[quote]tedro wrote:
I’m not even going to get into everything that is wrong with this. I just wanted to throw in that it appears they are basing obesity on a bmi over 30.
I only need to gain about 5 pounds and my bmi will be 30.
I am under 10% bf. I bet there are quite a few people on this site that are perfectly healthy with bmi’s over 30. I guess they won’t be served in Mississippi.[/quote]
My BMI is 30, but I’d be willing to bet that my waist size is on par or smaller than my “normal” counter parts of the same size. BMI is bullshit.
[quote]Uncle Gabby wrote:
pat wrote:
What do you want to bet this is riding on the coat tales of all the cigarette bans in place?
Once you start baning things you just open the flood gates for all kinds of oppressive legislation.
In order to keep doing the things you like to do, you have to put of with the thing you don’t like others doing even if it bothers you. If you want to stop others from doing things, they will find a way to stop you from doing things. It really is that simple.
Your annology is flawed because if you smoke in an inclosed space, other people have to breath your smoke, therefore, you are doing harm unto others. But in this case, there is no harm to anyone else. The fatty is only harming themselves, so the government has no right to tell a private business who they can and cannot serve.
Of course I get what you are saying, you give the anti-smoking jihad, or in this case the nanny-staters an inch and they demand a yard.[/quote]
Well, yes and no. The analogy works in that the government is in both cases is attempting to tell business owners what they can and cannot do with their own businesses and what kind of clientel they can have.
It’s the kind of thing that pisses me off to no end. It makes me want to open up a restaurant and bar that basically serves greasy fat food to obese smokers only.