RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Health and Safety



Message

mistoferin -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/20/2006 7:02:52 PM)

I'm very happy to see this discussion continuing in the way it has. I think it's obvious, as is evidenced even right here on this thread, that there are alot of misconceptions. I hope that discussions like this will lead to greater understanding.



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/20/2006 7:16:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
For someone who likes facts I'm really surprised. When used properly, condoms are highly effective (the rates I've seen easily go into 90%).


If the lottery guaranteed a win of 1 in 10, I'd play. Hell, I'd play it if it were 1 in 20. Even at 1 in a 100 it might still be worth it.

Now think about how effective condoms are even if they protected you 99% of the time. You want to be the 1% to get pregnant, AIDS, herpes, HPV, etc?



yourMissTress -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/20/2006 8:03:48 PM)

quote:

Digression:
quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
Remeber the woman that sued McDonald's for hot coffee that she spilled on herself, and at least in the initial court proceeding, WON.

Please do not mindlessly pass on misinformation if you can avoid it.

...

McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

Source: http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

...

Applying the principles of comparative liability, the jury found that McDonald's was 80% responsible for the incident and Liebeck was 20% at fault. Though there was a warning on the coffee cup, the jury decided that the warning was neither large enough nor sufficient. They awarded Liebeck US$200,000 in compensatory damages, which was then reduced by 20% to US$160,000. In addition, they awarded her US$2.7 million in punitive damages.

However, the judge reduced punitive damages to US$480,000; thus Liebeck was awarded US$640,000 in total. Both McDonald's and Liebeck appealed, and in December 1994, the two came to a confidential settlement, the amount of which is secret, but is believed to be approximately equal to the amount of the final judgment.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald's_coffee_case



So...she didn't sue McDonalds?

It appears to me that even your own posting proves that she did exactly what I said. How is this misinformation?

You disagree with my opinion that this case is an example of rewarding stupidity? It's my opinion, in no way do I claim it to be fact or law. That's not misinformation, that's an opinion.

and...kindly keep your condescension to yourself.




Petruchio -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 1:09:11 AM)

quote:

and...kindly keep your condescension to yourself.


Wallllllll (attempting a drawl), condescension is beloved by so many subs!

It would be selfish for me to keep it all to myself.



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 5:31:29 AM)

yourMissTress:

I am just championing the system as is - imperfect as it is, it is probably the best system that can be achieved. We have tort law so that people can be compensated justly for complaints they may have against another. A jury found the woman's complaint credible and I have no reason to question that judgment. You think your judgment is better than that - that your judgment can replace hundreds of years of common law jurisprudence and trust in the jury system? I'll agree that sometimes it would seem the jury system is rigged in certain ways, but I still trust in it to do more good than harm.

Just as a further aside, I vehemently reject any moves toward tort reform as deeply misguided and predicated on a fundamental misunderstanding of the purposes of government. Governments do not exist to make life easier for corporations, they exist to defend the rights in law of the body politic - "we the people." I have no complaints against corporations as such if they can be made to serve a public good - the original purpose of a corporation. While making a profit is all well and good, the original obligations of a corporation are to the society from which it receives specific benefits in law.

I am not a Unitarian myself, but this is a good place to start a better understanding of the issues at stake:
http://www.uuworld.org/2003/03/feature1a.html



yourMissTress -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 7:31:09 AM)

Chaingang,

Being a libertarian I would choose to have as little government involvement as possible. I advocate education, knowledge and responsibility. IMO personal responsibility is lacking in our society. I referenced the coffee incident to illustrate that in our society we can do stupid things and blame someone else for the results of our actions and be rewarded for it. It's my opinion that if you smoke cigarettes or cigars or chew tobacco and you get cancer or emphysema you have no one to blame but yourself. It's my opinion that if you have a gun in your home and your child gets a hold of it and shoots themself or a playmate, guilt does not fall in the lap of the gun maker or the ammunition manufacturer. And if you put hot coffee in your lap while driving, it's not the fault of the person who sold or made the coffee that you spilled it.

Personal responsibility doesn't equal protection of corporate billions. There are plenty of instances where faulty products were to blame for accidents or injuries or worse. And in those instances the manufacturers should be held liable.

It means that you are responsible for your actions and I am responsible for mine. And when you or I are injured or hurt someone else because of our own mistakes, there isn't someone else to blame. We have to take responsibility for our own actions. Not call our attorney to see how we can profit from the misfortune of the manufacturer that we chose to buy their product.

Corporations are not here to serve the common good. They are here to make money by providing a marketable service or product. We (those of us in the U.S.) live in a capitalist society.

Capitalism

An economic system based on a free market, open competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means of production. Capitalism encourages private investment and business, compared to a government-controlled economy. Investors in these private companies (i.e. shareholders) also own the firms and are known as capitalists.

While your utopian ideals are nice and a wonderful goal, that is not the society in which we live.

And I ask again...did she or did she not sue McDonalds? and did she or did she not receive monetary compensation as a result of the litigation?



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 8:35:23 AM)

Sorry for the hijacking of your thread, mistoferin...

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
Being a libertarian I would choose to have as little government involvement as possible.


Great! Then I guess we can do away with corporations altogether which are fictitious persons created under the law. We wouldn't want to have big and nasty old governments stepping in to create fictitious persons when we have natural persons, would we?

