In response to:

There Ought Not to Be a Law

shubi_ Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 12:24 PM
flores posted: Re: shubi, "Stossel makes the false premise conservatives think laws make people more virtuous" Hence sodomy laws, prostitution prohibitions, drug laws, don't really exist? Conservatives love them - Ok, conservative STATISTS, which are not unlike their brethren on the left. But they are positivist attempts at making man virtuous.
shubi_ Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 12:29 PM
Conservatives don't think passing laws against drugs will make people virtuous. Instead, conservatives want to deter bad people from doing things to harm others. All the above behaviors flores listed do harm to others and to society.

I do think the laws as we have passed them, mostly by the socialists, promote bad behavior rather than deter it. In fact, I don't believe putting drug users in prison serves any useful purpose. There should be a less expensive system to deal with druggies.

Personally, I just don't want to hear about who is doing sodomy to whom. Those of us that find it disgusting should not have to have it pushed in our face. I don't think it is criminal behavior, just sick behavior.
John_G Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 12:40 PM
"want to deter bad people from doing things to harm others."

how is the act of putting something into my body harmful to another?
HuffingPaintPost Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 12:59 PM
It's not (as long as you don't operate equipment or dangerous devices while under the influence, of course). The usual response from a "conservative" is a circular one: they blame the drug dealers for needing the laws, which ignores the fact that the dealers would be either few or nonexistent if some currently illegal drugs weren't.
shubi_ Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 1:07 PM
John, if you impair your ability to relate to your family, you are harming others. If you cannot hold a job because you are on drugs, you harm yourself and your family.
I don't hold with criminalizing drug use, however. To do so is counter productive.
nawlins72 Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 1:31 PM
Such "harms" do not rise to the level of infringement of rights thus do not warrant government intervention. If i don't love my children I harm the yet it would be absurd to legislate loving your children.
king10 - exposing leftism Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 4:03 PM
btw, there's NOTHING circular about it. And it's always strange to me how the libs always scream "war on drugs" as a retort to anything that forces inflection on their views. Axiomatic might be a better way to describe it....
nawlins72 Wrote: Aug 15, 2012 4:27 PM
There's nothing circular about YOUR argument, since you didn't present one.

I’m a libertarian in part because I see a false choice offered by the political left and right: government control of the economy -- or government control of our personal lives.

People on both sides think of themselves as freedom lovers. The left thinks government can lessen income inequality. The right thinks government can make Americans more virtuous. I say we’re best off if neither side attempts to advance its agenda via government.

Let both argue about things like drug use and poverty, but let no one be coerced by government unless he steals or attacks someone....