external image

state lawmaker wants to ban obese from eating in restaurants

LaurieJim

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Location
In the Beautiful South !!
Sorry, youre too fat to eat here
Miss. bill would ban restaurants from serving obese customers




updated 3:00 p.m. CT, Mon., Feb. 4, 2008
JACKSON, Miss. - A state lawmaker wants to ban restaurants from serving food to obese customers but please, dont be offended.
He says he never even expected his plan to become law.

I was trying to shed a little light on the number one problem in Mississippi, said Republican Rep. John Read of Gautier, who acknowledges that at 5-foot-11 and 230 pounds, hed probably have a tough time under his own bill.
More than 30 percent of adults in Mississippi are considered it obese, according to a 2007 study by the Trust for Americas Health, a research group that focuses on disease prevention.

The state House Public Health Committee chairman, Democrat Steve Holland of Plantersville, said he is going to shred the bill.

It is too oppressive for government to require a restaurant owner to police another human being from their own indiscretions, Holland said Monday.

The bill had no specifics about how obesity would be defined, or how restaurants were supposed to determine if a customer was obese.

Al Stamps, who owns a restaurant in Jackson, said it is absurd for the state to consider telling him which customers he cant serve. He and his wife, Kim, do a bustling lunch business at Cool Als, which serves big burgers beef or veggie and specialty foods like Sassy Momma Sweet Potato Fries.

There is a better way to deal with health issues than to impose those kind of regulations, Al Stamps said. Im sorry you cant do it by treating adults like children and telling them what they can and cannot eat.
 
How about banning people with brittle hair from Hair Salons?

People who surf more than 2 hours a day from the internet?

People who have broken bones in the past from sports stores?

People with back problems from buying running shoes?

People who tend to have gas from buying beans?

The possibilities are endless...:eek2:
 
How about banning people with brittle hair from Hair Salons?

People who surf more than 2 hours a day from the internet?

People who have broken bones in the past from sports stores?

People with back problems from buying running shoes?

People who tend to have gas from buying beans?

The possibilities are endless...:eek2:
.......for real.... i couldnt believe it when i read it...freaked me out:eek: he must have some personal issues in his own closet!!!
 
Remember this person "Republican Rep. John Read of Gautier".... Don't vote for him.

Only vote for people that are going to protect your Rights, not make a joke out of them.
 
OMG.... and let's take it further.... diabetics banned from buying candy, heart patients banned from buying/eating bacon and french fries... The possibilities are, indeed, endless. :rolleyes:
 
Well that's exactly what we need now, just a couple more regulations...we already have more regulations in this country now than all of the other countries in the history of the world combined, if you include our over 16,000 pages of the current tax code regulation...jeeze...:mad:

I can furnish plenty of data to back up that statement too, but out of respect for my buddies here, I will refrain...:D
 
Well that's exactly what we need now, just a couple more regulations...we already have more regulations in this country now than all of the other countries in the history of the world combined, if you include our over 16,000 pages of the current tax code regulation...jeeze...:mad:

I can furnish plenty of data to back up that statement too, but out of respect for my buddies here, I will refrain...:D

Why? It's the attic!!!

Can we go back to 1872 please?
1872 - Income tax repealed.

Taken from:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Or maybe anytime from 1895 to 1913. It seems 1894 was the start of all bad things :mad:

1894 - The Wilson Tariff Act revived the income tax and an income tax division within the Bureau of Internal Revenue was created.

1895 - Supreme Court ruled the new income tax unconstitutional on the grounds that it was a direct tax and not apportioned among the states on the basis of population. The income tax division was disbanded.

1909 - President Taft recommended Congress propose a constitutional amendment that would give the government the power to tax incomes without apportioning the burden among the states in line with population. Congress also levied a 1 percent tax on net corporate incomes of more than $5,000.

1913 - As the threat of war loomed, Wyoming became the 36th and last state needed to ratify the 16th Amendment. The amendment stated, "Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Later, Congress adopted a 1 percent tax on net personal income of more than $3,000 with a surtax of 6 percent on incomes of more than $500,000. It also repealed the 1909 corporate income tax. The first Form 1040 was introduced.

Quite an interesting read ;)
 
Why? It's the attic!!!

Can we go back to 1872 please?


Taken from:
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Or maybe anytime from 1895 to 1913. It seems 1894 was the start of all bad things :mad:

Quite an interesting read ;)

If you thought that was an interesting read Win...try this:

1913 - As the threat of war loomed, Wyoming became the 36th and last state needed to ratify the 16th Amendment. The amendment stated, "Congress shall have the power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several states, and without regard to any census or enumeration." Later, Congress adopted a 1 percent tax on net personal income of more than $3,000 with a surtax of 6 percent on incomes of more than $500,000. It also repealed the 1909 corporate income tax. The first Form 1040 was introduced.

