New Page 1
On Facebook | Twitter: @blairsville_com | Online Forums | About The Site | Contact Us | What's New! | Keyword:  
We Support Our Troops
Home   Happenings   Drop By...   Stay Awhile...   About Blairsville

Username:
Password:
 
Save Password
Please review our Usage Policies.

No members are currently in the forums and 10 visitors.
BoeBro Ventures, Inc. and Blairsville.com does not provide legal advice or services. The information here is provided by Blairsville.com members and is not verified for truthfulness or accuracy. You should consult a legal professional regarding any legal issues.
 All Forums
 Local Politics and related issues
 Alcohol by the drink
 New Topic  Topic Locked
Page: 
of 29
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Wildflower

USA
4528 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2006 :  4:49:37 PM  Show Profile
Believe me, I would not marry an alcoholic either. I have not been around an abusive one, but even the ones who keep their head together (happy drunks) are still hard to talk to after too much to drink.

They quit making sense or talk in circles.

But, I don't judge them for the problem. I just don't want the aggravation.

As to secondhand smoke, I'm afraid it may have affected my throat permanently.

WildflowerGo to Top of Page

coosa creek

USA
39313 Posts

Posted - 06/26/2006 :  5:08:50 PM  Show Profile
I would never date or marry a smoker, either, Wildflower!! Don't they understand that it will kil you???

Go to Top of Page

Wildflower

USA
4528 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  01:30:43 AM  Show Profile
Oh, they understand all right. But they are addicted. Nicotine has been said to be more addictive than crack cocaine. And I believe it.

The other thing about smoking is that there is often a tie in between smoking and depression. A lot of smokers unknowingly suffer from depression and feel better when they smoke.

They have been prescribing antidepressants for smokers for several years now and have greater success in helping them to quit that way. But there is also the physical withdrawal.

It is so addictive, that some people quit for years and then go back to it later on when life gets stressful.

WildflowerGo to Top of Page

why

USA
2072 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  08:20:02 AM  Show Profile
Anybody been to Helen lately?? They say that on weekends you can't get through town for the traffic after dark. Looking forward to that here???

whyGo to Top of Page

mad4martinis

USA
13730 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  08:29:33 AM  Show Profile
I don't think that's going to be the case here. Helen to me is like a German Disney World. Blairsville isn't ever going to be like that.


**There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you**Go to Top of Page

why

USA
2072 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  09:05:50 AM  Show Profile
I hope your right.

whyGo to Top of Page

Wildflower

USA
4528 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  10:04:04 AM  Show Profile
Why, Why, Why,

WHY are you comparing Blairsville to Helen?

What about comparing it to Hiawassee? We don't have any more traffic than Blairsville and we have two resorts!

WildflowerGo to Top of Page

mad4martinis

USA
13730 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  10:15:18 AM  Show Profile
I heard from someone who is pretty well to do here. He said that he heard a bank president talking about if the vote passes then the Ritz Carlton is going to build a resort out 129 North. Huh?! I laughed. That's really a "I'll believe it when I see it".

**There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you**Go to Top of Page

why

USA
2072 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  10:57:27 AM  Show Profile
WF, we have a downtown rejuvenation group already working on redoing downtown, who knows which way that will go. Traffic in and around Hiawassee is bad enough that I avoid the area whenever possible. Blairsville is a more confining area than Hiawassee, with the squire being in the main road in and out of town. The susposed by pass goes right through the school property so it is usless as a traffic control option. The only area where we have an adaquate road is 515 and if they all any more in/outlets it will be more of a mess than it is now. Soon they well need to close the direct routes into UCB, Ingles and HomeDopey (Spelled that way on purpose, they're on my bad side right now) and add a frontage road or like the parking lots in some way.

Blairsville and surronding area are not layed out very well for high traffic.

Besides you told me to lay off Towns County.

I use Helen as my bad example for most everything. I know some of the law enforcement from there and hear stories of the action on a weekly if not daily basis.

As we used to say, "Don't like it, couldn't give me the %@# thing (place).

whyGo to Top of Page

CaseyDoodleBug

USA
287 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  9:45:43 PM  Show Profile
If you have ever been through Cleveland, GA at any time of day any day of the week, that is traffic!! Poor planning, no by-pass (as yet anyway) and a population boom, but not alcohol because it's a dry city in a dry county. The traffic is not headed toward Helen either.

I don't think you can compare Blairville to Helen, at least not until we start seeing Chalets on the square, which I find highly unlikely.

DoodleBugGo to Top of Page

mad4martinis

USA
13730 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  9:47:47 PM  Show Profile
Just wait until that Walmart goes in Cleveland! They've already bought & are ready to build there.

