High school drug raid

[The idea]

Please define "personal lifestyle choice" and explain why such choices can't be dictated in a free society.

Suppose somewhere in the world a government that executes political prisoners smokes the flesh of the prisoners and then smuggles the meat into free societies. Would buying and eating such meat be a "personal lifestyle choice"? Why or why not?

That's gotta be the weirdest comparison I've ever heard, and it fails because in your example, the choice involves causing harm (albeit indirectly) to other people. As soon as illegal drugs are made legal, their production and distribution no longer cause harm to anyone. [...]

Here an attempt to express your response as an answer to the questions asked.

MODIFICATION: No, buying and eating such meat would not be a "personal lifestyle choice." The reason is that the choice indirectly causes harm to other people.

Actually, that modification doesn't seem to work because you follow that up by insinuating that illegal drugs do cause harm and that the issue is actually whether or not harm would be caused if changes were made to the law.

REVISED MODIFICATION: No, buying and eating such meat would not be a "personal lifestyle choice." The reason is that, even if various changes were made to the law, the choice would necessarily cause at least indirect harm to other people.

Does that simply rephrase your ideas or does it misrepresent them?