July 10, 2006 vs. October 26, 2006
Friday, October 27, 2006
Thursday, October 26, 2006
Baby Update # 3
Baby my son has once again returned from a doctor's appointment. This time he went to receive the remaining vaccination shots given to babies. He now weighs in at ten (10) pounds five (5) ounces and will not have to make an appearance at the doctors office for another two months now.As you can see from the picture above, he is starting to hold his head up some and with a little help he can even sit up. Now that my son appears more human like, I have once again found the camera and the past few days have taken a few pictures. I imagine now that he is beginning to be more active and is beginning to learn new abilities I will be snapping pictures like a mad man again (but don't expect too many more pics to be posted). Before long the struggle of keeping my son from pulling the cat's tail or other such troublesome activities will begin so you can look forward to some entertaining stories in the future.
Smoking Continued...
Please read the post below before reading this one.
I just wanted to add some more thoughts.
Some may argue that the choice to smoke or not to smoke is up to each person to decide on their own. By forcing the smokers outside, the choice to pollute ones lungs has been made for them by the government (not to mention the choice to smoke should be seen as the choice to end ones life as mentioned in part one below). It is time for us to take the power back, Rage Against the Machine styles, and force the government to do away with the real cigarettes as they did with the Popeye cigarettes. The amount of money lost from the tobacco tax and the people working in the tobacco industry will be offset by the decrease in the amount spent on health care. The increased cost of health care in Ontario is after all, one of the reasons for continually increasing the tobacco tax is it not???
Others may argue that drinking is just as dangerous as smoking and should be banned. Whether drinking should also be banned is not the point of this post but I can say it is not the same as smoking. The single act of drinking harms no one but the drinker and depending on the study one reads a moderate amount of alcohol has certain health benefits. The same cannot be said about tobacco or smoking. Smoking has no health benefits and one cigarette can affect anyone in a close proximity to the smoker.
I am sure there will be many more points of view on this subject as it is always a hot topic. I am only one man with a slightly different perspective than many people as is evidenced almost daily (maybe one day I will blog about that issue) so I am not saying my views here are correct. I just had some thoughts I wanted to share and maybe one day someone will be able to rid this world of such pollutants. I did not even mention the addictive nature of cigarettes (and for those that continue to debate habit vs. addiction, I can tell you it is both). To eliminate smokers we must eliminate the source. One cannot smoke cigarettes if one cannot obtain cigarettes.
I just wanted to add some more thoughts.
Some may argue that the choice to smoke or not to smoke is up to each person to decide on their own. By forcing the smokers outside, the choice to pollute ones lungs has been made for them by the government (not to mention the choice to smoke should be seen as the choice to end ones life as mentioned in part one below). It is time for us to take the power back, Rage Against the Machine styles, and force the government to do away with the real cigarettes as they did with the Popeye cigarettes. The amount of money lost from the tobacco tax and the people working in the tobacco industry will be offset by the decrease in the amount spent on health care. The increased cost of health care in Ontario is after all, one of the reasons for continually increasing the tobacco tax is it not???
Others may argue that drinking is just as dangerous as smoking and should be banned. Whether drinking should also be banned is not the point of this post but I can say it is not the same as smoking. The single act of drinking harms no one but the drinker and depending on the study one reads a moderate amount of alcohol has certain health benefits. The same cannot be said about tobacco or smoking. Smoking has no health benefits and one cigarette can affect anyone in a close proximity to the smoker.
I am sure there will be many more points of view on this subject as it is always a hot topic. I am only one man with a slightly different perspective than many people as is evidenced almost daily (maybe one day I will blog about that issue) so I am not saying my views here are correct. I just had some thoughts I wanted to share and maybe one day someone will be able to rid this world of such pollutants. I did not even mention the addictive nature of cigarettes (and for those that continue to debate habit vs. addiction, I can tell you it is both). To eliminate smokers we must eliminate the source. One cannot smoke cigarettes if one cannot obtain cigarettes.
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
To Smoke or Not To Smoke? It's Not Really Up To You Anymore
There was a time when one could light up anywhere they wished. One could be at peace smoking in malls, coffee shops, bars and even airplanes. Ah, the good old days! Smoking was such a common occurrence and so widely accepted throughout most of the 1900’s, advertisements for the death sticks littered magazines, even more so than alcohol ads.
Then results from numerous studies on smoking and the effects of the chemically filled cigarettes started popping up but one still knew where they could smoke and more importantly; one knew where others would be smoking so they could avoid smokers and the stink of burning tobacco-laced chemicals if they so pleased. Once these studies proved that tobacco smoke causes a variety of illnesses and diseases that could lead to death, the government ignored the warnings for as long as they could before taking actions against the feared smokers.
Instead of banning cigarettes outright, as they would any other item that posed a health risk, the government simply created and increased a tax on tobacco products, made the tobacco companies add warnings to their products, and forced businesses to have separate smoking areas for their customers. After continued pressure from the public, or at least a portion of the public, all levels of governments have imposed various bans on smoking in public establishment (bars, restaurants, etc…).
With smoking being banned indoors, this activity now takes place outdoors on public streets where unsuspecting passer-by’s are exposed to the toxic mix of pollutants released from the ends of the tobacco tubes. These pedestrians, in the end, become smokers themselves even though they spend no money on cigarettes or put no cigarette to their mouth just because they inhale tobacco filled air just by walking outside.
Where is the government in all of this, you may ask? Trying to rub the green from their eyes after counting all the tobacco revenue they collected. And where are the tobacco companies? In court defending themselves from the countless lawsuits filed against them. In my opinion, these lawsuits should be directed at the government and not the companies that are just trying to sell a product in our democratic society. After all, if these cigarette products are so dangerous as to lead to death, should not the government ban them in the interest of public safety?
