Except that burnt food is the one risk factor that the WHO’s press release on the subject does not highlight. They would presumably think that you’re rather missing the point.
AM I MY AMERICAN BROTHER’S KEEPER?
Is it our duty to interfere if we see a wrong being done? The question of duty is one that can be decided fully only by each individual himself. There is no code of laws or table of rules under which we all must act. Each man is the law unto himself. No other individual may violate the law of that man. For me it may be evil. I am not wise enough to know what it is for another. My duty is clear in many places, but in the performing of it I may neither act as a judge or hold animosity, anger, or disgust.
Were a man to abuse an animal, surely I must interfere to prevent suffering to the helpless, dumb and weak, for so we are ajoined. This done, my duty lies in helping my brother and sister, even though they be poor Americans, lost to us in Montana, Florida, or Brockton, Massachusetts [shoe city]?
My aim is to find Wisdom, and my duty, to do away with ignorance wherever it is encountered. It is my duty to prevent suffering or sorrow for either wife or child, and also to prevent greater misery - perhaps murder. They are human beings - even if they are Americans, they are human too just like us. This done, my duty lies toward the man, not in condemnation, but to seeking the cause that makes him unwise. If men steal, lie, cheat, betray the innocent or are betrayed by the knowing , my duty lies in preventing harm to others, If i can i should prevent sorrow and anguish, pain and want,and misery, suicide or bloodshed, even if these acts are wildly committed in Montana, Florida, and Massachusetts.
My duty lies in a desire to help all men, not because men’s actions seem to me wrong or their courses evil.How then may I say this or that man is evil, this or that thing is wrong? The effects may to me seem evil. But are they evil in Florida, Montana, or Massachusetts, that is the question.
It is quite generally thought that duty means the performance of a series of acts which others think I ought to perform, whereas, it more truly means the performance of actions by me which I know are good for others, even if those poor souls are trapped in Montana, Florida, or Brockton, Massachusetts or the USA.
It would be quite dangerous for me to take upon myself the duty of another, either because he told me it was good, or that it was duty. If I attempt to do another’s duty, a duty that was not given me. I am a thief, taking that which does not belong to me. My brother consenting thereto becomes an idler, fails to comprehend the lesson, shifts the responsibility, and between us we accomplish nothing. Yes, even if I am British and the other is some poor demented American living in the 3 states mentioned. Sorry APB do not know your location.
We are instructed to do good. We are enjoined to do good where it is safe. Not safe for ourselves, but safe for the objects toward which our duty points. Often we behold beings suffering great wrong. Our emotions prompt us to rush forward and in some way prevent the continuance of it. Still the wise man knows it is not safe. For him who seeks the upward way there is a duty to others, even if they are American.
He who desires to abandon his duty. Did he mean that we must sit idly by while ignorance let slip the dogs of pain, anguish, suffering, want and murder runriot, surely this cannot be true. Did he mean that while my fellow men suffer torture, wrong or abuse, that I sit silently a looker-on while that which is called evil works its will upon others. Men think that all things which are disagreeable to them, are evil. Perhaps it is evil, but so long as it affects one’s-self only, it is no great matter. It is our duty to live, and accept uncomplainingly our lives even if we live in Montana, Florida, or Brockton, Massachusetts. [Shoe City] or are called unkindly perhaps APB.
TRUE -BRIT. LEEDS. HOPE YOU LOT ENJOY IT. [BOB]
You mean like assuming a link exists between burnt food and cancer without evidence thus distracting from efforts to find real, identifiable, preventable causes? Look, I would love to see a comprehensive list of the causes of cancer with a series of actions to take to minimize the risk, but as long as you remain focused on a cause which has little evidence to support it, you’re going to waste valuable limited resources that could be better used for other avenues of investigation.
How kind of you to worry for me. I do wonder what caused her cancer. I would love to prevent someone else from going through what she’s gone through. The difference between you and I is that I’m not going to just assume that I know and go charging off shouting “The sky is falling, the sky is falling” without some evidence that the sky is actually falling.
