I don't like this thing. Let's ban it!

I don't think the argument against drugs, alcohol strength and price is that someone doesn't like them. It's that they cause harm. To the users mainly, but also to other people - druggies comitting crime, drunk people causing violence etc.

You might disagree with the idea that they do cause the harm (indeed on harm principle alcohol should surely be banned if cannabis is!).

You might disagree that the state should protect people from themselves.

But harm is the principle is the argument.

Topless women I give you.

You should check out Leviticus. The Lord doesn't like a whole lotta things..

And what about homosexuality in many countries of the world?

I agree with you OP. Can we unban the ban of the veil in France then?

Posted from TSR Mobile

I agree with you OP. Can we unban the ban of the veil in France then?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Do things ever actually get banned just because people don't like it?

that rambler chap was banned for rambling as nature intended

I'm all for unbanning the ban, so long as people who wear face coverings agree to remove them without fuss under any and all circumstances requiring them to do so on private property (like shops or whatever) or for security reasons.

Well that can't be right because banning drugs doesn't reduce harm it increases it, so it must just be some bull**** ***** come up with to look less like *****.

Drug users don't all commit crime. Get your head out of The Daily Mail.

The fundamental point is that I have an unassailable right to my own body. I own it, it is my property. You do not own it, and neither do the government. You have no right to tell me what I can and cannot do to it as long as I don't harm anyone else.

I don't think you got my point. I was not making the argument that drugs cause harm. I was pointing out that is the basis that banners use to make their arguments, not that they don't like drugs.

I don't think you got my point. I was not making the argument that drugs cause harm. I was pointing out that is the basis that banners use to make their arguments, not that they don't like drugs.

I think i did.

I understand their arguments, I just fundamentally disagree with them. Firstly, drugs don't automatically cause harm, and secondly, even if they did, what the **** business is it of theirs?

Let's ban people from trying to ban things

The automaticity is surely a red herring. Assault rifles don't "automatically" cause harm, but there's a good argument for banning them.

You could argue that if the state has to pay for the harm caused via treatment, then it can have a say in regulating the activity. And if others are harmed, then it is the state's business.

Let's ban people from trying to ban things

Doesn't that include yourself?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Assault rifles shoot other people, drug users take the drugs themselves. Crucial difference.

OK, perhaps you did. It was hard to read your meaning with the asterisks.

The automaticity is surely a red herring. Assault rifles don't "automatically" cause harm, but there's a good argument for banning them.

You could argue that if the state has to pay for the harm caused via treatment, then it can have a say in regulating the activity. And if others are harmed, then it is the state's business.