NationStates Jolt Archive

I'd like to begin a debate on personal freedoms. What laws that inhibit personal freedoms in your country would you change? What personal freedoms do you think the government should never touch? Why does it bother you that these laws exist, the infringement on freedom or the expense?

I'm from the US so I have a few big ones and a few small ones.

Drugs
Euthanasia
Suicide
Helmet laws
Seatbelt laws

I think there should be age requirements on all of these as I think the government has a requirement to protect those who cannot protect themselves. Drugs, drinking, euthanasia, suicide should require and age of 18. Children under eighteen should be restrained at all times in a moving vehicle or be wearing a helmet on a motorcycle, moped, et all.

Yes, I think the drinking laws should be at eighteen. If I can make the decision to join the military then I can make the decision to drink (I'm actually 30, but you get the point).

EDIT: Can we please not turn this into another Terri Schiavo thread? All people are going to end up arguing about is whether it was euthanasia or murder. Let's define euthanasia for the purposes of this discussion as an expressed desire to perish under certain circumstances and in certain ways.

I think that all sane, mentally competent people should be allowed to do whatever they want, provided their actions do not involve initating an act of force, theft or fraud against another person.

This means I favour legalization of all drugs, weapons, marriages and sexual relations, as well as complete abolition of all regulation of business and industry except laws which prevent force, theft and fraud. Suicide is perfectly acceptable in my book, every law-abiding person should have complete jurisdiction over their bodies and lives. Euthanasia is also acceptable because it involves giving express permission to a person to end one's life.

Marijuana should be legalised, prostitution should be legalised, euthanasia should be legalised, safety laws should be done away with, all censorship should be removed, and we should take away sin taxes. WOOT! Man, I'm good on those personal freedoms.

That's why I'm a libertarian. Although my personal freedom views are a bit more extreme than the actual party...

Sounds good to me. I'd also want the right to assemble without government intimidation.

But yeah, something needs to be done about our drug laws.

I think that the government was wrong in choosing to rule in favor of removing the feeding tube from Terri Shiavo (spelling). True, if i was in that situation, i would not want to be a burden on my family, and would want the tube/respirator/ect removed, however her family (mom and dad) WANTED the responsiblity of caring for their daughter. I think the government should have simply removed her guardianship from her husband to her parents.

oh and i agree about drinking the age should be lowered.

I think that all sane, mentally competent people should be allowed to do whatever they want, provided their actions do not involve initating an act of force, theft or fraud against another person.

This means I favour legalization of all drugs, weapons, marriages and sexual relations, as well as complete abolition of all regulation of business and industry except laws which prevent force, theft and fraud. Suicide is perfectly acceptable in my book, every law-abiding person should have complete jurisdiction over their bodies and lives. Euthanasia is also acceptable because it involves giving express permission to a person to end one's life.

What the man said, except I would ammend the restrictions to include a clause that says that you are not free to restrict the freedoms of others with the exception of actions in accordance with this principle. (Complicated, but follow it through)

I think that the government was wrong in choosing to rule in favor of removing the feeding tube from Terri Shiavo (spelling). True, if i was in that situation, i would not want to be a burden on my family, and would want the tube/respirator/ect removed, however her family (mom and dad) WANTED the responsiblity of caring for their daughter. I think the government should have simply removed her guardianship from her husband to her parents.

oh and i agree about drinking the age should be lowered.

My understanding of the whole Shiavo situation was that her husband adequately demonstrated for the courts that his wife wished to be allowed to die if she were ever in a vegetative state. Thus, the courts upheld her freedom of choice by not allowing her parents to overrule what was ostensibly her decision.

And if its not apparent, I completely agree with the judges on this one. People should have the right to end their own lives. The really odd thing to me is that if Shiavo were a dog we would have simply ended her life very peacefully and instantly with drugs. Instead we had to starve her to death (which fortunately, due to her level of consciousness, was a painless process).

Overall, I'm definitely in favor of repealing drug laws. Some drugs are associated with the commission of other crimes (e.g., cocaine, amphetamines), but those people should be punished for those other crimes, not for making a decision about what substances to put in their bodies (even when that decision is just plain stupid).

Drugs- I can understand use if controlled and administerd safely
Euthanasia-no problem with
Suicide- I'm cathloic, I have to say no to that one
Helmet laws-common sense
Seatbelt laws-common-sense

and as to the whole Terri thing, I think it should've been the husband's call, even though he is a scumbag. I'm glad she died though, at least she's in a better place then she was.

