4 ms·
> True, but when that level of individual freedom has negative repercussions on the community, the government has to step in Good, then I guess the government
by iopq 10y ago
> True, but when that level of individual freedom has negative repercussions on the community, the government has to step in
Good, then I guess the government should tell everyone to exercise too? I mean, people not exercising has negative repercussions on the community, so the government has to step in. Mandatory exercise for everyone.
I guess the same logic applies to limiting gaming/Internet time too.
- baddox 10y agoMandatory exercise is certainly consistent with banning unhealthy food, but I wonder why (presumably) very few people who advocate the latter would advocate the former. My guess is that the enforcement mechanisms feel different on the surface, because forced exercise requires physical force (or fines, etc.) on each individual, while banning junk food requires force on manufacturers and/or retailers (I'm not sure the distinction is very clear, since these entities are comprised of individuals). Yet that doesn't feel like a sufficient explanation, since many people advocate the prohibition of certain drugs, which does require the use of force against individuals.