CDC launching graphic anti-smoking ad campaign
As recently as the 1980s, the government produced hard-hitting ad campaigns against legitimate social ills like fornication and illegal drug use. But the social left complained. They viciously hated Nancy Reagan’s “Just say no to drugs” campaign because it allegedly ignored how poverty, racism, media (and right wing politics) forced the poor and minorities to take drugs, and such people had no will or ability to resist such things. (Seriously. They went after Bill Cosby for failing to have Theo Huxtable take drugs or Rudy Huxtable get pregnant “because they were black” for the same reason.) And the “promote birth control through sex education instead of opposing abstinence” crowd ended the anti-fornication ads.
The anti-drug campaigns at least continued into the 90s, but were nowhere near as effective and were actually silly because they lacked a clear moral center or imperative (the folks who made them didn’t want to appear to be “judging” drug users the way that the Reagan era ads allegedly did). But the anti-fornication ads became feminist, male-bashing “Don’t let a guy pressure you into having sex, only have sex when YOU ARE READY because a baby might ruin your dreams” propaganda that basically depicted school age boys as the equivalent of rapists courtesy of Donna Shalala (who by the way as president of the University of Wisconsin and Miami has done NOTHING to curtail the date rape culture that exists on BOTH campuses) and then disappeared altogether.
And now, what do we have to replace the anti-illegal drug and anti-fornication campaigns? Campaigns against smoking and obesity. They claim that it is about reducing behaviors that drive up health care costs (you know, ObamaCare). But it is actually about the government redefining morality. While a good fundamentalist can make a case against smoking, and the Bible defines gluttony as a sin, in the eyes of most people those aren’t key points of Christian morality. Fornication most definitely is, and so is use of hard illegal drugs (if for nothing other than the subculture that glorifies it). Ditching the campaigns against fornication and hard drugs and replacing them with smoking and obesity campaigns is nothing more than the government replacing Biblical morality with its own. The Bible says that fornication is wrong, we say it is OK and we spend billions each year in public schools on sex education (which isn’t just limited to the specific sex ed curriculum by the way, but is often integrated into biology, health, PE, and social science classes as well) telling people that fornication is fine. The Bible says nothing about smoking, rarely mentions gluttony (and technically all obesity is not the result of gluttony anyway) but WE THE PEOPLE are going to define these as sins OURSELVES based on our own authority (and a desire to reject Biblical authority and replace it with our own).
It is nothing less than the “tower of Babel” mentality. Whenever I see an anti-smoking ad on TV or drive by one of the MANY anti-obesity billboards, I actually get nostalgic for the ads in the 1980s that attacked far more serious problems, like getting strung out on cocaine and heroin, or having several kids by the age of 21 - and with multiple partners at that - and coming down with syphilis/gonorrhea/herpes/chlamydia/hepatitis (a lot of the better anti-fornication campaigns were pre-AIDS, and the AIDS issue ironically was the main thing used by the left to END the government’s official public policy position of opposing juvenile fornication and adult promiscuity) for your troubles.
I am generally not a “religious right/culture war” type because a lot of that is based on a fictional view of American history promoted by the David Barton types, but this IS an area where one can clearly see that the government is cultivating anti-Christ thinking among the populace.
The anti-drug campaigns at least continued into the 90s, but were nowhere near as effective and were actually silly because they lacked a clear moral center or imperative (the folks who made them didn’t want to appear to be “judging” drug users the way that the Reagan era ads allegedly did). But the anti-fornication ads became feminist, male-bashing “Don’t let a guy pressure you into having sex, only have sex when YOU ARE READY because a baby might ruin your dreams” propaganda that basically depicted school age boys as the equivalent of rapists courtesy of Donna Shalala (who by the way as president of the University of Wisconsin and Miami has done NOTHING to curtail the date rape culture that exists on BOTH campuses) and then disappeared altogether.
And now, what do we have to replace the anti-illegal drug and anti-fornication campaigns? Campaigns against smoking and obesity. They claim that it is about reducing behaviors that drive up health care costs (you know, ObamaCare). But it is actually about the government redefining morality. While a good fundamentalist can make a case against smoking, and the Bible defines gluttony as a sin, in the eyes of most people those aren’t key points of Christian morality. Fornication most definitely is, and so is use of hard illegal drugs (if for nothing other than the subculture that glorifies it). Ditching the campaigns against fornication and hard drugs and replacing them with smoking and obesity campaigns is nothing more than the government replacing Biblical morality with its own. The Bible says that fornication is wrong, we say it is OK and we spend billions each year in public schools on sex education (which isn’t just limited to the specific sex ed curriculum by the way, but is often integrated into biology, health, PE, and social science classes as well) telling people that fornication is fine. The Bible says nothing about smoking, rarely mentions gluttony (and technically all obesity is not the result of gluttony anyway) but WE THE PEOPLE are going to define these as sins OURSELVES based on our own authority (and a desire to reject Biblical authority and replace it with our own).