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
I advocate education, knowledge and responsibility.


No you don't. If you did you would be interested in the legal history of the corporation and advocate corporate responsibility just as much as you espouse Libertarian claptrap.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
It's my opinion that if you smoke cigarettes or cigars or chew tobacco and you get cancer or emphysema you have no one to blame but yourself.


Not true, product labelling is an issue here. I will explain...

I don't smoke. For a really long time I thought that cigarettes were just tobacco wrapped in paper with a filter tip. That's not actually true and the current health warning found on most cigarette packaging is inadequate to the task of explaining the truth about cigarettes. Famed tobacco industry whistle blower Jeffrey Wigand has taught the whole world that cigarettes are actually seen by Big Tobacco as a mechanism for the delivery of nicotine to the brain of the consumer - that they intend and design addiction as a consequence of the use of their cigarette products. We thereby learned that the design and manufacturing of cigarettes is a complex process "...including the chemistry of tobacco smoke, the science of growing and processing tobacco, and the use of additives such as ammonia to make nicotine more available to the smoker’s brain." (http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/031147.htm).

This list was disclosed in 1994 after years of pressure by consumers and Congress. The 599 Ingredients Added to Tobacco in the Manufacture of Cigarettes by the Five Major American Cigarette Companies:

Acctanisole, Acetic Acid, Acetoin, Acetophenone, 6i-Acetoxydihydrotheaspirane, 2-Acetyl-3-Ethylpyrazine, 2-Acetyl-5-Methylfuran, Acetylpyrazine, 2-Acetylpyridine, 3-Acetylpyridine, 2-Acetylthiszole, Aconitic Acid, Dl-Alanine, Alfalfa Extract, Allspice Extract, Oleoresin and Oil, Allyl Hexanoate, Allyl Ionone, Almond Bitter Oil, Ambergris Tincture, Ammonia, Ammonium Bicarbonate, Ammonium Hydroxide, Ammonium Phosphate Dibasic, Ammonium Sulfide, Amyl Alcohol, Amyl Butyrate, Amyl Formate, Amyl Octanoate, alpha-Amylcinnamaldebyde, Amyns Oil, Trans-Anethole, Angelica Root Extract, Oil and Seed Oil, Anise, Anise Star, Extract and Oils, Anisy Acctate, Anisyl Alcohol, Anisyl Formate, Anisyl Phenylacctate, Apple Juice Concentrate, Extract and Skins, Apricot Extract and Juice Concentrate, 1-Arginine, Asafetida Fluid Extract and Oil, Ascorbic Acid, 1-Asparagine Monohydrate, 1-Aspaartic Acid, Balsam Peru and Oil, Basil Oil, Bay Leaf Oil and Sweet Oil, Beeswax White, Beet Juice Concentrate, Benzaldehyde, Benzaldehyde Glyceryl Acetal, Benzoic Acid, Benzoin, Benzoin Resin, Benzophenone, Benzyl Alcohol, Benzyl Benzoate, Benzyl Butyrate, Benzyl Cinnamate, Benzyl Propionste, Benzyl Salicylate, Bergamot Oil, Bisabolene, Black Currant Buds Absolute, Borncol, Bornyl Acctate, Buchu Lea Oil, 1,3-Butanediol, 2,3-Butanedione, 1-Butanol, 2-Butanone, 4(2-Butenlidene)-3,5,5-Trunethyl-2-Cyclohexen-1 Oue, Butter, Butter Esters, and Butter Oil, Butyl Acetate, Butyl Butyrate, Butyl Butyryl Lactate, Butyl Isovalcrate, Butyl Phenylacetate,Butyl Undocylenate, 3-Butylidenephthalide, Butyric Acid, Cadinene, Caffeine, Calcium Carbonate, Camphene, Cananga Oil, Capsicum Oleoresin, Caramel Color, Caraway Oil, Carbon Dioxide, Cardamom Oleoresin, Extract, Seed Oil and Powder, Carob Bean and Extract, Beta-cascarilla Oil and Bark Extract, Cassia Bark Oil, Cassie Absolute and Oil, Castoreum Extract, Tincture and Absolute, Cedar Leaf Oil, Cedarwood Oil Terpenes and Virginiana, Cedrol, Celery Seed Extract, Solid, Oil, and Oleoresin, Cellulose Fiber, Chamomile Flower Oil and Extract, Chicory Extract, Chocolate, Cinnamaldehyde, Cinnamic Acid, Cinnamon Leaf Oil, Bark Oil and Extract, Cinnamyl Acetate, Cinnamyl Alcohol, Cinnamyl Cinnamate, Cinnamyl Isovalerate, Cinnamyl Propionate, Citral, Citric Acid, Citronells Oil, dl-Citronellol, Citronellyl Butyrate, Citronellyl Isobutyrate, Civet Absolute, Clary Oil, Clover Tops, Red Solid Extract, Cocoa, Cocoa Shells, Extract, Distillate and Powder, Coconut Oil, Coffee, Cognac White and Green