The Right to Control Others

I’ve been thinking about this and just can’t seem to grasp it. Could someone explain to how it is that I can have a law made to control the personal decisions of others? I don’t mean murder, assault, theft, or damaging someone’s property; I mean choices that cause no harm to another person.

For example, why should I get to determine what you can eat or drink? Or when and where you can consume the food or beverage of your choice? I can understand not allowing people to smoke in public places or setting off areas for smoking but there are towns where people aren’t even allowed to smoke in their own homes! A person’s home is his castle; no one should be able to control your behavior on your own property unless it’s beyond a doubt harming neighboring properties.

The real kicker here is that people will complain about a law that limits their choices but advocate for one that controls another person. If only people would realize the problem isn’t the particular laws but the fact that we allow them to exist. A person can’t expect to control their neighbors without allowing their neighbors the right to control them.

Take some time today to think about which laws bug you and why. Then think about laws about which you’ve heard others complain. Do you see a connection? Would you be willing to get rid of that law if they would toss out the one you don’t like? I would say, yes; you, on the other hand, might think it’s worth giving up your freedom if it means you get to control other people.

Those are my thoughts for this morning. Er…, I mean: Earthchild has spoken; now it’s your turn. Please comment below.

Giving government permission

What if I decided it’s indecent to show your hands in public? After all, hands are used for all sorts of personal and sometimes dirty tasks. Hands are used for wiping your butt and blowing your nose, for changing baby diapers and bathing children, to masturbate, etc., so I don’t want to have to see that personal part of your body. Say I find a group of people who agree with me and we lobby the government to make a law that everyone has to wear gloves in public.

That’s not as far-fetched as you might think. After all, we already have these sorts of laws now and the vast majority of the public thinks those laws are reasonable. It seems to me that once we give the government permission to ban something or require something, the next time they want to do it, well...we’ve already given permission.

We’ve given the government permission to require certain body parts be covered so what’s to stop them from adding to the list? If you can be required to wear pants, what else can be required? I’m not advocating for or against public nudity; I’m merely following the laws we have now to their logical conclusion. People tend to misunderstand, sometimes deliberately, and claim *that* couldn’t happen but history shows that many people would be shocked if they knew some of the laws we have now in their future. Laws they would have said could never happen.

Along with deciding what is decent for us, we’ve also given the government permission to ban substances so what’s to stop them from adding to that list? What’s that you say? Those things are “bad for you.” So, you’d be okay with banning coffee, alcohol (yeah, that went over well the last time they did it), and cigarettes? In addition, what about donuts and candy and sugar and myriad other things someone has decided aren’t good for us.

There are those who say *religion* isn’t good for a person so this brings me to the fact that we’ve given the government permission to limit our activities. What’s to stop them from adding to the list? Should gambling be illegal? How far should the government be allowed to limit your parenting decisions? There are already stories in the news of children being taken by CFS because the parents [gasp] allowed them to play outside. In addition, who should get to decide with whom you are allowed to associate—what types of relationships you have—including dating, sex, and marriage? If you think the government should be allowed to control those decisions, how can you protest their control of your religious choices? Should people be allowed to attend the church of their choice or even go to church at all? Should the government have any say in which churches can be allowed?

Now, go back and reread this, substituting the word *government* with *other people*. Because that’s what government is: the people. If you are okay with controlling the activities of consenting adults, you can’t complain when other people limit yours. I shouldn’t have to explain this to you so I’ll let Frederick Douglass tell you: “No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened about his own neck.” Try to remember that.

Earthchild has spoken. Your turn below.