I can understand being opposed to suicide (as in the idea of suicide), but I never understood having a law against it. If you succeed, you're dead, so obviously nobody's gonna charge you with anything. If you fail, we should probably be trying to find you some sort of counseling or other form of help, rather than throwing you in jail for being horribly depressed (this never actually happens though, right?). So again, I see this as being a personal choice. Why we would need the government involved here I have no idea.

So far pretty much everybody is in favor of repealing laws that curtail personal freedoms...not much of a debate :(

I think that all sane, mentally competent people should be allowed to do whatever they want, provided their actions do not involve initating an act of force, theft or fraud against another person.

This means I favour legalization of all drugs, weapons, marriages and sexual relations, as well as complete abolition of all regulation of business and industry except laws which prevent force, theft and fraud. Suicide is perfectly acceptable in my book, every law-abiding person should have complete jurisdiction over their bodies and lives. Euthanasia is also acceptable because it involves giving express permission to a person to end one's life.

See, the problem is that people claim that no sane person would ever end their life prematurely, a stupid argument in my book. I don't add sane in there. I don't care if you're sane or not. I would try as an individual to help a person who is considering suicide, but it is not the government's place to say they can't do it if they want to. I think no sane person would try heroin or ride a motorcycle with no helmet (though I might request that some posters do this and drive really fast), but so what. Still none of the government's business. I don't believe in protecting a person from themselves by infringing upon their freedoms, sane or not.

I forgot to add in sex acts. I think no sex act should be illegal unless it is a person who does not or cannot consent.

Civil Unions is a seperate issue because the government gives benefits to people based on their marital status. If you've read other threads on this, I believe a civil union should be respected by the state between any two adults. Marriage should be a concept reserved to non-state organizations, e.g. churches. If you can find someone to sanction it, you can marry your dog, but don't expect the government to give the dog social security benefits.

Marijuana should be legalised, prostitution should be legalised, euthanasia should be legalised, safety laws should be done away with, all censorship should be removed, and we should take away sin taxes. WOOT! Man, I'm good on those personal freedoms.

That's why I'm a libertarian. Although my personal freedom views are a bit more extreme than the actual party...

Crap, I missed prostitution too. Yeah, definitely all sex acts between consenting adults should be permissable, even if money is involved.

Seatbelt laws curtail personal freedom. I say keep them anyway. Why? Because the other option - if a person is too stupid to wear one, let him die- annoys me.

We need laws to a certain degree.

They are there to protect us, but at some point they become obsolete and oppressive.

I think Drug laws (mainly Marijuana) should be lightened.

Suicide - ? pardon my ignorance, but, it makes no sense to prosecute the dead and to penalise those who aren't harming others... They should receive help instead

Alcohol - 18/19 years old is reasonable. I think underaged drinking could be permitted if the parents are present and give permission (like, if a kid is at home and the parents are there or they are out at a restaurant)...

Helmet/Seatbelt Laws - common sense really.

Euthanasia - either through verbal or written consent in the form of a living will or through one's legal guardian who is acting on the will of the other (after requesting cour permission)

Abortion - between the woman and her doctor (and maybe the partner)

Voting - needs to be lowered. 16 year olds are in a position where they can get a driver's licence, hold a job, pay taxes, bet drafted (in extreme situtations), so, they should be able to vote

Prostitution - legalise it to make it safer for the women sex-trade workers. That way, they can negotiate in safe places and don't have to worry as much

Overall, I think we still needs laws governing these, but they need to be flexible and more forgiving.

I think that all sane, mentally competent people should be allowed to do whatever they want, provided their actions do not involve initating an act of force, theft or fraud against another person.

This means I favour legalization of all drugs, weapons, marriages and sexual relations, as well as complete abolition of all regulation of business and industry except laws which prevent force, theft and fraud. Suicide is perfectly acceptable in my book, every law-abiding person should have complete jurisdiction over their bodies and lives. Euthanasia is also acceptable because it involves giving express permission to a person to end one's life.

Regulation of business and industry have nothing to do with personal freedom laws. In fact, some business and industry laws were argued to prevent restriction of personal freedoms. For example, you cannot punish your employees for smoking cigarettes when they are not at work.

Regulation of business and industry have nothing to do with personal freedom laws. In fact, some business and industry laws were argued to prevent restriction of personal freedoms. For example, you cannot punish your employees for smoking cigarettes when they are not at work.
Which is very reasonable and fair.

