Quoting Jerome & Elizabeth Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>:
"Not everything is a matter of personal opinion. For instance, after raging debate for several decades, it's now almost universally accepted that smoking is extremely detrimental to one's health,"
1. Do you have research to back that up? 2. Does the research differentiate between dried and rolled tobacco as opposed
to chemically processed tobacco?
Ever wonder why the cancer incidence in tobacco smoking countries with simple dry and roll is much less as opposed to those countries where tobacco is chemically processed? Kinda parallels our food problem...but of course other variables get in the way - regular sun exposure - nomadic activity - and the fact that heart disease and cancer are diseases of old age.
"while with much less debate it is accepted that regular exercise, including riding classic bilkes, is very beneficial to one's health. Leaders of a society, whether government officials or others, or just ordinary citizens, should encourage others to engage in beneficial activities and to refrain from harmful ones. Note I say encourage and discourage, not dictate or forbid."
"Should" before encourage...careful there... =8-)
"One may however be justifed in forbidding certain conduct when it pertains to minors or damages others. Thus it is illegal in most places for minors to buy or use cigarettes or for adults to sell them to minors."
I can understand why adults can't sell cigarettes to minors - they're not their
kids. But what if a parent provides a signed note giving permission for the minor to purchase cigarettes? What grounds is the State arguing on to prohibit
that? Are there any dominoes in the State's equation?
"Now in regard to bicycling versus driving, bicycling can be demonstrated to provide many benefits, including enhancing personal health and reducing traffic and parking congestion, and I have yet to see anyone demonstrate anything harmful about bicycling."
1. Knee problems. 2. Neck and back problems. 3. Same lack of protection as a motorcyclist in a collision with a car, barrier
or wall - higher incidence of injury and death. 4. Suspected reduction in fertility in highly active male cyclists. 5. Tires require oil for production. 6. Steels, alloys, and other material produced for bicycles create toxic byproducts that must be properly disposed of. 7. The recycling of #6 creates additional toxic waste as a byproduct. 8. The cadium, mercury, copper and glues used in bonding material end up in water supply.
"On the other hand I agree that global warming has become too Politically Correct and is not yet definitively proven and that many of the models of global climate change are still suspect."
I'll go out on a limb and say: I'll take global warming any day over global cooling. Global warming = good for us. Global cooling = good for the fishes. (Even the penguins might panic...)
"Nevertheless, I think any reasonable person would concede that burning fossil fuels does the environment no particular good and may well finally be proven to do it substantial harm. If that harm is proven and is proven to be severe and immediate, as has now been proven about smoking, then mandatory actions banning or restricting driving will not only be justified but ethically obligatory. No one, after all, has any "right" to engage in actions that do substantial harm to others, and sufficient damage to the environment harms essentially everyone."
How about we ban forest fires right here and now? Anyone here who thinks of themselves as a global citizen in favor of invading China and shutting down their coal mine fires - raise your hands. (Avoid bombing the bicycle factories
please...) In the meantime, simply protecting the right to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness suits me fine - until of course I intrude
on my neighbor's right to do the same. Why a ban - when you have a course of action laid out already?
"Until the models can be proven (or disproven) it still makes sense to encourage (not dictate) demonstrably beneficial activities and discourage (not ban) activities which significant evidence suggests may be harmful to others. Now like it or not, it is society, not the individual, which decides what is proven or not proven, what benefit or harm is substantial or not, and what harm from a product like petroleum we will accept in exchange for its advantages. Democracy and "freedom" do not mean that everyone is entitled to do exactly as he pleases, but that everyone is entitled to participate in socially made decisions, and that if he is in the minority, he should be compelled to comply only where his compliance substantially benefits others or his refusal substantially harms others."
1. Define society. (Be careful - too many people over define it...) 2. I never used the word "Democracy". 3. Never said everyone is entitled to do as one pleases...read my posts more carefully... 4. Compelled how? Careful there...
"The great thing about cycling is that one has absolutely no need to agonize about it. Besides the inherent enjoyment of the activity itself, one can also "feel good" about getting exercise, saving money, maintaining and repairing one's own vehicle, reducing congestion, and yes, quite likely improving the environment. Two of the early advocates of cycling in post-WWII America were Dr. Clifford Graves, and Dr Paul Dudley White, President Eisenhower's physician. Those who started cycling when many of us did remember that these guys were widely quoted in the bicycle publications of the time, which have now become classics. I remeber a quote from one of them to the effect that cycling was to travel through one's own country in the fresh air, giving no offense of any kind to one's fellow citizens. That's just as vaild an aspiration today as it was back then."