**There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you**Go to Top of Page

daughterofconfederate

USA
29728 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  9:49:38 PM  Show Profile
O NO! PLEASE NO! NOT THE CHALETS.

Casey, I agree with you.


I can see the peoples reasoning for either way.. but I will still vote yes.


We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.
Sir Winston Churchill


Go to Top of Page

CaseyDoodleBug

USA
287 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  9:56:31 PM  Show Profile
Yes Maddy, I agree. The Wal-mart is going to be right off the square, which is going to cause one traffic nightmare if they don't construct the by-pass, which they are planning to do.

I worry about the merchants on the square once the Wal-Mart comes in and the by-pass is built. Cleveland was my mother's home and the thought of the square falling into oblivion would make me very sad. Perhaps they should consider an alcohol referendum too and build restaurants on the square.

DoodleBugGo to Top of Page

Admin

USA
1484 Posts
Blairsville.com Administrator

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  10:52:54 PM  Show Profile  Visit Admin's Homepage
While everyone's doing a pretty good job at keeping on topic, please remember that this topic is about the upcoming Union County/Blairsville votes on alchohol by the drink. There are already one or two active conversations about Wal-mart, which doesn't serve alcohol by the drink.

Go to Top of Page

Wildflower

USA
4528 Posts

Posted - 06/27/2006 :  11:38:09 PM  Show Profile
Why,

Actually, traffic in Towns is only bad in one place - it's where the highway narrows down to 2 lanes and a turn lane - a bottleneck. I don't live on that side.

Even so, it's all relative. No one who moved here from a city can complain about traffic in the least.

When I went to Florida last July, I came back and said I'll never complain about summer heat again!

Traffic is the same principle. We really don't know what "traffic" is here.

WildflowerGo to Top of Page

Wildflower

USA
4528 Posts

Posted - 06/28/2006 :  11:55:35 AM  Show Profile
Considering the latest news on secondhand smoke, I am finding it even more ridiculous taking the anti-alcohol stance seriously. Especially since some of them smoke, but have no religious compulsion to halt smoking as much as alcohol.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20060628/cm_usatoday/thedebateisover

WildflowerGo to Top of Page

AlphaDraconis

USA
179 Posts

Posted - 06/28/2006 :  1:41:57 PM  Show Profile  Visit AlphaDraconis's Homepage
Smoking while driving kills too...

From Montana's Safe Driving Site:

quote:

Stay Alert
In Montana, inattentiveness, carelessness, and driving too fast accounted for over 50% of the crashes in the past 10 years. The inattentive drivers were more susceptible to fatal crashes than the other two categories. Some of the contributing factors of inattentiveness listed by the Highway Patrol include eating, smoking, talking on cell phones, adjusting controls, inserting tapes and CDs, looking at maps.

Don't Drink and Drive
Montana has the highest alcohol related fatality rate in the nation per vehicle mile traveled. Montana is also identified as one of 13 states by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration as a Strategic Evaluation State because of it's high impaired driving rate.

During 2003, alcohol related fatalities were at 48.9% of all fatalities and alcohol related crashes were 9.4% of all crashes in the state.



(Emphasis Added, Internal Links Removed]
http://www.mdt.mt.gov/safety/driving_tips.shtml


Go to Top of Page

mad4martinis

USA
13730 Posts

Posted - 06/28/2006 :  6:14:03 PM  Show Profile
How many restrictions can this thing have?! All I can think of is "BIG BROTHER" in blairsville.

**There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you**Go to Top of Page

why

USA
2072 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  10:15:49 AM  Show Profile
WF, smoking is considered wrong in my church as it harms the "temple of God" as the human body is called in the Bible. Yes there are those who go to church that smoke, there are also those who commit adultry, drink, bare false witness, gossip, and are down right scounderals but does that make everyone in the church the blame for the few??

Smokeing and driving kills also, true, how many people wreck each year from droping a smoke in their laps and losing control, more than we think I'll bet but that doesn't change the fact that alcohol also kills and we can control access to it.

Maddy, Restrictions, when is enough, enough? I don't think they go far enough, those who are "for it" probably think they are too restrictive. Why quit serving at 11:00 pm, why not go to midnight or 2:00am? Gets the drinkers out on the road later when most of us are in bed doesn't it?? After all we've served our 60% of food and can now concentrate on alcohol sales the rest of the evening. If you ain't eat supper (dinner to you city folks) by 11:00 PM, you need to prepare your schedule better or go the the Huddle or Waffle house. Any way a lot of those around Blairsville would say that here we have "Big Bubba" watching us.