Dealt with admirably by APB.
Personal jab aside, I don’t expect you to get it right all the time. I do expect that when you are shown evidence that you’re wrong, you should admit that.
This I simply don’t believe. I would have see a cite (heh!) that the Brit Police didn’t ask to see the evidence collected against those 12 men.
No, not answers - results. All that means is that roughly 1.27 million web pages contain the text “smoke” and the text “cancer”. I have to believe that at this point you are deliberately avoiding acknowledging this. The text “burnt food does not under any circumstances ever cause cancer or increase cancer risk” would show up in your 269K results, but that doesn’t mean much when you’re trying to prove that burnt food causes cancer. You can’t make it true by repeating it over and over again.
No, see, that’s not how it works. You have made the claim, you have to prove it.
As for your soliloquy on being your American brother’s keeper, impressive. Not relevant to the discussion at hand, but impressive.
QUOTE ZACKALWE ‘‘As for your soliloquy on being your American brother’s keeper, impressive. Not relevant to the discussion at hand, but impressive’’.
At last, another convert, brother Zebediah as seen the light. [ Iv’e given up trying to spell Zakalwe]
Brother Z, the point you have not given enough consideration too is that over the years, the FBI information to Scotland Yard is trustworthy, reliable, and we Brits rely on it. In turn your own Law Enforcement Officers know they can rely on us to be just has careful. If we get a message from the FBI saying Muslim Mohammed has been identified by an informant, by an FBI Police tap as someone worth pulling in, then Mohammed is going to be picked up or watched. He will be watched, his phone tapped, he will be followed. Occasionally your side and ours gets it wrong, yesterday we pulled in twelve following an FBI tip off. One turns out to be Al Quedas top man in Europe. I feel its safe to claim that all the Police inteview statements will be read and reread by FBI Agents based in London. In turn we have teams of Special Branch Officers in Washington, DC who look at all the incoming and outgoing signals and messages. We are a team on this issue.
Like it or not, Britain is Americas No 1 friend. We respect our link with America,
and so you have Brit troops in Iraq. No false friendship here, we went in. You will not appreciate what a commotion 9-11 caused here. I knew it would be war and that we were going in when the Queen for the very 1st time ever, did something no Monarch must ever do - she summonsed the Bandmaster and band of the Guards Regiment and she ordered played in the yard in front of Buckingham Palace the Stars and Stripes. That was a British 9 -11 declaration of war. At the same time our naval fleet took up position/s in the Middle East Arabian Peninsula.
My views of the world, meaning other nations, is one of distrust, anger, and loathing, not for me all this Save the World ----. We have seen only too well whats happened to America, to the good hearted people of the USA, and its a lesson we have learnt from you. Hate me if you wish but i am pro USA, pro Canada, Pro NZ, pro Austrailia, pro Britain, i am also pro Ireland, Norway and Holland, as for the others , NO THANK YOU.
RE the Cancer Issue - lets drop it shall we and start a new thread.
A good topic would be USA AID 1900 - 1999. Regards. BOB.
At this point, I think this has gotten sufficiently evangelistic to qualify for Great Debates. Frankly, I’d rather dump it in (apropriately enough) the BBQ Pit.
I don’t disagree, Mathochist, but unfortunately it’s based on a column by Cecil. So, I’m reluctantly leaving it here.
Well hell, I tried to stay on topic for the most part. Sorry CKDH.
Actually, TRUE-BRIT, there’s a part of me that finds it really funny that you struggle with my user name. It’s a character from a novel written by a UK author. The actual novel and author are left as a exercise for the student.
Yikes, please be caution in believing this website. The author (Malloy) is well-known for being in the pocket of industry. Hence his definition of junk science which only seems to apply science which is anti-industry.
Bumped because the column is back on the SD front page.
Any good research on this question since 2004?
Shhhhhh. TRUE-BRIT has been silent for 13 years. We dare not risk awakening the beast.
Since the animal being BBQed is already dead, I don’t think it has much to worry about when it comes to cancer.