re: Oregon just re-criminalized drug possession and use

quote:

---

the fact that hardcore libertarians/"legalize everything" types still exist after the past 5 or so years is hilarious

---

The fact that people with no interest in illicit drugs can't take the principle of freedom and apply it to other things is more hilarious IMO.

For example, the poster above points out that the freedom to eat whatever you want contributes to a lot more societal problems—and costs a lot more money...look it up—than the freedom to do illicit drugs. He's right, of course.

But does that really mean we want government regulations on food?

If so, I have some bad news for the regular denizens of this board.

Whether you believe it or not, the vast majority of the legitimate science (and the science that would win out if the government did regulate food), says that the fewer animal products you eat, the healthier you will be all other things being equal.

Who wants a once-a-week government imposed meat ration, raise your hand?

And I'm not going to argue about whether you personally think that science is valid vs the (mostly Bro Science) studies that say that meat is great for you...the mostly vegetarian diet would win in that scenario.

But that does bring up another valid point in this discussion. When you give the government the power to limit behavior "because it's not good for society," you give the government the power to decide what behavior is not good for society.

Imagine Biden deciding whether going to a church that teaches Biblical principles is good for society or not.