LesbianSpace - Page 62

whoopie · February 22nd, 2003, 04:24 PM

ok..one moreeeeee thing..LOLOL....the cost of the stop smoking meds, that u need a script for..are more expensive than cigarrettes for a month supply...therefore hard for someone like me to afford them...as much as i want to quit..i cant afford the meds...sounds like an excuse..maybe it is...but, thats my situation...ok..all done...

)))

LiamFan! · February 22nd, 2003, 05:05 PM

whoopie, that makes big sense. Our insurance pays for stop smoking programs and weight loss programs, but not sure if it pays for meds in either case.

MintyFemme2 · February 23rd, 2003, 02:20 AM

(((((((((((((((((((((WHOOPIE)))))))))) Umm please don't think for one minute I was meaning single you or other smokers out. I know that smoking cigerattes is an addiction. My main objective was that the goverment can't treat two very different issues the same way! But yet they are. Smokers feel the way the goverment treats them eveytime the light up.. they are charged addtional taxes to supossedly go to the schools. Now if I am reading right the goverment is wanting to take away that very money from the schools in order to eraticate obesity. The extra taxes that people pay for smoking didn't work .. there are still smokers willing to pay the difference. And now they are trying basically the same tactics but reversing them for overweight issue. In my personal opinion the goverment is only looking out for one thing ... their wallets!
Razzie don't get me started on the " terrorist" band wagon LOL.
Tops thanks for starting an excellent conversation.. as you can tell I don't particulary like the goverments invovlement in our personal affairs.

topsinapod · February 26th, 2003, 01:35 PM

I think that both the band and the bar should be held accountable for the disaster in Rhode Island last week. It's my opinion that pyrotechnics should be against the law in all fifty states except when used out of doors or in an arena by professionals that are trained specifically in their use. That's my opinion.

topsinapod · March 1st, 2003, 07:32 AM

It's Saturday morning and I'm sitting in Lesbian Space. I plan to sit here every saturday morning and wait for my favorite roomies to come and join me again. We used to chat at this time a lot so I know some of you are up and awake having your morning coffee. I promise to be here by 6am. (Some of you haven't gone to bed yet either.) Hope to see you there!!!!!! The coffee is fresh!

topsinapod · March 1st, 2003, 06:52 PM

hmmmm sorry if I chased you away hoggie. Perhaps it's more than you can handle. .

MintyFemme2 · March 1st, 2003, 08:21 PM

(((((((((((((((TOPS)))))))))) you are so BAAAAAAAAADDDDDDD .. but I wub ya anyhow. Umm I would love to chat wiff ya on Sat mornings at 6 your time BUT it is 3 my time

*throwing fit because we can't all be on the same time* LOL. As for the fireworks thign in RI I agree in the sense that it was the band and bar's responsibilty. But for banning everywhere would ya explain more? Does that mean that a responsible person shouldn't be allowed to do the ground fire works you can get at every corner on the 4th of July? I don't believe any one should be allowed to do the ones that go in the sky unless they are trained to do them. I most cettainly don't think even professionals should do any kind of fire works inside a building or to close to a building.. much less one with alchol . ohh psst I think I am to much for you to handle LMAO

topsinapod · March 4th, 2003, 06:32 AM

((((((((((Minty))))))))))))

The laws governing fireworks differ from state to state. In Maine it is illegal to use any form of personal fireworks except the sparklers. NH sells fireworks but they are also illegal for use there as well. As far as in music displays, it appears the band will be facing charges here for violating the permit laws. They played in Bangor two days prior to the tragedy in RI. They never had a permit to use pyrotechnics in their act and it's possible the place they played is also in trouble. For the time being, Maine has banned them till they can create a law because of what happened in RI.

Fireworks are dangerous. When I was about 12 years old I almost lost my thumb when a firecracker exploded in my hand. That was enough for me.

topsinapod · March 4th, 2003, 06:50 AM

I'm wondering why we elect lawmakers. Have you ever noticed the silliness that some lawmakers partake in? We elect them to hopefully make laws that are needed and that make sense. Why then do they come up with some of the stuff that they decide needs a law?

We have a bill that would outlaw Elephants when the Shrine Circus comes to town. Should we also outlaw Lipizzaner Stallions because they are trained to perform? How about training your dog to get a treat? Should that be against the law? The Shrine Circus has a reputation for taking good care of their animals. This is a waste of time and not what we elected our 'lawmakers' to do.

Here's another. A lawmaker here has been trying to pass a bill that a drunk PASSENGER can be charged in an accident if riding in a car. That one has been sent to the circular file thank goodness. The real question is, how long will it remain there? These things have a habit of returning and returning till they get passed.