Oil, Copaiba Oil, Coriander Extract and Oil, Corn Oil, Corn Silk, Costus Root Oil, Cubeb Oil, Cuminaldehyde, para=Cymene, 1-Cysteine, Dandelion Root Solid Extract, Davans Oil, 2-trans, 4-trans-Decadienal, delta-Decalactone, gamma-Decalactone, Decanal Decanoic Acid, 1-Decanol, 2-Decanal, Dehydromenthofurolactone, Diethyl Malonate, Diethyl Sebacate, 2,3-Diethylpyrazine, Dihydro Anethole, 5,7-Dihydro-2Methylthieno (3,4-D) Pyrimidine, Dill Seed Oil and Extract, meta-Dimethoxybenzene, para-Dimethoxybenzene, 2,6-Dimethoxyphenol, Dimethyl Succinate, 3,4-Dimethyl-1-2 Cyclopentanedione, 3,5-Dimethyl-1-2-Cyclopentanedione, 3,7-Dimethyl-1, 3,6-Octatriene, 4,5-Dimethyl-3-Hydroxy, 2,5-Dihydrofuran-2-One, 6,10-Dimethyl-5, 9-Undecadien-2-One, 3, 7-Dimethyl-6-Octenoc Acid, 2,4-Dimethylacetophenone, alpha, para-Dimethylbenzyl Alcohol, alpha, alpha-Dimethylphenethyl Acetate, alpha, alpha Dimethylphenethyl Butyrate, 2,3-Dimethylpyrazine, 2,5-Dimethylpyrazine, 2,6-Dimethylpyrazine, Dimethyltetrahydrobenzofuranone, delta-Dodecalactone, gamma-Docecalactone, para-Ethoxybenzaldehyde, Ethyl 10-Undecenoate, Ethyl 2-Methylbutyrate, Ethyl Acetate, Ethyl Acetoacetate, Ethyl Alcohol, Ethyl Benzoate, Ethyl Butyrate, Ethyl Cinnamate, Ethyl Decanoate, Ethyl Fenchol, Ethyl Furoate, Ethyl Heptanoate, Ethyl Hexanoate, Ethyl Isovalerate, Ethyl Lactate, Ethyl Laurate, Ethyl Levulinate, Ethyl Maltol, Ethyl Methyl Phenylglycidate, Ethyl Myristate, Ethyl Nonanoate, Ethyl Levulinate, Ethyl Maltol, Ethyl Methyl Phenylglycidate, Ethyl Myristate, Ethyl Nonanoate, Ethyl Octadecanoate, Ethyl Octanoate, Ethyl Oleate, Ethyl Palmitate, Ethyl Phenylacetate, Ethyl Propionate, Ethyl Salicylate, Ethyl trans-2-Butenoate, Ethyl Valerate, Ethyl Vanillin, 2-Ethyl (orMethyl)-(3,5 and 6)-Methoxypyrazine, 2-Ethyl-1-Hexanol, 3-Ethyl-2-Hydroxy-2-Cyclopenten-1-One, 2-Ethyl 3, (5 or )-Dimethylpyrazine, 5-Ethyl-3-Hydroxy-4-Methyl-2(5H)-Furanone, 2-Ethyl-3-Methylpyrazine, 4-Ethylbenzaldehyde, 4-Ethylguaiacol, para-Ethylphenol, 3-Ethylpyradine, Eucalyptol, Farnesol, D-Fenchone, Fennel Sweet Oil, Fenugreck, Extract, Resin and Absolute, Fig Juice Concentrate, Food Starch Modified, Furfury Mercaptan, 4-(2-Fury)-3-Buten-2-One, Galbanum Oil, Genet Absolute, Gentian Root Extract, Geraniol Geranjum Rose Oil, Geranyl Acetate, Geranyl Butyrate, Geranyl Formate, Geranyl Isovalerate, Geranyl Phenlacetate, Ginger Oil and Oleoresin, Glutamic Acid, 1-Glutamine, Glycerol, Gllyeyrrhizin AmmoniatedGrape Juice Concentrate, Gualac Wood Oil, Guaiacol, Guar Gum, 2,4-Heptadienal, gamma-Heptalactone, Heptanoic Acid, 2-Heptanone, 3-Hepten-2-One, 2-Hepten-4-One, 4-Heptenal, trans-2-Heptenal, Heptyl Acetate, omega-6-Hexadecenlactone, gamma-Hexalactone, Hexanal, Hexanoic Acid-2-Hexen-l-001, 3-Hexen-1-01, 3-Hexen-1-Y1 Acetate, 2-Hexenal, 3-Hexenoic Acid, trans-2-Hexenoic Acid, cis-3-Hexenyl Formate, Hexyl-2 Milk Solids, Hydrolyzed Plant Proteins, 5-Hydroxy-2-4 Decadienoic kAcid Lactone, Hydroxycitronellal, 6-Hydroxydihydrotheaspieane, 4-(para-Hydroxyphenyl)-2-Butanone, Hyssop Oil, Immortelle Absolute and Extract, alpha-Ionone, beta,Ionone, alpha-Irone, Isoamyl Acetate, Isoamyl Benzoate, Isoamyl Cinnamate, Isoamy Formate, Isoamyl Hexanoate, Isoamyl Isovalerate, Isoamyl Octanoate, Isoamyl Phenylacetate Isobornyl Cinnamate, Metnyl Dinyarojasmonate, Metnyl Esler of Kosin, Partially riyarogensieu, Metnyl Dovaierate, Methyl Linoleate (48%), Methyl Lanolenate (52%) Micture, Methyl Naphthyl Ketone, Methyl Nicotinate, Methyl Phenylacetate, Methyl Salicytate, Methyl Sulfide, 3-Methyl-1-Cyclopentadecanone, 4=Methyl-1-Phenyl-2-Pentanone, 5-Methyl-2-Phenyl-2-Hexenal, 5-Methyl-2-Thiophenecarbonaldehyde, 6-Methyl-3, 5-Heptadien-2-One, 2-Methyl-3-(para-Isopropylphenyl) Propionaldehyde, 5-Methyl-3-Hexen-2-One, 1-Methyl-3 Methyoxy-4-Isopropylbenzene, 4-Methyl-3-Pentene-2-One, 2-Methyl-4-Phenylbutyraldehyde, 6-Methyl-5-Hepten-2-One, 4-Methyl-5-Thiazoleethanol, 4-Methyl-5-Vinylthiazole, Methyl-alpha-lonone, Methyl-trans-2-Butenoic Acid, 4-Methylbutyraldehyde, 3-Methylbutyraldehyde, 2-Methylbutyric Acid, alpha-Methylcinnamaldehyde, Methylcyclopentenolone, 2-Methylheptanoic Acid, 2-Methylhexanoic Acid, 3-Methylpentanoic Acid, 