Jun 20, 2011 22:01
It occurred to me the other day that if you support drug prohibition then you support the idea that the government can legislate good health. That being the case, where do you draw the line? Should fast food be illegal? Should motorcycles be illegal - they're clearly more dangerous than cars? Should hang-gliding be illegal? What about swimming in the sea? Far more people die out there than in swimming pools: why isn't that illegal?
Some may think I'm being facetious, but I'm really not. If you accept that a substance - ecstasy, say - should be made illegal solely because it is potentially harmful to its users, then you're accepting that the government has the right to make laws to keep/make you healthy. And if you've accepted that, then why shouldn't they greatly expand their health-promoting legislation?
Maybe joining a gym should be a legal requirement. Maybe annual medical check-ups should be mandatory, and hefty fines issued for those whose cholesterol has risen. Certainly Coca-Cola and Pepsi should be banned: everybody's in agreement that high-fructose corn syrup is damaging to health (studies link it to obesity, diabetes, cancer, and hypertension amongst other things).
My viewpoint is probably obvious, but I'll say it anyway. I think consenting adults should be free to engage in whatever unhealthy activities they like. If I want to inject heroin into my eyeballs before engaging in anal sex (riskier than the vaginal kind) using high fructose corn syrup as a lubricant, then that's nobody's business but mine (and the anus's owner, of course).
It should not be illegal for me to engage in potentially unhealthy activities. That's just fucked up.