By the way I don't like to be around smoking any more than anyone else, us reformed smokers hate to see anyone else enjoying themselves.


whyGo to Top of Page

mad4martinis

USA
13730 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  10:38:08 AM  Show Profile
Why, I have to agree with you on the restrictions. I don't mind them, but it's pretty sad that we even have to go through a vote for this issue. It can already happen, we just don't have a commish that has a strong enough backbone to release the license.

**There is no truth except the truth that exists within you. Everything else is what someone is telling you**Go to Top of Page

coosa creek

USA
39313 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  11:01:24 AM  Show Profile
It really upsets me that people still smoke! My ex husband and my mother both were social drinkers. Lung cancer from smoking killed both of them, not drinking!! They were stupid!!

Go to Top of Page

daughterofconfederate

USA
29728 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  1:50:15 PM  Show Profile
Id say lots more wrecks happen cause the cell phones too! People worried about answering it, dialing it, deep conversations.. thats destracting I dont care who you are. I rarely use mine at all. Most people who have my number know that too cause I hardly ever remember I have it unless I need it, and I mean need it! Or to use in long distance calls..

Why, lol! You got me tickled with that last sentence in your post. Sorry but I did snigger a lil... cute!

Daddys lungs were crushed in his DUI accident. He stayed in ICU at Pheobe Putney for 31 days exact and the doctor told us his lungs were already damaged but you know what his worse element was, his liver! GOD AS MY WITNESS and it wasnt from the wreck! It was from years of alcohol pickling it. The doctors focused so much on saving his life and I remember that doctor looking me eye to eye sayin, his liver being damaged already hurt him worse than anything.. he had cosmetic surgery, he had cast on legs and arm.. he had damaged lungs.. the smoking wasnt mentioned because the impact of the steering wheel into his chest did so much damage it didnt matter if you he had been a non smoker. He had tubes pumping his lungs.. and today he only has one lung. He also had serosses of the liver, long before the wreck. The doctor pointed out that his neck was probably red with white spotty patches or spots before hand and I stood there and shook my head yes, he did.. and he showed me all the signs that show when your liver is just eat up and pickled.. so its as bad to treat your liver like ya dont care too. What is the function of your liver and what does alcohol do to it? No one wants to throw that out there that drinks because it makes alcohol look bad.. and God knows everyones wrong for not wanting this when the ones who do will try to throw up on people the other things that dont even pertain to ALCOHOL! The resrtictions for smoking are at a better point then I recall as a kid! And its not in restrs. anymore at all. YOUR ISSUE IS WHY IT SHOULD OR SHOULDNT BE HERE AND WHY DONT PEOPLE WANT IT HERE.. EITHER YOU CAN UNDERSTAND OR STAY STUCK IN YOUR I WANT IT NO MATTER WHAT ANYONE ELSE FEELS AND LETS BLAME THIS GROUP AND THAT CIG. BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN BRING OUT FACTS..


We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.
Sir Winston Churchill


Go to Top of Page

daughterofconfederate

USA
29728 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  2:26:08 PM  Show Profile
While my motor is turning on this, How do you expect people to realize that this drinking can be positive when folks dont wanna own up to the bad parts of it? How can one take responsibilty for a drink in their hand if they cant be responisbile about the WHOLE picture completely without trying to point fingures at well this is this even tho that does not pertain and is not even in the same reality of what the issue actually is? Smoking is NOT you non smokers worry if you dont deal with it. Carrying for someones health is very much a wonderful position within you but being a lil assinine with the name calling when there are facilitys for alcohol abusers is not a gratifying assurance that you are an example of looking out for someones health when you abuse your own body with substances and yes chemicals. Its just absurb to me and that me and my lil say means very lil.

I just think its a very long arm stretch for those in fear of the NO check mark.. I wouldnt be feared too awful bad. I think we will get it and you know we probably will get it. I saw the signs, I seen the billboards and it hasnt persued me to vote no but I do understand their reasoning however I feel that sometimes God gives us test, do we pass or not? Only he knows. I think people can sip wine or whatever responsably. Its a choice in which they should be free to make and if its a test, let it be their test grade.

If you are gonna drink, drink. Be merry and have fun but do it responsably. If youre gonna throw the "well drinking aint the issue but smoking is, or fowl language or anything as a curve ball, then thats just the kind of curve ball my kids do when they dont want to admit they marked on the wall but it was Sissys marker, I just used it and that pencil erases but you didnt find that on the wall but it belongs to that boy.. yeah."