I've decided we have too many lawmakers. There are things that need to be controlled by a state law. Pyrotechnics for example. Elephants and drunk passengers????? Lets get real.

topsinapod · March 4th, 2003, 06:53 AM

Don't get me wrong here. If animals are being mistreated then the person responsible needs to be held accountable. There is no excuse for abuse. EVER.

DACDjr · March 4th, 2003, 08:59 AM

((((((((( everyone )))))))))))

LiamFan! · March 4th, 2003, 09:29 AM

Actually, the Shriners don't have a very good reputation, and elephants are unpredictable and not easily (or humanely) controlled in a dangerous situation.

http://www.circuses.com/factshrine.html

topsinapod · March 4th, 2003, 01:22 PM

Many animals are not easily controlled in dangerous situations. I'm not sure this qualifies as that.

I picked the Shrine Circus because that's the one that came to mind when I heard about the bill and that's the one that usually comes to town here.

There are very few children that will see something like an elephant unless they are brought for them to see. Heck, the only elephants I've seen have been in the circus when very very young or in a zoo. I doubt many people have seen one any other way either except on television.

Granted, there are bad circus keepers and there are bad zoo keepers. Does this mean that all are bad? My only question is do we need to ban them from appearing here? Is this a serious enough happening to require this law?

Require inspections, require permits, and if abuse is found arrest the bums. But I believe our lawmakers could be making much better use of their time.

sunflower · March 4th, 2003, 01:53 PM

(((((((((((Hugs All)))))))))))

I don't believe in being cruel to
animals. Its bad enough people are cruel to each other.

topsinapod · March 4th, 2003, 05:31 PM

Actually, the issue for me wasn't cruelty to animals. There is NO excuse for anyone being cruel to an animal. All I'm saying is there are existing laws that deal with the issue and we do not need another one that deals with only one animal. We have numerous laws that are outdated and unused, yet we keep writing more and more. Does anyone even know them all?

February 22nd, 2003, 04:24 PM	#916
whoopie Registered User Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: arizona Posts: 18	ok..one moreeeeee thing..LOLOL....the cost of the stop smoking meds, that u need a script for..are more expensive than cigarrettes for a month supply...therefore hard for someone like me to afford them...as much as i want to quit..i cant afford the meds...sounds like an excuse..maybe it is...but, thats my situation...ok..all done...)))

February 22nd, 2003, 05:05 PM	#917
LiamFan! Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 2,048	whoopie, that makes big sense. Our insurance pays for stop smoking programs and weight loss programs, but not sure if it pays for meds in either case. __________________ Love is never defeated, and I could add, the history of Ireland proves it. -- Pope John Paul II

February 23rd, 2003, 02:20 AM	#918
MintyFemme2 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: CA Posts: 571	(((((((((((((((((((((WHOOPIE)))))))))) Umm please don't think for one minute I was meaning single you or other smokers out. I know that smoking cigerattes is an addiction. My main objective was that the goverment can't treat two very different issues the same way! But yet they are. Smokers feel the way the goverment treats them eveytime the light up.. they are charged addtional taxes to supossedly go to the schools. Now if I am reading right the goverment is wanting to take away that very money from the schools in order to eraticate obesity. The extra taxes that people pay for smoking didn't work .. there are still smokers willing to pay the difference. And now they are trying basically the same tactics but reversing them for overweight issue. In my personal opinion the goverment is only looking out for one thing ... their wallets! Razzie don't get me started on the " terrorist" band wagon LOL. Tops thanks for starting an excellent conversation.. as you can tell I don't particulary like the goverments invovlement in our personal affairs. __________________ " Life is what you make of it"

March 1st, 2003, 08:21 PM	#922
MintyFemme2 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: CA Posts: 571	(((((((((((((((TOPS)))))))))) you are so BAAAAAAAAADDDDDDD .. but I wub ya anyhow. Umm I would love to chat wiff ya on Sat mornings at 6 your time BUT it is 3 my time throwing fit because we can't all be on the same time LOL. As for the fireworks thign in RI I agree in the sense that it was the band and bar's responsibilty. But for banning everywhere would ya explain more? Does that mean that a responsible person shouldn't be allowed to do the ground fire works you can get at every corner on the 4th of July? I don't believe any one should be allowed to do the ones that go in the sky unless they are trained to do them. I most cettainly don't think even professionals should do any kind of fire works inside a building or to close to a building.. much less one with alchol . ohh psst I think I am to much for you to handle LMAO __________________ " Life is what you make of it"

March 4th, 2003, 08:59 AM	#926
DACDjr Senior Memeber Join Date: May 2001 Location: Indiana Posts: 864	((((((((( everyone ))))))))))) __________________ KAP-AJS

February 26th, 2003, 01:35 PM	#919
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	I think that both the band and the bar should be held accountable for the disaster in Rhode Island last week. It's my opinion that pyrotechnics should be against the law in all fifty states except when used out of doors or in an arena by professionals that are trained specifically in their use. That's my opinion.

