Wednesday, February 09, 2005

You're Not The Boss of Me :p

RICHMOND,
Virginia (AP) -- Virginians who wear their pants so low their underwear shows may want to think about investing in a stronger belt.The state's House of Delegates passed a bill Tuesday authorizing a $50 fine for anyone who displays his or her underpants in a "lewd or indecent manner."
SAN FRANCISCO
From parks to bars to the workplace, more states are proposing far-reaching bans that would limit public smoking. Last year, several coastal cities in southern California went so far as to ban smoking on public beaches. This year, San Francisco supervisors passed a law - supported by the mayor - that will prohibit smoking in all city-run recreational areas except golf courses.
Big Brother is getting more like Big Momma and Poppa everyday.

What's Next? A Ban on Indoor Nudity?

And then they wonder why they end up having to take counter measures like this:

WASHINGTON (CNN) --
The U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a bill Wednesday to ban lawsuits by obese customers who say they became overweight by eating at fast-food restaurants.
"We've got to get back to those old-fashioned principles of personal responsibility, of common sense, and get away from this new culture where everybody plays the victim and blames other people for their problems."

Which it doesn't take a genius to see that if you are going to regulate every little detail about people's lives, they are going to EXPECT it of you. And then the more you comply, the more they want. The only way to get back those "old-fashioned principles" is to respect the individual adult enough to leave him with his freedom; for the government to get their sticky fingers off of everyone's plate, and tell all the whiny "but I'm offended" groups out there that what is truly horrendously offensive is their constant assault on personal liberty.

It is not the government's function to keep us all moral, or to make sure we eat right, and we take our vitamins. The government's function is solely to protect us from force initiated by others, on the individual and us as a country. And once again people, being offended is not the initiation force against you, but guess what, having your hard earned tax dollars forcefully expropriated for laws which you don't agree with or what's worse, which target you, IS the initiation of force against you by your government. But then, that is old news, and no body seems to mind, they just want more and more rules, so they can secure their piece of the pie before the government takes it all from their neighbor.

As Peter Schwartz explains:
A precondition of freedom is the recognition of the individual's capacity to make decisions for himself. If man were viewed as congenitally incapable of making rational choices, there would be no basis for the very concept of rights. Yet that is increasingly how our government views us. It is adopting the role of a paternalistic nanny, zealously protecting the citizen against his own actions. In the process, our freedom is disappearing.

2 Comments:

Blogger M.T. Daffenberg said...

Again, I agree. Mostly.

The only thing I would add is that government also has, or rather, ought to have the goal of bettering society, obviously starting with its own. If improvements can be made in a social sphere, then those improvements ought to be intiated by a government for the people, by the people; it's in the people's best interest. We cannot deny our social instincts. It's when rights get violated that this idea goes too far. It seems that this idea is what created the atmosphere for laws like the one you mentioned--I can't explain ignorance or lack of respect for individual rights--but there are good social programs that don't infringe on people's rights and improve society. And they're not that bad.

1:06 PM  
Blogger jomama said...

Why not just come and and say you
didn't agree, Michael?

That was what I read in your post.

Name one 'social program' that doesn't
violate someone's space?

10:27 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home