View Single Post
Old November 19th, 2012 (7:54 PM).
Oryx's Avatar
Oryx Oryx is offline
Crystal Tier
Join Date: Mar 2011
Age: 23
Gender: Female
Nature: Relaxed
Posts: 13,207
Quote originally posted by TRIFORCE89:
Same with seat belts. Is the kid going to do it for themselves? No. And even if you were the only one in the car, and by extension the only one injured or dead. There are a number of outcomes to that that don't just involve that single individual. Entire family structures are upended. Emotional damage for others. Economic challenges if the bread winner of the family dies. So, it affects other people.
Doesn't that go down a dangerous road though? The economic challenges would still be the same if a person was killed riding a motorcycle or overeating. But these are seen as personal freedoms. You said yourself you're against banning larger soft drinks, but those larger soft drinks are unhealthy in every sense of the word, empty calories. And there are plenty of economic challenges if the breadwinner of the family dies. So logically, we should ban large soft drinks. It becomes a slippery slope when you decide that one thing is unsafe enough to force people to change by law, but another thing isn't. You have to be really careful that your arguments are very narrowly tailored to a specific situation.

I appreciate the children argument though. Would it be a better law to require all children to wear seatbelts and helmets, so as to eliminate parental influence, but allow adults to act as they please?

Theme * Pair * VM * PM

Not all men...

Are all men stupid?

That's right.

Reply With Quote