4-Methylpentanoic Acid, 2-Methylheptanoic Acid, 2-Methylhexanoic Acid, 3-Methylpentanoic Acid, 4-Methylpentanoic Acid, 2-Methylpyrazine, 5-Methylquinoxaline, 2-Methylterahydronfuran-3-One, (Methylthio) Methylpyrazine ( Mixture Of Isomers), 3-Methylthiopropionaldehyde, Methyl 3-Methylthiopropionate, 2-Methylvaleric Acid, Mimosa Absolute and Extract, Molasses Extract and Tincture, Mountain Maple Sollid Extract, Mullein Flowers, Myristaldehydep Myristic Acid, Myrrh Oil, beta=Napthyl Ethyl Ether, Nerol, Neroli Bigarde Oil, Nerolidol, Nona-2-trans, 6-cis-Dienal, 2, 6-Nonadien-l-01, gamma-Nonalactone, Nonanal, Nonanoic Acid, Nonanone, trans-2-Nohen-1-01, 2-Nohen-1-01, 2-Nonenal, Nonyl Acetate, Nutmeg Powder and Oil, Oak Chips Extract and Oil, Oak Moss Absolute, 9,12-Octadecadiernoic Acid (48%) and 9, 12, 15-Octadecatreinoic Acid (52%), delta-Octalactone, gamma-Octalactone, Octanal, Octanoic Acid, 1-Octanol, 2-Octanone, 3-Octen-2-One, 1-Octen-3-Ol, 1-Octen-3-Yl Acetate, 3-Octenal, Octyl Isobutyrate, Oleic Acid, Olibanum Oil, Opoponax Oil and Gum, Orange Blossoms Water, Absolute, and Leaf Absolute, Orange Oil and Extract, Origanum Oil, Orris Concrete Oil and Root Extract, Palmarosa Oil, Palmitic Acid, Parsley Seed Oil,l Patchouli Oil, omega-Pentadecalactone, 2,3-Pentanedione, 2-Pentanone, 4-Pentenoic Acid, 2-Pentylpyridine, Pepper Oil,l Black and White, Peppermint Oil, Peruvian (Bois De Rose) Oil, Petitgrain Absolute, Mandarin Oil and Terpeneless Oil, alpha-Phellandrene, 2-Phenenthyl Acetate, Phenenthyl Alcohol, Penethyl Butyrate, Penethyl CLinnamate, Penethyl Isobutyrate, Penethyl Isovalerate, Penethyl Phenylacetate, Phenethyl Salicylate, 1-Phenyl-1-Propanol, 3-Phenyl-1-Propanol, 2-Phenyl-2-Butenal, 4-Phenyl-3-Buten-2-01, 4-Phenyl-3-Buten-2-One, Phenylacetaldehyde, Phenylacetic Acid, 11-Phenylalanine, 3-Phenylpropionaldehyde, 3-Phenylpropionic Acid, 3-Phenylpropyl Acetate, 3-Phenylpropyl Scotch, Pineapple Juice Concentrate, alpha-Pinene, beta-Pinene, D-Piperitone, Piperonal, Pipsissewa Leaf Extract, Plum Juice, Potassium Sorbate, 1-Proline, Propenylguaethol, Propionic Acid, Propyl Acetate, Propyl para-Hydroxybenzoate, Propylene Glycol, 30Propylidenephthalide, Prune Juice and Concentrate, Pyridine Pyroligeneous Acid and Extract, Pyrrole, Pyruvic Acid, Rainin Juice Concentrate, Rhodinol, Rose Absolute and Oil, Rosemary Oil, Rum, Rum Ether, Rye Extract, Sage, Sage Oil and Sage Oleoresin, Salicyladehyde, Sandalwood Oil, Yellow, Sclareolide, Skatole, Smoke Flavor, Snakeroot Oil, Sodium Acetate, Sodium Benzoate, Sodium Bicarbonate, Sodium Carbonate, Sodium Chloride, Sodium Citrate, Sodium Hydroxide, Solanone, Spearmint Oil, Styrax Extract, Gum and Oil, Sucrose Octaacetate, Sugar Alcohols, Sugars, Tagetes Oil, Tannic Acid, Tartaric Acid, Tea Leaf and Absolute, alpha Terpineol, Terpilnolene, Terpinyl Acetate, 5,6,7,8,-Tetrahydroquinoxaline, 1,5,5,9-Tetramethyl-13-Oxstricyclo (8.3.0.0 (4,9)) Tridecane, 2,3,4,5 and 3,4,5,6-Tetramethylethyl-Cyclohexanone, 2,3,5,6-Tetramethylphyrazine, Thiamine Hydrochloride, Thiazole, 1-Thereonine, Thyme Oil, White and Red, TLhymol, Tobacco Extracts, Tochopherols (mixed), Tolu Balsam Glum and Extract, Tolualdehydes, para-Tolyl, 3-Methylbutyrate, para-Tolyl-kAcetaldehyde, pars-Tolyl Acetate, para-Tolyl Isobutyrate, para-Tolyl-Phenylacetate Triacetin, 2-Tridecanone, 2-Tridecenal, Triethyl Citrate, 3,5,5-Grimethyl-1-Hexanol, para, alpha, alpha Trimethylbenzyl Alcohol, 4-(2,6,6-Trimethylcyclohex-1-Enyl) But-2-En-4-One, 2,6,6-Trimethylcyclohex-2-Ene-1,4-Dione, 2,6,6-Trimethylcyclohexa-1,3-Dienyl Methan, 4-(2,6,6-Trimethylcyclohexa-1, 3-Dienyl) But-2-En-4-One-2,2,6-Trimethylcyclohexanone, 2,3,5-Grimethylpyrazine, 1-Tyrosine, delta-Undercalactone, gamma-Undecalactone, Undecanal, 2-Undecanone, 10-Undecenal, Urea, Valencene, Valeraldehyde, Valerian Root Extract, Oil and Powder, Valeric Acid, gamma-Valerplactone, Valine, Vanilla Extract and Oleresin, Vanillin, Vertaraldehyde, Vetiver Oil, Vinegar, Violet Leaf Absolute, Walnut Hull Extract, Water, Wheat Extract and Flour, LWild CLherry Bark Extract, Wine and Wine Sherry, Xanthan Gum, 3,4-XLylenol, Yeast. (http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/031147.htm)

