Americans are ensured their rights of Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness in the constitution.
Life = Right to live.
Liberty = Right to do what you want.
Pursuit of Happiness = Right to live the way you want.
Life is the first and most important right we're ensured. Now if the only way to guarantee your right to life is to violate the other two, then the government is obligated to do so. Things like cocaine abuse and driving without a seatbelt really do not hurt anyone besides yourself, but it puts your life in danger and that's something government exists to protect us from doing. まほ～
1. Those rights aren't listed by precedence. Their precedence is entirely relative.
2. I've already argued that
people have the right to death as a part of their right to life. The decision to live or not is entirely yours. Jeopardizing your life is also your choice entirely as long as it doesn't jeopardizes anyone else's.
3. The government was not created to enforce these rights, only to protect them from intervention.
4. The government does not protect us from doing something that puts ourselves in danger, they protect other people from a person putting someone else's rights at risk. I'd list contradictions but they're so obvious this makes me wonder if you actually think before you post.
I believe any addictive substance that has the potential to cause significant and direct damage to your body should be against the law to manufacture, distribute, and abuse.
Vicodin, novacaine, caffeine, aspirin, ibuoprofen, oxycodone, high fructose corn syrup, food dye, alcohol, liquor, dihydrogenmonoxide.
Everything and anything has the potential to cause psychological addiction. These are chemicals that can cause significant damage to your body. If you are talking specifically about chemical addiction, that depends entirely on dosage. So should chemicals that help people be banned because they can become addictive?
Our lives should not be spent just wasting away, becoming dependant to drugs to get by.
That's not your decision to make for everyone else. Everyone has the right to live their life how THEY see fit, not how YOU see fit.
If the Government has to step in to make us all make the right choice, then let there be a second Prohibition Era.
The government doesn't have that loving right, and what makes that choice "right", anyway? This isn't a decision of ethics, to drink or not to drink isn't a moral decision. Oh and completely ignore the fact that the Prohibition era was a catastrophe. People will do what they want no matter what.
Poll