Last updated: November 11. 2013 9:51AM - 369 Views

Story Tools:

Font Size:

Social Media:

I completely agree with our government’s decision to outlaw “trans fats,” and save the 6,000 lives per year they say this ban will save. I can’t believe anyone would object to this new law written by the FDA instead of that “dysfunctional” Congress. This law is designed to protect us from our own awful choices, and we should not object to it just on the basis of a selfish and uncaring belief in our own right to choose what we eat, drink or otherwise ingest.


The government has the right and the obligation to protect us from any choice we make that is harmful to ourselves, so they can “save lives.” So they should also enact prohibitions on tobacco, cars, all guns, candy, and sugar and criminalize excessive use of video games and TV, obesity, and the failure to properly exercise.


All of these government measures would save many more lives per year than the banning of “trans fats.” These bans also meet the legal test of granting the government any power over us they wish to ascribe to themselves so long as it protects us from the harm of our own choices and “saves lives.” Only selfish, radical, uncaring, right wing libertarians would think the freedom to make our own lifestyle choices would be more important than “saving lives.”


— Robert Sielschott, Lima

Comments
comments powered by Disqus


Featured Businesses


Poll



Mortgage Minute