Tea Party protesters rallying to my side.” Jesus completely and utterly rejected, at every turn, the kind of religion that you are espousing here, all while you mock the attempts of others to do the types of things that Jesus DID espouse–like healing the sick.

Why are evangelicals fighting against the very things that Jesus taught you to do? What do you stand to gain in this battle, except money? “Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also”–a truism that’s perfectly evidenced by the fact that Evangelicals rise up immediately to fight against taxes or “big government”, but do nothing while 45,000 people die annually due to lack of adequate health insurance, or when families lose their homes due to bankruptcy caused by health care bills, or when people are cut by predatory insurance companies who care more about “mammon” than about life. Your treasure, and your kingdom, are “of this world”, and your heart rejects the very things that Jesus would have you do.

Dustin,

I’m not making light of the problem of obesity in the country, but the source of obesity and the source of smoking-related diseases (including heart disease) are quite different. Even if we outlawed all fast food restaurants in the country, we’d have a problem with obesity. People have been overeating ever since there have been people, and it’s lifestyle and choices that can control it, not outlawing fast food.

Tobacco products, on the other hand, carry inherent risk through simple use, and those same illnesses can usually be avoided by avoiding tobacco products, so their regulation makes sense.

Lindsay wants to have a serious discussion about your satirical post. How can you be so flippant in your responses to her? For starters, we both know that the role of the ideal government is not just to provide security for it’s citizenry and help protect them from the tyranny of the state of nature, but also is meant to appeal to our emotions so that it can bring about the change we supposedly believe it. The government can help us, yes it can.

Unless you understand that, Robin, serious conversation over a satirical post is simply not possible. Oh, and your Torrey education has failed you… schmuck.

Lindsay,

According to the Mayo clinic, heart disease (not lung cancer) is the number one killer of men in the United States. Fatty foods which lead to obesity and high cholesterol are primary factors that contribute to heart disease. Scientists say that the evidence suggests that Robin’s comparison is not unserious. Your appeal to “science” to refute Robin is the only thing lacking in seriousness.

Lindsay,

Now I’m curious… I’d like to hear (in 2 sentences) what YOU think the government should tell its citizens.

When I bugged my mom about her smoking, she used to say, “Well, ya gotta die from something.” Indeed. Maybe we ought to be more worried about the state of our SOULS and less about our bodies.

Wow, Robin. That’s just about the saddest assessment of government’s role that I’ve heard in a long time. If that’s your position, I don’t see how we can discuss anything seriously.

And if you continue to insist that the consequences of tobacco use are equal to those of caffeine or McDonald’s consumption, I’m afraid you’re opinion’s not much good on this topic, either. It just doesn’t make scientific sense, and it’s a long way to go to for a self-indulgent joke at the expense of your political opponents. And it’s not even a good joke, at that.

This isn’t the place for pure snarkiness. This is the place for intelligent discussion of important ideas – or perhaps I missed what Torrey’s supposed to train people to do.

You must be kidding. Coffee is bad for you just like cigarettes and alcohol? I’m pretty sure you must be smoking something to make such an absurd statement. How many people died from coffee last year?

“The government has an understandable interest in banning cocaine, heroine, etc. If you take those narcotics, you are an immediate threat to yourself and the people around you. Try driving on crack. You probably won’t come back to tell me how the experiment went.”

Sort of like drinking and driving, eh? So would you like to reimpose prohibition? Please explain how drinking whiskey, rum, gin, wine, beer or vodka differs from smoking weed in terms of how it affects your driving.

And I hate cigarettes. Personally, that is. But if you want to fire up, be my guest. Just not in the same air I have to breathe. That’s where I draw the line.

The government is way too concerned about our personal choices that have no effect on others. Wait ’til you have to fill out one of those extended census questionnaires. Talk about invasion of privacy!

Uh.

And then there’s this: the new tobacco regulations don’t actually change any laws about tobacco use. It bans flavored tobacco and requires those laughable huge labels to be placed on each carton and pack.

I was recently in Greece and noticed that they require said labels. They look like this: http://www.luxurylaunches.com/entry_images/0806/16/lucky_strike_gold.jpg
Right, and everyone knows that those pious Hellenes don’t touch the stuff.

The government has an understandable interest in banning cocaine, heroine, etc. If you take those narcotics, you are an immediate threat to yourself and the people around you. Try driving on crack. You probably won’t come back to tell me how the experiment went.

(I’ve seen people smoke, eat McDonalds, AND talk on the phone while driving. What talent! What glorious freedom we have to orchestrate our own premature demise!)

I used the mock example of coffee because it is similar to tobacco in addictiveness and availability. Also, it’s basically pretty bad for you in immoderate, prolonged use. Just like cigarettes. Or alcohol. Viva el Prohibición?

A Nanny tells her wards: “Don’t eat that, it’s bad for you.”
A Mother tells her children: “If I catch you smoking, you are grounded for life.”

The government should tell its citizens: “Pay your taxes and try not to blow anything up. Beyond that, best of luck to ya.”