So while your Libertarian mileage my vary, I think I can prove to the satisfaction of a panel of venireman that the label is insufficient warning and that the tobacco industry is liable for damages committed against tobacco smokers without their prior knowledge or consent. Smokers do not usually realize that they are smoking an ultra-engineered "vehicle for the delivery of nicotine" instead of just plain tabacco or that they are a targetted return customer/addict.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
It's my opinion that if you have a gun in your home and your child gets a hold of it and shoots themself or a playmate, guilt does not fall in the lap of the gun maker or the ammunition manufacturer.


Why would adequate protection against a gun's misuse by children be an unreasonable expectation in terms of product design? What the government creates (corporations) it may regulate.

FWIW, I would hold the child's parents also at least partially at fault. More on that idea later...

BTW, I support gun ownership and own guns myself.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
And if you put hot coffee in your lap while driving, it's not the fault of the person who sold or made the coffee that you spilled it.


Again, product labelling is the issue at hand. Why must McD's sell coffee that is substantially hotter than the competition? If they do so, isn't it fair to expect them to adequately warn their patrons that they are selling dangerously hot, scalding coffee capable of causing severe skin burns? Why is the expectation of such warning such a big deal?

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
It means that you are responsible for your actions and I am responsible for mine.


No man is an island. Even the idea of private property is a creation of law. All men owe practically everything to their society.

In the coffee case the court elected to use the idea of comparative liability. Under such theory every actor in an incident is usually responsible for some part of a disputed injury. Seems like a very fair notion to me: to decide what a damage is worth and then hold parties responsible for their percentage of blameworthiness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
Corporations are not here to serve the common good. They are here to make money by providing a marketable service or product. We (those of us in the U.S.) live in a capitalist society.


Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation
http://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate_accountability/history_corporations_us.html

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
Capitalism
An economic system based on a free market, open competition, profit motive and private ownership of the means of production. Capitalism encourages private investment and business, compared to a government-controlled economy. Investors in these private companies (i.e. shareholders) also own the firms and are known as capitalists.


Ah, a free marketeer! Can you please show me anywhere on earth, during any time period, where a free market has ever existed? Uh huh, I thought not. That's a great philosophy you have there, one that has never been tried in all of human history. All economies are government controlled and always have been. How about coming down from Mt. Libertarian-Land and joining the rest of us down here in reality?

BTW, why should "private ownership" not be a right of only natural persons? Answer: because corporations want "limited liability for debt" which natural persons do not have as a right. Seems like you Libertarians want a legally created loophole for "responsibility" (a.k.a. government protection). What was it you said? "Education, knowledge and responsibility"? Do you also sell people bridges?

If corporations commit crimes in the world, may we hold "shareholders" responsible for those crimes? Why or why not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
While your utopian ideals are nice and a wonderful goal, that is not the society in which we live.