It is on their time and on their property, and not at work.

Drugs- I can understand use if controlled and administerd safely
Euthanasia-no problem with
Suicide- I'm cathloic, I have to say no to that one
Helmet laws-common sense
Seatbelt laws-common-sense

and as to the whole Terri thing, I think it should've been the husband's call, even though he is a scumbag. I'm glad she died though, at least she's in a better place then she was.

Fine, don't commit suicide. You shouldn't outlaw suicide because you're a Catholic.

Fine, don't commit suicide. You shouldn't outlaw suicide because you're a Catholic.
I agree with you on this!

Besides, what I find funny is - how the hell do you plan to stop suicidal people anyway? (in further response)

I can understand being opposed to suicide (as in the idea of suicide), but I never understood having a law against it. If you succeed, you're dead, so obviously nobody's gonna charge you with anything. If you fail, we should probably be trying to find you some sort of counseling or other form of help, rather than throwing you in jail for being horribly depressed (this never actually happens though, right?). So again, I see this as being a personal choice. Why we would need the government involved here I have no idea.

So far pretty much everybody is in favor of repealing laws that curtail personal freedoms...not much of a debate :(

For those who don't know, if you attempt suicide and do not succeed, the government can have you incarcerated in a facility for the mentally unstable (they call it by many names). You are often forced into agressive therapy. I disagree with this even though it saved the life of someone I care for very much.

I agree on most fronts, except about suicide. Too many peopel are either to elsfish to simply end themselves, and so things like suicide by police/train/parachuteless sky diving/etc occur. If someone desires to kill themselves, then they shuld just hang themselves or slit their wrists in the privacy of their own home. Doing it in public, or by forcing someone else to kill you, is wrong and cowardly.

Aside from that, Abortion should be legal up to a point (a couple months in, maybe four, something like that) provided that is funded entirely through private monies. Also, Euthanasia should be legal, provided that it can be proven with numerous sources (written and witnesses) that this was the desire of the person, and that they are given (at least) the same courtesy of a quick and painless death that we would give a dangerous animal.

Aside from that, if it doesn't involve me, my property, or my knowledge, go right on ahead.

Sounds good to me. I'd also want the right to assemble without government intimidation.

But yeah, something needs to be done about our drug laws.

you can assemble...

...you just can't shout in people's faces, roll around like a snake to block traffic or otherwise act like an animal.

Which is very reasonable and fair.

No. An employer should not be forced to give their property to someone they don't want to under any circumstances.

We need laws to a certain degree.

They are there to protect us, but at some point they become obsolete and oppressive.

I think Drug laws (mainly Marijuana) should be lightened.

Suicide - ? pardon my ignorance, but, it makes no sense to prosecute the dead and to penalise those who aren't harming others... They should receive help instead

Alcohol - 18/19 years old is reasonable. I think underaged drinking could be permitted if the parents are present and give permission (like, if a kid is at home and the parents are there or they are out at a restaurant)...

Helmet/Seatbelt Laws - common sense really.

Euthanasia - either through verbal or written consent in the form of a living will or through one's legal guardian who is acting on the will of the other (after requesting cour permission)

Abortion - between the woman and her doctor (and maybe the partner)

Voting - needs to be lowered. 16 year olds are in a position where they can get a driver's licence, hold a job, pay taxes, bet drafted (in extreme situtations), so, they should be able to vote

Prostitution - legalise it to make it safer for the women sex-trade workers. That way, they can negotiate in safe places and don't have to worry as much

Overall, I think we still needs laws governing these, but they need to be flexible and more forgiving.

Abortion really is an argument of whether it is a personal freedom or not. One side says mass of cells. The other says fetus, thus has personal freedoms we must respect, first and foremost being the right to life. Personally I think abortion should be legal and safe in the first trimester.

Because of Terri, people tend to forget that most euthanasia cases involve people who are conscious and can make their own wishes known verbally.

No, sixteen-year-olds cannot be drafted. You cannot be drafted until 18, at least in the US. I don't agree that sixteen-year-olds can vote. Only adults should be allowed to vote, use drugs or choose for their life to end. You think sixteen-year-olds can't make a decision about what to put in their body, but they can choose the president? How is that consistent?