The 16th Amendment...The Law That Never Was !!!

The Discovery

Article V of the U.S. Constitution specifies the ratification process, and requires 3/4 of the States to ratify any amendment proposed by Congress. There were 48 States in the American Union in 1913, meaning that affirmative action of 36 states was required for ratification. In February, 1913, Secretary of State Philander Knox issued a proclamation claiming that 38 states had ratified the amendment.

In 1984, William J. Benson began a research project, never before performed, to investigate the process of ratification of the 16th Amendment. After traveling to the capitols of the New England states, and reviewing the journals of the state legislative bodies, he saw that many states had not ratified the Amendment. Continuing his research at the National Archives in Washington, DC, Bill Benson discovered his Golden Key. This damning piece of evidence is a 16 page memorandum from the Solicitor of the Department of State, whose duty is the provision of legal opinions for the use of the Secretary of State. In this memorandum sent to the Secretary of State, the Solicitor of the Department of State lists the many errors he found in the ratification process!

The 4 states listed below are among the 38 states that Philander Knox claimed ratification from.

The Kentucky Senate voted upon the resolution, but rejected it by a vote of 9 in favor and 22 opposed.

The Oklahoma Senate amended the language of the 16th Amendment to have a precisely opposite meaning.

The California legislative assembly never recorded any vote upon any proposal to adopt the amendment proposed by Congress.

The State of Minnesota sent nothing to the Secretary of State in Washington.

When his year long project was finished at the end of 1984, Bill had visited every state capitol and knew that not a single state had actually and legally ratified the proposal to amend the Constitution. 33 states engaged in the unauthorized activity of amending the language of the amendment proposed by congress, a power the states do not possess. Since 36 states were needed for ratification, the failure of 13 to ratify would be fatal to the amendment, and this occurs within the major (first three) defects tabulated in Defects in Ratification of the 16th Amendment. Even if we were to ignore defects of spelling, capitalization, and punctuation, we would still have only 2 states which successfully ratified.

Read more about it
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Here's you another good one:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
 
But it's not too opressive for government to require a bank to police another human being from their own discretions?

Well, Dom... you know that $25 I deposit might fund decent hard working folks that work in the online casino industry who might not pay us. Wouldn't want that to happen now would we? Oh. Wait. I guess we would. Now that the gov't has seen to it that the regulated casinos have locked us out, it's mostly the unregulated casinos that will take our action -- and might not pay out. Self-fullfilling prophecy?

Politicians must be required to have fewer brain cells than the average citizen they govern. :rolleyes:
 
Politicians must be required to have fewer brain cells than the average citizen they govern.
I don't think it is brain cells, some of these SOB's are real smart, some have stayed in power for decades.

I think it is a genetic flaw they all share... The Honesty, Morals, Ethics and Fair Play Genes are missing in these politicos...
 
If these politicos are gonna make ridiculous laws, they should make a law against obese woman wearing Lycra stretch pants in public... Nows there is a law I can support...
 
Referring back to the OP, is this just not a PR excercise to bring awareness to the problem? Or am i missing something...?

It was an actual Bill submitted to the Miss. State Legislature to vote on, to become a law, but the Public Health Committee chairman said he was going to shred it so that it could not be voted on...
 
Last edited:
Referring back to the OP, is this just not a PR excercise to bring awareness to the problem? Or am i missing something...?

It was an actual Bill submitted to the Miss. State Legislature to vote on to become a law but the Public Health Committee chairman said he was going to shred it so that it could not be voted on...
............hey rob, didnt huckabee have something like that in arkansas, i think he did a big turnaround with his own weight prob and had some sorta state program for the overweight in his state. i thought i had read that somewhere or hell i could have been dreaming:D
 
............hey rob, didnt huckabee have something like that in arkansas, i think he did a big turnaround with his own weight prob and had some sorta state program for the overweight in his state. i thought i had read that somewhere or hell i could have been dreaming:D

Yea, I believe so Laurie...let me look at my saved files here for a bit, see if I can't find something regarding that...
 
Here you go Laurie....

He launched the "Healthy Arkansas" initiative to promote better eating and exercise habits in one of the country's most obese populations. The initiative grants time off for state employees who stay healthy, not just those who get sick. It also allows workers to take a paid half-hour each day for exercise. "We give employees time to go out and hurt themselves during the day," he says of cigarette breaks. "Not only do we lose productivity but we increase the likelihood of their getting sick. But if you want to take care of yourself, we say do it on your own dime. Now what makes sense about that?"............

Link Outdated URL (Invalid)
 
only from eating in restaurants? so you could buy a case of twinkies at the grocery store, or order in a dozen pizzas, but dining in a restaurant is off limits? at least you're getting mild exercise by going out. i bet subway was behind the whole thing. hey, isn't jon lovitz fat? and he endorses them. strange..

:thumbsup:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top