Interesting. Meet my fellow "Utopian" pal Mr. Thomas Jefferson (deceased), who said:

"I hope that we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country."

You may have heard of this Jefferson guy. Some people consider his ideas pretty important and influential.

Next...




yourMissTress -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 9:23:00 AM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
I advocate education, knowledge and responsibility.

No you don't. If you did you would be interested in the legal history of the corporation and advocate corporate responsibility just as much as you espouse Libertarian claptrap.


So, if I don't think/feel the way you do I must not be interested in legal history? And obviously any opinion that differs from yours is...claptrap?

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
It's my opinion that if you smoke cigarettes or cigars or chew tobacco and you get cancer or emphysema you have no one to blame but yourself.

Not true, product labelling is an issue here. I will explain...


My opinion is untrue?


quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
It's my opinion that if you have a gun in your home and your child gets a hold of it and shoots themself or a playmate, guilt does not fall in the lap of the gun maker or the ammunition manufacturer.

Why would adequate protection against a gun's misuse by children be an unreasonable expectation in terms of product design? What the government creates (corporations) it may regulate.

FWIW, I would hold the child's parents also at least partially at fault. More on that idea later...

BTW, I support gun ownership and own guns myself.


My opinion is still such that 100% responsibility is on the owner of the gun.

quote:

Seems like a very fair notion to me:


So you DO have an opinion and not every word you utter is fact.

quote:

Ah, a free marketeer! Can you please show me anywhere on earth, during any time period, where a free market has ever existed?


of course, you just skipped the words "based on" because they don't fit your arguement.


While I agree with you that there are some problems with product labeling and there can always be improvements to safety precautions. I hold firm in the belief that ultimately we are all responsible for our own choices and actions.

I also am an admirer of Mr. Jefferson's work and writing, and I also believe quite strongly that the United States we live in today is quite far from what our fore fathers had in mind. As well I believe that not only are you allowed to your opinion, regardless of my own, but I also stand for your right to voice that opinon free from criticism and ridicule. I appreciate the same courtesy.

Chaingang, we are just going to have to agree to disagree on politics and the state of the union. But I will ask one more time...
quote:

did she or did she not sue McDonalds? and did she or did she not receive monetary compensation as a result of the litigation?


And to the rest of Collar Me...I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 9:40:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: yourMissTress
But I will ask one more time...did she or did she not sue McDonalds? and did she or did she not receive monetary compensation as a result of the litigation?


She did, but your point and the implication of your statement was that it was a wrong-headed outcome and I wished to point out my own reasons for disagreeing with you. I also wished to point out that your views are not actually based on anything but flawed Libertarian reasoning. As to criticism and ridicule - well, call it instant karma.

My view only...

Pointing out that this is my view isn't a clever rhetorical point, it's obvious by the fact that my name "Chaingang" and eightball avatar appear next to the statement. In normal conversations, opinions are up for grabs. I never realized I had to bow down before the opinions of others. You are free to believe whatever fool thing you wish to believe, and I am free to vocally disagree with you and beat your opinion to dust if I feel like it.

YMMV...



nicochan -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 5:31:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

Great topic. I also agree it should not be moved elsewhere.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
To me fluid bonding means no kissing, no unprotected oral sex (flavored condoms for blow jobs and saran wrap or dental dams for cunninglinguis). It literally means to me that there is a barrier for any fluids.


Barrier protection is great every time it works and meaningless every time it fails. I have a "Pro" friend that has become pregnant twice in the last year from protected sex with client/strangers. She reports no unusual situations like condom slippage or breakage. She just got pregnant even though she used condoms with spermicide. And if one can get pregnant even while being "careful" imagine what else one can get: AIDS, HPV, Herpes, etc. Conclusion: barrier sex is no protection at all really.


For someone who likes facts I'm really surprised. When used properly, condoms are highly effective (the rates I've seen easily go into 90%).

Frankly for her to get pregnant once and not reconsider what she was doing or the appropriate level of protection doesn't sound terribly professional to me. People get pregnant and contract diseases while using condoms mostly because they aren't using them properly, not because condoms have a high failure rate.

C~

See:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pubs/facts/condoms.htm
http://www.agi-usa.org/pubs/journals/3323101.html
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/dmid/stds/condomreport.pdf


Condoms actually have about an 88% effective rate citing average use. The 99% or so is from perfect use every time, which is practically impossible. Also, the Pill is also 99.8% effective, so even with proper usage 1 or 2 women become pregnant per 1,000.

Adding to the obviously good advice, getting tested is SO VERY important. Ladies, have your pap smears for HPV and others, and any other tests that screen for STDs/STIs. I had no idea there were that many strains of HPV though, wow...

Speaking of testing, what tests are performed on donated blood, other than hepatitis and HIV/AIDS?



Petruchio -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/21/2006 7:55:31 PM)

I'm a libertarian (little L) so I find it disappointing that the Libertarian Party (big L) is so dismal. However, I find myself avidly following MissTress's and Chaingang's exchange. (That UU article was fascinating, but the way.)

quote:

Ah, a free marketeer! Can you please show me anywhere on earth, during any time period, where a free market has ever existed? Uh huh, I thought not.


I am a free market purist from Sayesian economics forward, so I agree that the worst abuses have been by politicians who claim to be conservative. Their agenda is protectionism, not free trade.