I guess I've persuaded you...that's been my point all along:
THERE IS NO NEED WHATSOEVER TO WRAP CYCLING IN A BILL OF GOOD LOOSELY TERMED HERE AS "CULTURE".
I'll say it again, when I run into people wrapping bicyling in a "culture" of some kind - I find myself thinking: "Why are they riding a bicycle?" It simply makes no sense whatsoever...it must be about something other than liking
bicycles or liking to ride bicycles, etc. If it's emotional or political baggage - it harms the cause of those who support cycling in MY HONEST OPINION.
"The classic bicycle hobby isn't just about hoarding these things or hanging them on the wall. More than anything it should be about riding them. Now part of the fun of riding classic bikes is to experience, and help preserve, a little piece of history. But much of the fun is the same as that of riding any bicycle, and that includes not only the immediate personal enjoyment, but also the enjoyment of the fact that one is doing something beneficial both for oneself and others. If enjoying doing things beneficial to others as well as myself makes me a communist or a "phony" conservative, then I don't want to be a "true" conservative, at least not by your definition."
That last sentence - you used a sleight of hand. Each time I've quoted your problemtic statement from way back in this thread - I quoted it exactly as written. I made no changes. I then pointed out how the implication of your statement was typicaly those who feel a need to make their view a matter of public policy to be forced upon others...Care to correct that last sentence above? Or are you going to stick with the sleight of hand?
Robert Shackelford San Jose, CA USA
Regards
Jerry Moos In that bastion of Communist subversion, Big Spring, Texas, USA
> --- On Thu, 12/18/08, @mrrabbit.net <mrrabbit@mrrabbit.net> wrote:
>
> From: mrrabbit@mrrabbit.net <mrrabbit@mrrabbit.net>
> Subject: Re: [CR]18 Way to Know You Have Bike Culture
> To: jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net
> Cc: "Amir Avitzur" <walawalaoxenfree@gmail.com>, "ternst" <ternst1@cox.net>,
> classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 1:54 PM
>
> I'll thought I'd strip out something from the commentary below that I
> think
> serves as a perfect example of what I think underlies so many aspects
> of "bicycle culture" and "bicycling advocacy" that results
> in friction or the
> turning off of others to cycling and the cycling community:
>
>
> "If bikes are to become more widely used in America, and I think it is
> highly
> desirable that they should, we must develop a culture that sees cycling a
> desirable, healthy, and socially responsible, all of which are true IMHO."
>
>
> We already have a culture in America called "American Culture" that
> encompasses
>
> the following:
>
> 1. An appreciation for technological development and change including the
> field of transportation is which bicycles are an existing and viable option.
>
> 2. A recognition of the individual right to determine for oneself what is
> desireable or not.
>
> 3. A recognition of the individual right to determine for oneself what is
> healthy or not - one man's cup of tea isn't necessarily another's.
>
> 4. A recognition of the rule of law, and a jury's right to determine when
> one
> individual has violated another individual's right to privacy, property,
> etc.
>
> (Have to admit they are under attack lately...)
>
> Socially responsible? Usually when I hear that phrase it comes from the
> mouth
> of a socialist or communist who want to IMPOSE their view as policy and deny
> to
>
> others the same. Lately they have come from phony conservatives in sheeps
> clothing.
>
> If you want to persuade...great! Go for it...and respect the rights of those
>
> who aren't persuaded. Your loaded statement doesn't argue for
> persuasion - but
>
> rather imposition wrapped in an easy to swallow pill coating.
>
> I'll take my own thank you...
>
> =8-)
>
> Robert Shackelford
> San Jose, CA USA
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Jerome & Elizabeth Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>:
>
> > I agree with Ted. I found this clever and amusing also, and the
> attiutude
> > towards motorists was one of good-natured condescension, not the active
> and
> > occasionally violent hostility one sometimes sees among the most extreme
> > bicycle activists in the US.
> >
> > If bikes are to become more widely used in America, and I think it is
> highly
> > desirable that they should, we must develop a culture that sees cycling a
> > desirable, healthy, and socially responsible, all of which are true
> IMHO.
> > Evidently Denmark already possesses such a culture, and they should be
> > admired for that. I don't see that they are demonizing motorists,
> indeed one
> > of the items mentioned leaving the car parked while cycling to work,
> meaning
> > they feel no guilt about owning an automobile.