March 1st, 2003, 07:32 AM	#920
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	It's Saturday morning and I'm sitting in Lesbian Space. I plan to sit here every saturday morning and wait for my favorite roomies to come and join me again. We used to chat at this time a lot so I know some of you are up and awake having your morning coffee. I promise to be here by 6am. (Some of you haven't gone to bed yet either.) Hope to see you there!!!!!! The coffee is fresh!

March 1st, 2003, 06:52 PM	#921
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	hmmmm sorry if I chased you away hoggie. Perhaps it's more than you can handle. .

March 4th, 2003, 06:32 AM	#923
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	((((((((((Minty)))))))))))) The laws governing fireworks differ from state to state. In Maine it is illegal to use any form of personal fireworks except the sparklers. NH sells fireworks but they are also illegal for use there as well. As far as in music displays, it appears the band will be facing charges here for violating the permit laws. They played in Bangor two days prior to the tragedy in RI. They never had a permit to use pyrotechnics in their act and it's possible the place they played is also in trouble. For the time being, Maine has banned them till they can create a law because of what happened in RI. Fireworks are dangerous. When I was about 12 years old I almost lost my thumb when a firecracker exploded in my hand. That was enough for me.

March 4th, 2003, 06:50 AM	#924
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	I'm wondering why we elect lawmakers. Have you ever noticed the silliness that some lawmakers partake in? We elect them to hopefully make laws that are needed and that make sense. Why then do they come up with some of the stuff that they decide needs a law? We have a bill that would outlaw Elephants when the Shrine Circus comes to town. Should we also outlaw Lipizzaner Stallions because they are trained to perform? How about training your dog to get a treat? Should that be against the law? The Shrine Circus has a reputation for taking good care of their animals. This is a waste of time and not what we elected our 'lawmakers' to do. Here's another. A lawmaker here has been trying to pass a bill that a drunk PASSENGER can be charged in an accident if riding in a car. That one has been sent to the circular file thank goodness. The real question is, how long will it remain there? These things have a habit of returning and returning till they get passed. I've decided we have too many lawmakers. There are things that need to be controlled by a state law. Pyrotechnics for example. Elephants and drunk passengers????? Lets get real.

March 4th, 2003, 06:53 AM	#925
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	Don't get me wrong here. If animals are being mistreated then the person responsible needs to be held accountable. There is no excuse for abuse. EVER.

March 4th, 2003, 09:29 AM	#927
LiamFan! Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 2,048	Actually, the Shriners don't have a very good reputation, and elephants are unpredictable and not easily (or humanely) controlled in a dangerous situation. http://www.circuses.com/factshrine.html __________________ Love is never defeated, and I could add, the history of Ireland proves it. -- Pope John Paul II

March 4th, 2003, 01:22 PM	#928
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	Many animals are not easily controlled in dangerous situations. I'm not sure this qualifies as that. I picked the Shrine Circus because that's the one that came to mind when I heard about the bill and that's the one that usually comes to town here. There are very few children that will see something like an elephant unless they are brought for them to see. Heck, the only elephants I've seen have been in the circus when very very young or in a zoo. I doubt many people have seen one any other way either except on television. Granted, there are bad circus keepers and there are bad zoo keepers. Does this mean that all are bad? My only question is do we need to ban them from appearing here? Is this a serious enough happening to require this law? Require inspections, require permits, and if abuse is found arrest the bums. But I believe our lawmakers could be making much better use of their time.

March 4th, 2003, 01:53 PM	#929
sunflower member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Ontario Posts: 226	(((((((((((Hugs All))))))))))) I don't believe in being cruel to animals. Its bad enough people are cruel to each other.

March 4th, 2003, 05:31 PM	#930
topsinapod Registered User Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Maine Posts: 120	Actually, the issue for me wasn't cruelty to animals. There is NO excuse for anyone being cruel to an animal. All I'm saying is there are existing laws that deal with the issue and we do not need another one that deals with only one animal. We have numerous laws that are outdated and unused, yet we keep writing more and more. Does anyone even know them all?