This is an over-simplification compared to the MT's and CG's writing, but generally, government should only see to it that companies do not become oligopolies, do not pollute, and do not harm consumers. Some further argue that something should be done about pharmecutical 'micro-markets', but that is open to debate whether those sick with rate diseases should be allowed to die.

Setting aside the McDonald's coffe issue which has been well argued by both sides, my conclusion is that both MT and CG have points regarding corporations in America. The difference is that CG is showing corporations for what they are and MT is arguing what they should be.

We saw the Justice Department succeed in convicting Microsoft of unfair mononpolistic practices. We then saw the Bush administration turn around and say, 'Thank you very much for your campaign donations, case dismissed.'

We have seen the Japanese come into our country and overturn a century and a half of law that permits reverse engineering because American competition didn't suit their corporate giants.

We have seen the medical 'industry' argue to a receptive Congress that they should not be held responsible for medical mistakes.

We have seen Enron, the largest contributor to the Bush campaign, 'apparently' succeed in advising the administration to make us the only nation not to sign the Kyoto treaty.

We have then seen the administration then use Microsoft, AOL, and Yahoo to spy on its own citizens.

So in their own ways, both arguments are right:

ChainGang for arguing what IS, and
MissTress for arguing what SHOULD BE.



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/22/2006 7:07:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Petruchio
ChainGang for arguing what IS, and
MissTress for arguing what SHOULD BE.


Hah! Funny.

Hey, I actually think it would be neat to run one state as a Libertarian experiment. When I was much younger I read "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged," was all into Objectivism, etc. But at the end of the day no one gives a shit who John Galt is or whether he is an active part of the world or disappears never to be found again. The world keeps moving along...and 'twas always thus.

In my view the problem is that the Libertarian view has some internal philosophical problems and in my whole life long has achieved almost nothing. That's reality. The party might as well not exist.

Politics in the U.S. are about long pendulum swings. The U.S. govt. system was created for things to change in achingly small incremental steps - so to make anything actually happen you have to have a groundswell of motive force and the strength of public opinion on your side.

So the problem presented by the legally fictive corporation is going to be with us until people are just about ready to abandon the idea of the corporation altogether. Then things will change, and while we won't actually get rid of corporations - because after all they can serve a public good AND make profits besides - but we will have to recreate them in a more sensible configuration with much tighter regulation. Which is at it should be.

See "The Corporation":
http://www.thecorporation.com/

Yes men:
http://www.theyesmen.org/
http://www.dowethics.com/risk/#arc



truesub4u -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/22/2006 11:37:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightofMists

Particular for relationships that are not monogamus! However, even these individuals would benefit from such education. What risks of transmission that can occur with specific Infections would be an important consideration... sex is not the only means of transmission that can occur.


Bravo for bringing an excellent topic to the boards!


KnightofMist.... I so agree with this statement. Even though those that are in a mongamus should always still take care. Sad part is knowing not everyone is trustworthy. Affairs take place... no denying this. No not in all relationships.... but in some.

And it's not just who your partner sexed it up with... but who that person sexed it up with prior to your partner.

You so end up having sex with so many other people when you do decide to go sexual with one.

One who doesn't take the time to think... be careful.. and care enough for the one they're with... OR THEMSELVES... is a fool within themselves.



Slipstreme -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/22/2006 12:46:43 PM)

quote:

hope you are kidding when you say you thought it only came from males. no offense but that's really ignorant. Also if you're french kissing you're already started sharing fluids. spit from french kissing is shareing fluids.


I figured I had worded it wrong after I said it. I meant more along the lines that unless there is a cut in the oral giver's mouth, or tongue, the whole blood to blood contact issue, is how I thought I could get anything from recieving oral licking. I did not know the disease could spread simply from the skin on the tongue through the vaginal walls unless there was blood involved. According to the literature Ive read on AIDS, there have been no confirmed cases of lesbians getting AIDS from eating each other out, hence my reasoning.

Im pretty sure the skunk and kitty are both clean, but that doesn't stop me from worrying about it. I'll probably cut my attention down to one partner: skunk. It does however suck that I will have to wait till I do anything with skunk longer than getting tested from the first mistake I made, before I had the skunk. (Long story,fellatio, involving supposedly unintentional deception on his part) Thing is I know the kitty and the skunk have had past sexual partners, how safe with them the kitty's been I dont know.

The skunk and I are both clean as far as herpes goes, so I dont think we have to worry about that, as far as mouth to mouth goes. However, we have passed colds to each other. I understand the whole swapping spit is sharing fluids, however I thought it was relatively safe aside from again, possibly getting a cold or mono from a partner, which I consider acceptable risk. I didn't think you could get something serious, unless say someone has AIDS and you both have bleeding wounds in the mouth. Again, herpes isn't an issue here, currently anyway.

That is my take on it. Yes I know I came off as ignorant, however I don't appreciate being called ignorant. Yes as far the kitty goes I should have kept oral out of it, and Im upset I have to wait longer for a definate test. It is really going to screw up plans skunk and I had concerning where we were going to take our relationship. I guess I'm going to have to hope I'm not the exception in that small risk of someone getting STDs from the oral activities I've done, wait 6 extra months, get the test and then go from there. But now I'm fricken paranoid about all this, and whether skunk and I can wait out another six months is beyond me.



