SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
757 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Losing Choice in the city

First I am not a froi gras eater.....I like duck, but froi gras IMHO is kind of strange tasting.....maybe I have not had good froi gras...whatever

Secondly I am not a smoker, that is I do not smoke cigarettes, I do occasionally like to have a cigar w/ a guiness or a scotch


Soon I will not be able to either in Chicago Restaurants or bars..........this impinging on choice of what is otherwise a legal activity bothers me.

The froi gras thing is patently silly

The smoking ban thing is annoying.....though I add I have no problem what so ever w/ smoke free restaurants and bars....in fact I am all for them....just let the owner make the call.....his customers will let him know if his choice was wise or not w/ their dolllars

As for the objections surrouding the health concerns concenring exposure to second hand smoke, essentially if there are smoke-free alternatives people can chose to work in such a place or work in a place that allows smoking.....

people who don't like smoke can go to the smoke free joints and vice versa
I don't know if any of this type of stuff affects the convention business, but I could see how it could in the future......leaving conventioneers to chose other spots where they are more free from local ordinaces interfering w/ generally social and legal activity

thoughts....lets keep it civil :)



foie gras artcle below



http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0604270225apr27,1,4786122.story?coll=chi-news-hed







chicagotribune.com >> Business
Sacre bleu! No foie gras for you

By Bob Secter
Tribune staff reporter
Published April 27, 2006

Chalk up another first for Chicago, which on Wednesday became the nation's only combined nuclear- and foie gras-free zone.

After passing a sweeping ban on public smoking in December, the City Council has now followed up with a more exclusive bit of lifestyle policing. On a voice vote, aldermen outlawed the sale of the fatty delicacy made from goose or duck liver, settling a months-long culinary battle between goose huggers and gastronomes. (Aldermen declared the city a nuclear-free zone in 1986.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
70 Posts
I work out regularly, and eat healthy, but I also enjoy the occasional cigar. If I don't feel like being around cigarette smoke, I would simply stay away from a corner bar or irish pub. The ban on smoking in restaraunts I understand, but bars?? It's a bar for Christ's sake, not a health club!!! :bash:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
838 Posts
I agree for the most part. I would never smoke, but that's just my choice, and everyone else has that choice too. Or at least, they should. I understand that second-hand smoke is dangerous, but people should have the right to smoke if they want to. No one said that non-smokers have to go to smoke-filled bars and restaurants, so I don't think there should be a law against it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,162 Posts
Yeah, City Council has been in full ban mode recently (on the "ban" wagon?)
I'd have been happier if they'd just regulated how the critters are raised, within Chicago city limits. What we have instead is a feel-good restriction of symbolic value only.

Also, I'm not quite clear on where Council gets this power - Chicago's smoking ban, like that goofy NJ ban of a few years ago on runny eggs (since repealed), addresses public health & safety; the foie gras ban addresses the health, safety & welfare of...international geese. As cruel as force-feeding may be to the animal, the end product is perfectly safe for people to eat.

I'm with Daley here - we've more immediate concerns - and I generally don't like the use of bans to affect personal behavior, especially when the activity isn't a danger to oneself & to others, even when the behavior is repugnant. Otherwise, City Council is just legislating personal morality, and I don't think that is any of their business.

All of this in Chicago, a city which prospered for years by designing ingenious and inhumane new ways to slaughter livestock! ;)
 

·
born again cyclist
Joined
·
3,671 Posts
i agree. all of this regressive morality legislation is NOT the direction we should be moving in. fortunately, this city being the cesspool of corruption that it is, i'm quite confident that one will still be able to eat foi gras in a restaurant and smoke a cigar afterwards without too much trouble. just gotta pay the right people.

does anyone remember how well prohibition went over in this town?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,853 Posts
thank god we are finally catching up with newyork and LA
and becoming civilized,

bip wup,
they just need smoking licenses and to not give out too many
and then the smokers can all congregate at certain locations,

and name the hang out joints things like
Cancer sticks
or Tombstones
or Coffin Nails,
and make them gothic and stuff,


and i hope to god that you pushed the o button too long
instead of mispelling losing
i find it to be incredible that anyone could
get confused with loose and lose
they are two different words!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,850 Posts
Steely Dan said:
i agree. all of this regressive morality legislation is NOT the direction we should be moving in. fortunately, this city being the cesspool of corruption that it is, i'm quite confident that one will still be able to eat foi gras in a restaurant and smoke a cigar afterwards without too much trouble. just gotta pay the right people.

does anyone remember how well prohibition went over in this town?
Maybe the Outfit will get in on the froi gras racket.
 

·
Expert
Joined
·
6,905 Posts
http://www.mi6.co.uk/news/index.php?itemid=3612

A new expose on the crude methods used to force feed ducks and geese for pate delicacy foie gras, narrated by former James Bond star Sir Roger Moore, has prompted Chicago, Illinois, officials to ban the product.

Activists People For The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) staged a screening of the harrowing video, featuring birds being force-fed with pipes to fatten their livers, for Chicago's city councillors, who have since opted to ban the sale of the delicacy.

It's the second major PETA victory in the fight to make the selling of foie gras illegal in the US - Governor Anrold Schwarzenegger banned all sales of the pate in California last year (05).

PETA bosses now have their sites set on New York, where the only two farms left that produce the liver pate are located.