We make a living by what we get, we make a life by what we give.
Sir Winston Churchill


Go to Top of Page

AlphaDraconis

USA
179 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  2:51:59 PM  Show Profile  Visit AlphaDraconis's Homepage
DoC, I don't think the point in talking about cigarettes is that somehow they're more harmful than alcohol, or that alcohol therefore can't be harmful. The point is that it's hard to reconcile which harmful substances we let people choose to abuse, and which ones we decide they're not allowed to use.

Why said it correctly:

quote:
that doesn't change the fact that alcohol also kills and we can control access to it.

The question is though, are those that are willing to vote no to allowing alcohol willing to then take the next step and stop the sale of tobacco products? If not, then how are they judging when a person is allowed to make a bad decision, and when they are not. Both products harm the body, both will kill you if you let them. Both are addictive to some people.

Cellphones are a good example of that - it's not common sense to people that they shouldn't hold a phone to their ear and drive down the road at 60mph, or if it is, they think, well I can handle it, it's not hurt me yet. That sounds like the same rationalization that someone who's had too much to drink uses when they go ahead and try and drive home.

Do we allow someone to make that wrong choice of driving home drunk? No, that is illegal. Do we allow someone to make that wrong choice of driving while talking on the phone, while eating, while too tired? We kind of do - there are laws against driving while distracted, but those are normally just used to figure out who gets the ticket in a wreck.

I think this issue boils down to how innocent a person who dies from a harmful product is when they die. We think of victims of DUI as almost always the innocent ones - that they were in the other car. I don't have the actual fatality rates, so I imagine plenty of DUI drivers kill themselves as well, but its the cases where they survive, and the van full of kids doesn't that we remember. So, we believe alcohol is worse than other semi-legal products because a few drinks and one bad choice, and innocent people die. If alcohol only killed through health problems, then perhaps we wouldn't worry about it.

Tobacco, though, it's main target is a smoker, so since they made the choice, we figure it's their choice to hurt themselves. Secondhand smoke is a serious problem, but hey, the family and children of the smoker chose to live with the smoker, right? So, they're not quite as innocent as that family of children hit by the DUI driver. And plus, it'll be 30-60 years before they die from that secondhand smoke, so it won't make tonight's evening news.

This vote is very much a question of personal freedom. We all agree that the government has the right to limit our personal freedoms to protect the greater good. Those that want to vote yes on this vote think that the greater good is not harmed enough to warrant that control over their personal freedom. Those that want to vote no disagree, and think the harm outweights the benefit. By voting, the majority gets to decide how the minority will live, which is how it's always been (except when the majority violates a constitutional right).

Cigarettes, cellphones, tylenol, and anything else that harms when used improperly only serve to show that we, as a society, are not only limited to the risks of alcohol, but many different risks. On each one of them, the individual voters will have to decide whether their personal freedom to do something should be given up to protect the greater good. When you're voting, though, if you don't do the thing that you're asked to give up, perhaps you should vote as if you were being asked to give up something that you do and enjoy, since it's sometimes too easy to give up freedoms you don't intend to use anyway. Every freedom you give up for the greater good sets the precedent for another to go that same way. And yes, to acknoledge those that are worried that this vote opens the door to more sales, the opposite is true as well. Every freedom you regain sets the precendent to gain more.

My point here is that we all have our motives for how we would vote on this issue. It just seems important to understand how those same motives get applied when the situation changes to a different issue.

Go to Top of Page

donp

USA
16 Posts

Posted - 06/29/2006 :  2:55:19 PM  Show Profile
Oh, Man! Get over it! The local churches are 99% behind promoting this Alcohol Kills crap. I got news for ya, so does religion. Those of you acting for my interests because your God has told you what's best, and since it's from God, it's gotta be right so I can say and do anything in promoting "His" interests, need to get the H@#* off my planet. Please take one of those other Mid-east type terrorists with similar views with you when you go. One under each arm would be perfect.
Want a social issue that is truly meaningful? - tackle drugs with the fervor you are using on drinking. Your children are much more likely to have a drug problem than an alcohol problem and the effects are far more wide-spread. I'm fairly new here, but I see the drug problem often with this county's youth - it's everywhere and you would be absolutley amazed to know just how pervasive it really is.
Jesus and His disciples partook of alcohol.


donpGo to Top of Page

Topic is 29 Pages Long:
  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10
 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
 
 New Topic  Topic Locked
Jump To:

Blairsville, Georgia - home in the North GA Mountains

2002-2007 BoeBro Ventures, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000

2002-2009 BoeBro Ventures, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Usage Policy