On second thought, maybe the smokers of the world are all criminals. Suicide, or at least, attempted suicide is against the law. Studies have shown and the government agrees that smoking could lead to death; therefore, anyone who purchases cigarettes is attempting suicide. I will take this one step further still, keeping in mind that many agree that smoking kills. With smokers forced outside where anyone passing by may inhale the toxic fumes, these smokers are also guilty of attempted murder. Since the government is responsible for forcing these deviants outside and giving them the opportunity to kill others, not to mention allowing the sale of these deadly in the first place, they must be guilty of something.
Then results from numerous studies on smoking and the effects of the chemically filled cigarettes started popping up but one still knew where they could smoke and more importantly; one knew where others would be smoking so they could avoid smokers and the stink of burning tobacco-laced chemicals if they so pleased. Once these studies proved that tobacco smoke causes a variety of illnesses and diseases that could lead to death, the government ignored the warnings for as long as they could before taking actions against the feared smokers.
Instead of banning cigarettes outright, as they would any other item that posed a health risk, the government simply created and increased a tax on tobacco products, made the tobacco companies add warnings to their products, and forced businesses to have separate smoking areas for their customers. After continued pressure from the public, or at least a portion of the public, all levels of governments have imposed various bans on smoking in public establishment (bars, restaurants, etc…).
With smoking being banned indoors, this activity now takes place outdoors on public streets where unsuspecting passer-by’s are exposed to the toxic mix of pollutants released from the ends of the tobacco tubes. These pedestrians, in the end, become smokers themselves even though they spend no money on cigarettes or put no cigarette to their mouth just because they inhale tobacco filled air just by walking outside.
Where is the government in all of this, you may ask? Trying to rub the green from their eyes after counting all the tobacco revenue they collected. And where are the tobacco companies? In court defending themselves from the countless lawsuits filed against them. In my opinion, these lawsuits should be directed at the government and not the companies that are just trying to sell a product in our democratic society. After all, if these cigarette products are so dangerous as to lead to death, should not the government ban them in the interest of public safety?
On second thought, maybe the smokers of the world are all criminals. Suicide, or at least, attempted suicide is against the law. Studies have shown and the government agrees that smoking could lead to death; therefore, anyone who purchases cigarettes is attempting suicide. I will take this one step further still, keeping in mind that many agree that smoking kills. With smokers forced outside where anyone passing by may inhale the toxic fumes, these smokers are also guilty of attempted murder. Since the government is responsible for forcing these deviants outside and giving them the opportunity to kill others, not to mention allowing the sale of these deadly in the first place, they must be guilty of something.
Tuesday, October 24, 2006
A Very Generous Gift Indeed!
I am sure everyone who reads my blog religiously, and has been tired of me only having two eyes, has received a gift that they could call generous, whether it was having permission to leave work a whole thirty minutes early on Christmas Eve day or when Grandma gave you a $50 dollar bill instead of her usual $5 (not like that ever happened to me though) at the end of a pleasant visit. Maybe you received an extravagant gift from someone you expected a sack of coal from, and then felt really bad about it because you did give them a sack of coal...You get the idea.
So when I received a card from Bell’s internet service, Sympatico, stating something to the effect that they (the faceless morons at Bell) hoped my recent move (well my move two and a half months ago) was a success and that they were giving me a month of internet service free, I was thrilled, I got that warm fuzzy feeling deep down inside. They do care, the almighty corporations do care! I waited patiently for my next telephone bill to arrive (thanks to Bell’s one bill everything is on one bill now and is twice as complicated to figure out) so I could gloat about the freebie. When the bill finally came I giddily ripped it open like a child opening a Christmas present and my mouth dropped; there was no rebate for the month’s internet service.
Now I was thinking I had read the card wrong so I read it again, then I conferred with Mrs. Shuster to see if I might be reading it wrong. Alas, I was mistaken; it said they had given me a free month of internet service. I immediately tore through my bills from the last three months trying to find the rebate but it was useless, I never received this alleged free month of internet service. So when this month’s bill came I was expecting to finally see this elusive free month but again I was disappointed. How much more disappointment can one man take???
All I have to say is that at least they didn’t charge me twice! I have given up hope for this supposed free month of internet service. As the title says, this was a very generous gift indeed! Thanks Bell, you guys rock! Best company in the world, next to Rogers of course.
So when I received a card from Bell’s internet service, Sympatico, stating something to the effect that they (the faceless morons at Bell) hoped my recent move (well my move two and a half months ago) was a success and that they were giving me a month of internet service free, I was thrilled, I got that warm fuzzy feeling deep down inside. They do care, the almighty corporations do care! I waited patiently for my next telephone bill to arrive (thanks to Bell’s one bill everything is on one bill now and is twice as complicated to figure out) so I could gloat about the freebie. When the bill finally came I giddily ripped it open like a child opening a Christmas present and my mouth dropped; there was no rebate for the month’s internet service.
Now I was thinking I had read the card wrong so I read it again, then I conferred with Mrs. Shuster to see if I might be reading it wrong. Alas, I was mistaken; it said they had given me a free month of internet service. I immediately tore through my bills from the last three months trying to find the rebate but it was useless, I never received this alleged free month of internet service. So when this month’s bill came I was expecting to finally see this elusive free month but again I was disappointed. How much more disappointment can one man take???
All I have to say is that at least they didn’t charge me twice! I have given up hope for this supposed free month of internet service. As the title says, this was a very generous gift indeed! Thanks Bell, you guys rock! Best company in the world, next to Rogers of course.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