> >
> > I'm hardly an anti-car fanatic, and indeed I work at an oil refinery
> and have
> > worked in refineries most of my life. I see no contradiction in using
> > petroleum and automobiles where they are really needed or highly
> beneficial,
> > while using bicycles (or walking or mass transport) whenever we can. I
> do
> > find it a bit ironic to commute by cycle to work at a refinery, but ironic
> in
> > a pleasant way. I think Denmark and some other European countries have a
> > healthier balance of auto use with its alternatives than we do in America,
> > and I think we would do well to learn from them. A national belief in
> the
> > superiority of every single aspect of one's own culture is not a sign
> of
> > strength, but a fatal weakness that will eventually destroy any society.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jerry Moos
> > Big Spring, Texas, USA
> >
> >
> >
> > --- On Thu, 12/18/08, ternst <ternst1@cox.net> wrote:
> >
> > From: ternst <ternst1@cox.net>
> > Subject: Re: [CR]18 Way to Know You Have Bike Culture
> > To: mrrabbit@mrrabbit.net, "Amir Avitzur"
> <walawalaoxenfree@gmail.com>
> > Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> > Date: Thursday, December 18, 2008, 12:28 PM
> >
> > Let's not take this too personal or seriously.
> > I chuckled a little with the actuality as it is in Denmark, coupled with
> > some tongue in cheek.
> > To understand it from THEIR society and how they view it, one has to have
> > been there, stayed a while, and ridden bikes around the towns and
> > countryside.
> > I have done so.
> > As as a country we have been so big and dominant so long we have tended to
>
> > be more isolationist and become too provincial in many ways, so we
> don't
> > really "get it", witness our standing in the world today when it
> > comes to
> > giving other countries respect, dignity, and understanding.
> > In many countries the bike is THE MODE of transport. We are a car
> dominated
> > society.
> > Bike people here may be in some facets of our sport more a CULT than an
> > actual CULTURE!
> > It's always important to recognize and understand the difference.
> > Ride your bike and enjoy! To hell with the rest! Loosen up those legs and
> > your brain.
> > Ride and let ride.
> > Ted Ernst
> > Palos Verdes Estates
> > CA USA
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <mrrabbit@mrrabbit.net>
> > To: "Amir Avitzur" <walawalaoxenfree@gmail.com>
> > Cc: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2008 9:37 AM
> > Subject: Re: [CR]18 Way to Know You Have Bike Culture
> >
> >
> > > Honestly, I didn't find it cute...nor on topic. Actually, I
> thought
> > every
> > > item
> > >
> > > was contrived...and sensed an anti-car, anti-conservative,
> > > anti-libertarian
> > > agenda in it as well.
> > >
> > > One though was right on spot: "I just ride."
> > >
> > > Seriously, if someone feels the need to subscribe to some kind of
> > > "culture" as
> > > part of riding on or working with bicycles - I have to question why
> they
> > > are on
> > >
> > > a bike in the first place.
> > >
> > > Is it possible that it's because they have to, and hate it, and
> > suscribing
> > > to
> > > a "culture" is their way of dealing with it. Maybe such
> > cyclists really
> > > are
> > > envious of motorists? Jealous? Debate away...I have better things
> to
> > > do...
> > >
> > > In my case, I like bicycles. I like cars. I just ride and drive
> 'em.
> >
> > > And
> > > even when I can't afford a car, big deal. I just get on with
> it...
> > >
> > > Even though I don't really listen much to Dr. Laura, one time I
> did
> > listen
> > > in
> > > when she made a point that I think might just fit right in here...
> > >
> > >
> > > "There are two kinds of women. There are those who hate men.
> > Complain
> > > about
> > > men. Attack men. Whine about this and that and equality outside and
> in
> > > the
> > > home...etc...and spend their life being miserable. Then there are
> those
> > > women
> > >
> > > who understand that men are born to women, raised by women, and
> married to
> > > women...and they use that power wisely."
> > >
> > >
> > > Maybe some cyclists out there need to think about the above and apply
> it
> > > to
> > > their cycling life, their relationship with motorists, etc...and give
> it
> > > some
> > > more thought.
> > >
> > > =8-)
> > >
> > > Robert Shackelford
> > > San Jose, CA USA
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Quoting Amir Avitzur <walawalaoxenfree@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > >> This is cute and, maybe even, on topic.
> > >>
> > >>
> http://www.copenhagenize.com/
> > > bicycle.html
> > >>
> > >> Happy Holidays
> > >>
> > >> Amir Avitzur
> > >> R"G Israel
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message
> has
> > been
> > >> saved in a permanent database.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has
> been
> > > saved in a permanent database.
> > > _______________________________________________
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has been
> > saved in a permanent database.
>
>
>
>
> --
> PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has been
> saved in a permanent database.
>
>
>
> --
> PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has been
> saved in a permanent database.
--
PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has been
saved in a permanent database.