@Bodhi-Dharma: I agree with you about the starving to death thing. It makes much more sense to be allowed give someone an OD and let them slip away quickly and painlessly. But, we can't. Why? Lawyers.
Did this in Legal Studies back in fourth year of secondary school. In Ireland, and presumably elsewhere, giving someone an OD is hastening the course of death, and thus murder (or manslaughter, or whatever...), while removing the feeding tube is merely the cessation of artificial means of extending life. Which is fine, apart from, it's balls. You shorten life either way, and the OD way is definitely more humane, in the case that the person can feel in some way.

@Warlike Texas: If you're a Catholic, why aren't you against euthanasia? The church is, and the Pope (poor guy) is personally against even the removal of life support from people in a permanent vegetative state.

We should legalize everything that does not infringe on the rights of another citizen, namely the rights to life and liberty.

That means do whatever you want unless it hurts someone else.
But because businesses control the rights of their workers, namely the right to life (you'll starve if you don't work) complete control of business is necessary, not just regulations. Laying off your workers can only happen to save the company. Independent decisions made without the consent of workers must not be allowed. CEO and Corporate Board Member must become puppet positions.

But toke, fuck, and live however you want, as long as you don't hurt someone else in the process.

No. An employer should not be forced to give their property to someone they don't want to under any circumstances.

I assume here that you mean salaries, benefits, et all. Employers can not deny you a chance to work for them based on gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or most types of addictions. This is a rule specifically to protect personal freedom. If all factories, say, made a rule requiring no one to work their who smoked, then they would essentially restrict all smokers ability to sustain themselves. This is an illegal act, if you're familiar with worker's rights. It's the specific reason why non-competes are hard to enforce.

Addictions are a sticky one. Because you may not be at work while under the influence, laws have to be flexible. For instance, I wasn't suppose to drink alcohol for eight hours before duty while in the military. Airline pilots have a similar rule. I generally can't be under the influence of any non-prescribed drug (and even some prescribed drugs) while working, particularly in any kind of environment that is dangerous to me or makes me dangerous to other people if I am impaired.

EDIT: Ignore this whole damn thing. I don't want to hijack my own thread by discussing business laws instead of personal freedoms even if it touches on personal freedoms.

If 18 is the draft age, 14 year olds should vote if the term is 4 years. Think about it - these people have no choice about the Commander in Chief that will lead them into war. He could be a drunk cowboy, a french surrender monkey, or anything!

If 18 is the draft age, 14 year olds should vote if the term is 4 years. Think about it - these people have no choice about the Commander in Chief that will lead them into war. He could be a drunk cowboy, a french surrender monkey, or anything!

Like everything else, except in extreme cases, children are required to submit to their parents for these types of decisions. If a fourteen-year-old wants to change the outcome they need to convince their parents on whom to vote for.

I know what the situation is. Now tell me your opinion!

I'm all for the legalization of marijuana..

but be advised:

if you are pulled over while driving and you smell like pot, you will be charged with

DUM

Driving Under Marijuana

hehe

I'm all for the legalization of marijuana..

but be advised:

if you are pulled over while driving and you smell like pot, you will be charged with

DUM

Driving Under Marijuana

hehe
GROAN

I would respond, Jacobia, but I don't want to hijack the thread. Maybe you can start a new one about the subject?

Should employer's be forced, against there will, to hire someone when they don't want to?

I know what the situation is. Now tell me your opinion!

My opinion is that fourteen-year-olds should not be allowed to vote. I stated this earlier.

*bump*

Sounds good to me. I'd also want the right to assemble without government intimidation.The danger there is that a "peaceful assembly" can quickly become a mob and a riot. That's why the government keeps an eye on you. Because 50,000 upset people in one spot doesn't generally mean milk and cookies for everyone. Remember, these are human beings we're talking about.

I can understand being opposed to suicide (as in the idea of suicide), but I never understood having a law against it. If you succeed, you're dead, so obviously nobody's gonna charge you with anything. If you fail, we should probably be trying to find you some sort of counseling or other form of help, rather than throwing you in jail for being horribly depressed (this never actually happens though, right?).Heh, depends. You live in Texas?

ALSO! You should be allowed to drink at any age. It removes the mystique and prevents alcoholism and abuse at a later age; look at the French, after all.

ALSO! You should be allowed to drink at any age. It removes the mystique and prevents alcoholism and abuse at a later age; look at the French, after all.

I was wondering when someone would bring this up. I agree though I don't have a huge problem with age limits on drug/alcohol use.