Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : THE WHITE HOUSE -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PROLIFE who wrote (18848)	3/31/2008 12:46:54 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 25737

(Typical knee-jerk Big Government 'solution' from Pro.... Can't even arrive at a consistent set of standards to wrap law around....) So, what standards should 'count'? a) Medical risks like potential for overdose/death/bodily harm? b) Addictive potential of the substance? c) Questions of 'is it 'natural' or artificial? d) Historical happenstance ('luck of the draw', pure accident)? e) Potential for making a body 'feel good' (what the Puritans would be opposed to: "If it pleasures the body it must be evil in the sight of God.")? f) Default when in 'gray areas' to believing that --- so long as not harming others --- adults should be sovereign over their own lives? g) Or have the laws default to the proposition that Big Daddy Government always knows what's best for people, and that the government has the 'right' and 'obligation' to tell people how they are 'allowed' to live their own lives... even in the confines of their personal homes? h) Religious connections? etc....