PETA chief Dan Mathews says, "Investigations into foie gras farms in the US and Europe have revealed sick, dead, and dying animals, some with holes in their necks from pipe injuries and ducks with bloody beaks and their wings twisted together jammed into wire cages."
^Sounds like good eatin' :goodbye:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
757 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
mohammed wong said:
thank god we are finally catching up with newyork and LA
and becoming civilized,

bip wup,
they just need smoking licenses and to not give out too many
and then the smokers can all congregate at certain locations,

and name the hang out joints things like
Cancer sticks
or Tombstones
or Coffin Nails,
and make them gothic and stuff,


and i hope to god that you pushed the o button too long
instead of mispelling losing
i find it to be incredible that anyone could
get confused with loose and lose
they are two different words!

perhaps you should turn your keen insight to the title above the first post......yes I hit the 'o' key toooooo looong
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
838 Posts
Pertaining to spyguys's post, I could see why these methods would concern some people and why I also see the unethical side of it, but this is so inconsistent. The living conditions for those birds are terrible, yes, but its really no different for any other animals. If they banned foie gras, then why haven't they banned bacon, pork, hamburgers, steak, etc.? It's not like those animals are treated any better, its just that people shouted louder in this case.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,850 Posts
XCRunner said:
Pertaining to spyguys's post, I could see why these methods would concern some people and why I also see the unethical side of it, but this is so inconsistent. The living conditions for those birds are terrible, yes, but its really no different for any other animals. If they banned foie gras, then why haven't they banned bacon, pork, hamburgers, steak, etc.? It's not like those animals are treated any better, its just that people shouted louder in this case.
Well, do they try to make pigs and cows more delicious by feeding them in a way that is very painful to them while they are still alive? If so, that's news to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,162 Posts
UrbanSophist said:
Well, do they try to make pigs and cows more delicious by feeding them in a way that is very painful to them while they are still alive? If so, that's news to me.
No - but if they are young cows, they might have their front legs amputated, to keep the meat tender & tasty; if they are pigs, they are bled slowly & painfully, to keep the meat tasty; if they are turkeys or chickens, they are pumped full of growth hormones, to increase the tasty breast meat, and are often not able to walk properly because of the body mass imbalance. Then there is the debeaking, though this doesn't really affect the quality of the meat.....

As a culture, we've grown so distant form the farm & slaughterhouse - meat could be harvested from trees, for all we see of the original animal once it has been disassembled & packaged.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,850 Posts
wrabbit said:
No - but if they are young cows, they might have their front legs amputated, to keep the meat tender & tasty; if they are pigs, they are bled slowly & painfully, to keep the meat tasty; if they are turkeys or chickens, they are pumped full of growth hormones, to increase the tasty breast meat, and are often not able to walk properly because of the body mass imbalance. Then there is the debeaking, though this doesn't really affect the quality of the meat.....

As a culture, we've grown so distant form the farm & slaughterhouse - meat could be harvested from trees, for all we see of the original animal once it has been disassembled & packaged.
Wow. I really need to read up on all this. Any suggested sources?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
721 Posts
Smoking is not a right. It isn't protected. Revenue will be going up for the vast majority of buisnesses.

Smoking should not be allowed anywhere in public.

And I really don't want to go down the road of personal rights right now........bigger personal rights issues in this city to tackle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Mayor Richard Daley, who has confessed to an occasional foie gras nibble, scoffed at the council's priorities. "We have issues with children being killed," the mayor said.

I am glad that Daley agrees with me here, he seems to be alot like me in having a low tolerance for petty issues such as this. We need to focus on important breed and butter issues and not touchy feely things like this.

At a council committee hearing, actress and animal rights activist Loretta Swit likened force-feeding to the torture of Iraqis at the Abu Ghraib prison.

Its people like this that give liberals a bad name. I mean come on lady I dont like Bush and question alot of his policies but I doubt Iraqis at Abu Ghraib are being force fed with tubes until their livers are ten times their normal size and then served as a delicacy for Bush and Cheney for their lunch meetings :| .
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
757 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Chicago3rd said:
Smoking is not a right. It isn't protected. Revenue will be going up for the vast majority of buisnesses.

Smoking should not be allowed anywhere in public.

And I really don't want to go down the road of personal rights right now........bigger personal rights issues in this city to tackle.
If you want to ban smoking in public fine ban it in public.....ie cta buses, trains, sidewalks, parks, government buildings. These are public places. In the case of CTA a quasi-governmental institution acting on behalf of the public. In the case of Government buildings, the actual government who acts in the stead of the public anyhow.


Bars, restaurants are not public places, they are privately owned places that have a license to serve liquour , food etc. They are in no way public places, other than that a few members of the public chose to patronize them.

Now, that being said as I earlier stated, I am all for smoke-free restaurants, and smoke-free bars, just let the owner make the call......I don't see why the prohibitionists so object other than it reveals their un-stated goal of criminalizing smoking in general.

As for it (smoking) not being a right you are right. Just as their is no right to eat fatty foods, or drink, etc. Yes, I am aware of the objection that well smoking creates 2nd hand-smoke....etc, eating a triple-swiss/cheddar-bacon burgher does not, nor does drinking my single malt or a pint of guiness, however there are unseen costs related to these beahviors as well; some of which may deleteriously affect a 3rd parties health.

Anyhow, on this forum noone is going to change a person from one side of that argument to another....at least I doubt it.

Basically, I created this thread just to get a sense of what people think of the city's apparent love affair w/ banning personal choice / behavior.....not to debate whether there exists a 'right' to smoke
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Top