It is nothing less than the “tower of Babel” mentality. Whenever I see an anti-smoking ad on TV or drive by one of the MANY anti-obesity billboards, I actually get nostalgic for the ads in the 1980s that attacked far more serious problems, like getting strung out on cocaine and heroin, or having several kids by the age of 21 - and with multiple partners at that - and coming down with syphilis/gonorrhea/herpes/chlamydia/hepatitis (a lot of the better anti-fornication campaigns were pre-AIDS, and the AIDS issue ironically was the main thing used by the left to END the government’s official public policy position of opposing juvenile fornication and adult promiscuity) for your troubles.
I am generally not a “religious right/culture war” type because a lot of that is based on a fictional view of American history promoted by the David Barton types, but this IS an area where one can clearly see that the government is cultivating anti-Christ thinking among the populace.
Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura http://healtheland.wordpress.com
Using tacky, craven appeals to lust to sell products is not by any means a new thing.
Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura http://healtheland.wordpress.com
First of all I used to smoke (in college).
- Back then: Students smoked in class. The profs smoked in class (University of Cincinnati …. 1967)
- On the job, the majority of people smoked (in the office … in the car). One was a smoker if even one didn’t smoke!
- At my company they finally banned indoor smoking in about 1992. They still had a smoking area of the break area for a number of years
- I love the smell of unburned tobacco (visit a tobacco shop sometime!) and ground coffee
- Here in Minnesota coworkers gather outside our building in sub-zero temps to smoke.
- No amount of anti-tobacco ads … no matter how direct or graphic … will deter those who seriously want to smoke
- And frankly the government is addicted to tobacco taxes
I was thinking more along the lines of [url] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iE7ukc7MV-k
[Jim Peet] First of all I used to smoke (in college).Forget the smell of a tobacco shop. I have smelled tobacco plants growing on farms (I grew up in the rural southeast) and can attest to the outstanding smell. But as someone who grew up with asthma - and my condition was getting pretty serious until God healed it during a session of family prayer a few years ago - I have no desire to be anywhere near burning tobacco, as some of my worst bouts of illness came as a result of being near someone smoking for too long. Doesn’t make smoking (or dipping or chewing) the stuff a sin, but I am not sad to see the practice curtailed, as being in the university and workplace environments that you were in would have literally been hazardous to my health.
- Back then: Students smoked in class. The profs smoked in class (University of Cincinnati …. 1967)
- On the job, the majority of people smoked (in the office … in the car). One was a smoker if even one didn’t smoke!
- At my company they finally banned indoor smoking in about 1992. They still had a smoking area of the break area for a number of years
- I love the smell of unburned tobacco (visit a tobacco shop sometime!) and ground coffee
- Here in Minnesota coworkers gather outside our building in sub-zero temps to smoke.
- No amount of anti-tobacco ads … no matter how direct or graphic … will deter those who seriously want to smoke
- And frankly the government is addicted to tobacco taxes
The government being addicted to ANY taxes is merely an argument for the Ron Paul small government appreciators like myself (Paul’s support of homosexuality notwithstanding, which is why I cannot bring myself to actually pull the lever for the guy). The fact that not even the death penalty deters all murderers is not a sufficient justification for either making murder legal or for banning the death penalty. And incidentally, I should point out that the Reagan era “Just Say No” campaign DID result in a reduction in the use of illegal drugs; the media just never admitted it for their own political and ideological reasons. If a similar reduction in smoking does not occur, the main reason will be the fact that smoking is not illegal, nor is it considered to be sinful or immoral by most people. Thus, people aren’t going to take the government’s “double-minded” stance towards it seriously.
I am not “for” smoking as much as I am AGAINST the government’s attempt to reject Biblical morality and create its own set of values in its place. Fornication, homosexuality, abortion etc. are OK, as are wars for nation-building “democracy spreading” political - and economic - purposes totally unrelated to our own security. But obesity? Smoking? “Mistreating” animals? “Harming” the environment (which buying a large house or car includes)? Having too many children? Failing to be multi-cultural and pluralistic? Bad! Wrong! Evil! These folks are creating their own list of “sins” to replace those in the Bible, and what is more are far more coercive about enforcing their morality than John Calvin’s Geneva ever was.
Solo Christo, Soli Deo Gloria, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Sola Scriptura http://healtheland.wordpress.com
Few things smell better than someone else smoking a pipe. Very occasionally I do my part to make other people feel better. ;-)
Discussion