An Open Letter to The Center for Science in the Public Interest
To: CSPI
I am struggling with understanding your recent appointment as the adjudicator of what is and isn't good for me. Your recent lawsuit against Burger King is a glaring example of liberal do-gooders systematically exploiting our legal system to promote their own views of the world.
First, your action is insulting. You imply that I'm not intelligent enough to make healthy choices in my life. Since you've determined that I lack the basic fundamentals of sound decision making, you've decided to make my decisions for me. More importantly, you've robbed me of my right of free will. Maybe I enjoy eating trans fats. I certainly enjoy responsible consumption of alcohol, and my daily Starbucks caffeine fix is one of the bright spots of my day. Neither of these items are healthy choices, in an absolute sense. However, enjoyed in moderation, they create part of the foundation of my free will, exercised in a free society.
Second, your action is idiotic. I'm sure that your crack legal team has recognized that you have no standing. I'm confident that you entered this action with the sole intention to attract media attention to your twisted and misguided cause. You've achieved your goal, and you likely care little if there is any significant legal outcome. What you have achieved is a consumption of economic utility from our society. Burger King's legal team will spend the required time and money to defend against your equivalent of a second grader on a playground yelling "My dad is going to sue you" when they didn't get a ball. This cost will be past on to the consumer - me. Not adjusting for the time value of money or inflation, I conservatively calculated that your action will personally cost me $300. This is the defense cost that will be passed on to the consumer through increased prices. If you are successful in bullying Burger King into changing, I'm sure my personal liability will be even higher, as Burger King "reformulates" my burger and fries.
Finally, your action is not needed. We are a strong society whose majority understand their choices and the related consequences. If someone is living on a consistent diet of Burger King trans fat, well, they've got problems that your pansy organization can't even touch. What about a deep fryer screams "good for you"? It doesn't - anyone walking into a fast food restaurant recognizes this fact. We don't need you sticking your ass in our lives, increasing the cost of goods through frivolous legal action, and striving to be our moral compass. If I want a fat-laden burger and fries, that's what I want. If I'm concerned about my health, I'll double up on the Lipitor.
BTW - you can make arrangements to forward my $300 compensation by leaving a comment.
I am struggling with understanding your recent appointment as the adjudicator of what is and isn't good for me. Your recent lawsuit against Burger King is a glaring example of liberal do-gooders systematically exploiting our legal system to promote their own views of the world.
First, your action is insulting. You imply that I'm not intelligent enough to make healthy choices in my life. Since you've determined that I lack the basic fundamentals of sound decision making, you've decided to make my decisions for me. More importantly, you've robbed me of my right of free will. Maybe I enjoy eating trans fats. I certainly enjoy responsible consumption of alcohol, and my daily Starbucks caffeine fix is one of the bright spots of my day. Neither of these items are healthy choices, in an absolute sense. However, enjoyed in moderation, they create part of the foundation of my free will, exercised in a free society.
Second, your action is idiotic. I'm sure that your crack legal team has recognized that you have no standing. I'm confident that you entered this action with the sole intention to attract media attention to your twisted and misguided cause. You've achieved your goal, and you likely care little if there is any significant legal outcome. What you have achieved is a consumption of economic utility from our society. Burger King's legal team will spend the required time and money to defend against your equivalent of a second grader on a playground yelling "My dad is going to sue you" when they didn't get a ball. This cost will be past on to the consumer - me. Not adjusting for the time value of money or inflation, I conservatively calculated that your action will personally cost me $300. This is the defense cost that will be passed on to the consumer through increased prices. If you are successful in bullying Burger King into changing, I'm sure my personal liability will be even higher, as Burger King "reformulates" my burger and fries.
Finally, your action is not needed. We are a strong society whose majority understand their choices and the related consequences. If someone is living on a consistent diet of Burger King trans fat, well, they've got problems that your pansy organization can't even touch. What about a deep fryer screams "good for you"? It doesn't - anyone walking into a fast food restaurant recognizes this fact. We don't need you sticking your ass in our lives, increasing the cost of goods through frivolous legal action, and striving to be our moral compass. If I want a fat-laden burger and fries, that's what I want. If I'm concerned about my health, I'll double up on the Lipitor.
BTW - you can make arrangements to forward my $300 compensation by leaving a comment.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home