ShadeDiva -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/22/2006 7:21:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang
Barrier protection is great every time it works and meaningless every time it fails. I have a "Pro" friend that has become pregnant twice in the last year from protected sex with client/strangers. She reports no unusual situations like condom slippage or breakage. She just got pregnant even though she used condoms with spermicide. And if one can get pregnant even while being "careful" imagine what else one can get: AIDS, HPV, Herpes, etc. Conclusion: barrier sex is no protection at all really.


Just for some personal experience - I was on the pill (and I NEVER forgot), using latex condoms, AND using foam (compatible with latex condoms - at least the box said it was lol) - all at the same time mind you - and I STILL got pregnant.

I *am* that 2% of the 98% effectiveness they speak of, LOL.

But it goes to show that even if you are using MANY forms of protection - even if used together - ALL it does is narrow the odds. It is NOT ever 100% and there ARE no guarantees.

Ironically enough I have since only used the pill or condoms, and after 9 years or so after I was preggers, I have never conceived again - and that's only using ONE form of protection.

So yanno. Take of it what you will, but I'd say don't ever feel that you *can't* get anything just cuz you are protected - but realize that it gives you a LOT better of a chance of escaping a consequence that you might not want.



Wildfleurs -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/23/2006 11:25:30 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
For someone who likes facts I'm really surprised. When used properly, condoms are highly effective (the rates I've seen easily go into 90%).


If the lottery guaranteed a win of 1 in 10, I'd play. Hell, I'd play it if it were 1 in 20. Even at 1 in a 100 it might still be worth it.

Now think about how effective condoms are even if they protected you 99% of the time. You want to be the 1% to get pregnant, AIDS, herpes, HPV, etc?



Well if you are that worried about getting someone pregnant (i.e. worried about being in that 1%) or contracting an STD I would suggest that you need to make sure that you are absolutely celibate for the rest of your life. That is the only thing that is 100% safe.

C~



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/23/2006 12:04:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
Well if you are that worried about getting someone pregnant (i.e. worried about being in that 1%) or contracting an STD I would suggest that you need to make sure that you are absolutely celibate for the rest of your life. That is the only thing that is 100% safe.


Yeah, because that would be a far better solution than simply taking my time to get to know someone, creating honesty and trust between us, and getting us both tested. I can see now that if I can't just live my life carefree and wild I should just pack it in and be celibate instead!

Of course, why didn't I see this sooner!!!

...

When you don't know your partners very well, this is what you get:
* reduces the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85%.
* reduces the risk of gonorrhea for men by approximately 71%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom

Sounds like Russian Roulette in a way...keep pulling the trigger on your gun and you will get a big surprise.



Wildfleurs -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/23/2006 2:10:42 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

Yeah, because that would be a far better solution than simply taking my time to get to know someone, creating honesty and trust between us, and getting us both tested. I can see now that if I can't just live my life carefree and wild I should just pack it in and be celibate instead!

Of course, why didn't I see this sooner!!!

...

When you don't know your partners very well, this is what you get:
* reduces the risk of HIV/AIDS transmission by approximately 85%.
* reduces the risk of gonorrhea for men by approximately 71%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condom

Sounds like Russian Roulette in a way...keep pulling the trigger on your gun and you will get a big surprise.


I'm just confused. I don't know what you arguing for or against. I think you are arguing for testing someone and then not using condoms, but I can't even tell.

So I'll repeat my post again.

Well if you are that worried about getting someone pregnant (i.e. worried about being in that 1%) or contracting an STD I would suggest that you need to make sure that you are absolutely celibate for the rest of your life. That is the only thing that is 100% safe.

If you are arguing that there is another method besides celibacy that is 100% safe, I'd love to hear it.

C~



Chaingang -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/23/2006 2:57:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Wildfleurs
If you are arguing that there is another method besides celibacy that is 100% safe, I'd love to hear it.


I am arguing for reason and will simply ignore your straw man here...

Condom use is often called "safe sex" when it should more properly be called "safer sex" - it is a panacea to consider condom use a perfect protection against anything as it is hardly that.

I also think there is a middle ground that can be found. You can be tested negative and engage in risky behavior only with people whom you trust and that have also been tested negative. What further methods are used for birth and disease control is obviously a personal matter, but your chances are much improved be dealing with people you know and trust rather than an endless string of strangers.



Wildfleurs -> RE: Fluid Bonding and misconceptions. (2/23/2006 4:35:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chaingang

I am arguing for reason and will simply ignore your straw man here...

Condom use is often called "safe sex" when it should more properly be called "safer sex" - it is a panacea to consider condom use a perfect protection against anything as it is hardly that.


You are arguing for reason and then ascribing arguements I never made. Yeah lots of reason there.

quote:



I also think there is a middle ground that can be found. You can be tested negative and engage in risky behavior only with people whom you trust and that have also been tested negative. What further methods are used for birth and disease control is obviously a personal matter, but your chances are much improved be dealing with people you know and trust rather than an endless string of strangers.



Okay it sounds like my guess was fairly close. It certainly sounds like you are advocating testing someone and not using condoms. At this point I'm just trying to figure out what you are arguing, before you assume that there was some value judgement in the previous sentence.

C~



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875