4 ms·

It actually is considered acceptable to tell people what they can and cannot put into their bodies. Legal restrictions on medicines and intoxicants are in place

It actually is considered acceptable to tell people what they can and cannot put into their bodies. Legal restrictions on medicines and intoxicants are in place all over the world, and that hasn't led to "others" taking control of my body.

SamPatt 3y ago
>Legal restrictions on medicines and intoxicants are in place all over the world, and that hasn't led to "others" taking control of my body. If you say so. I believe prohibition exerts substantial control over our bodies, and also corrodes other aspects of personal freedom (such as the Fourth Amendment in the US).
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  Well if you don't believe in any medicine prohibitions, then you'd be arguing against literally every government in the world (except maybe Somalia) plus the UN and hundreds of other IGOs, NGOs, etc...
  - Mordisquitos 3y ago
    Spain for instance does not impose any legal restriction as to what you knowingly choose to put into your own body. Not only is possession of any drug for personal use without an intent to distribute not a criminal offence in Spain, neither is consuming said drugs in the privacy of your own home. There is also no legal restriction on growing cannabis or psychedelic mushrooms on private property outside of public view, as long as the amounts are small enough that there is no reason to suspect an intent to distribute it.
  - randomNumber7 3y ago
    > then you'd be arguing against literally every government in the world I'd like to do that^^. 1. Imagine what would happen to the mafia etc... No more war in mexico for example. 2. Normal people wouldn't just start taking heroine for example 3. Imagine what happens to jails 4. You could use some of the new tax money (which goes to the mafia currently) to hire some medical professionals. That way you could help the really addicted. 5. 100% pure heroin would not destroy the body (it was developed as painkiller). Those junkies are that f*ed up because of the other stuff they pump in their veins. How is that a win for society?
  - SamPatt 3y ago
    Yes I believe every government in the world has made a mistake by implementing prohibition. I also believe they were all in error when slavery was legal everywhere. This is a combination of appeal to authority and appeal to majority.
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      Why would anyone take you seriously? (Anymore so then the fringe groups that call for disbanding the UN, all central banks, etc...)
      - SamPatt 3y ago
        Ideas should be judged on their merit, not their popularity. I don't care if my views are fringe and others choose to not take them seriously as a result. That's outside my control. People accepting beliefs uncritically is the problem, and that applies equally to nutjob conspiracy theorists as well as people who accept the whatever the current groupthink believes. A cursory examination of history is all that's needed to know that, at any given point in time, there are many beliefs across society which are just flat out wrong. To think that in 2023 somehow we've finally got it figured out is arrogance.
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        > Ideas should be judged on their merit, not their popularity. No, ideas that need to be applied broadly should be judged on a combination of their merits and demerits, and popularity, as there are enforcement and political costs associated with any proposal (as long as the government needs to do make any changes whatsoever). It would be different if it was a private proposal that will only affect you and immediate family. To be entirely honest, it seems like you need to rethink this more thoroughly instead of just repeating memorable slogans.

SamPatt 3y ago

>Legal restrictions on medicines and intoxicants are in place all over the world, and that hasn't led to "others" taking control of my body. If you say so. I believe prohibition exerts substantial control over our bodies, and also corrodes other aspects of personal freedom (such as the Fourth Amendment in the US).

MichaelZuo 3y ago
Well if you don't believe in any medicine prohibitions, then you'd be arguing against literally every government in the world (except maybe Somalia) plus the UN and hundreds of other IGOs, NGOs, etc...
- Mordisquitos 3y ago
  Spain for instance does not impose any legal restriction as to what you knowingly choose to put into your own body. Not only is possession of any drug for personal use without an intent to distribute not a criminal offence in Spain, neither is consuming said drugs in the privacy of your own home. There is also no legal restriction on growing cannabis or psychedelic mushrooms on private property outside of public view, as long as the amounts are small enough that there is no reason to suspect an intent to distribute it.
- randomNumber7 3y ago
  > then you'd be arguing against literally every government in the world I'd like to do that^^. 1. Imagine what would happen to the mafia etc... No more war in mexico for example. 2. Normal people wouldn't just start taking heroine for example 3. Imagine what happens to jails 4. You could use some of the new tax money (which goes to the mafia currently) to hire some medical professionals. That way you could help the really addicted. 5. 100% pure heroin would not destroy the body (it was developed as painkiller). Those junkies are that f*ed up because of the other stuff they pump in their veins. How is that a win for society?
- SamPatt 3y ago
  Yes I believe every government in the world has made a mistake by implementing prohibition. I also believe they were all in error when slavery was legal everywhere. This is a combination of appeal to authority and appeal to majority.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    Why would anyone take you seriously? (Anymore so then the fringe groups that call for disbanding the UN, all central banks, etc...)
    - SamPatt 3y ago
      Ideas should be judged on their merit, not their popularity. I don't care if my views are fringe and others choose to not take them seriously as a result. That's outside my control. People accepting beliefs uncritically is the problem, and that applies equally to nutjob conspiracy theorists as well as people who accept the whatever the current groupthink believes. A cursory examination of history is all that's needed to know that, at any given point in time, there are many beliefs across society which are just flat out wrong. To think that in 2023 somehow we've finally got it figured out is arrogance.
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        > Ideas should be judged on their merit, not their popularity. No, ideas that need to be applied broadly should be judged on a combination of their merits and demerits, and popularity, as there are enforcement and political costs associated with any proposal (as long as the government needs to do make any changes whatsoever). It would be different if it was a private proposal that will only affect you and immediate family. To be entirely honest, it seems like you need to rethink this more thoroughly instead of just repeating memorable slogans.