"8. Eliminate all laws regulating private, consensual, adult sexual behavior."
Which laws would those be?
How about laws forbidding incest? I have no problem with incest committed between consenting adults. It's none of my business. I don't endorse it, by any stretch, but I don't think that every legal behavior requires my endorsement.
I would prefer that my children ride on the roof, I will provide handles for them to grip.....This would be ok under a libertarian government? On sundays they want to be towed behind the car on skateboards, can that be worked into the new laws too?
Children are different. They are incapable of legal consent. Thus, they cannot legally consent to put their lives at risk by not wearing a seatbelt or helmet. Adults, however, have a legal right to say, "I want to make a dangerous choice, and I'm willingly putting my life at risk." Seatbelt and helmet laws, when applied to adults, infringes on an adult's right to put his/her life at grave risk.
All drugs? So parents can blitz their kids with antibiotics as they wish? What is the basis for a claim of "informed consent" when a person is helplessly addicted? Can we then have accross the board drug testing for anyone in a sensitive position?
Once again, children are a different issue. Children cannot consent to put their lives at grave risk. Adults, however, can consent to that. If an adult makes a dangerous choice to use drugs, they deserve what they get. If they get addicted, it's their own fault. They have nobody to blame but themselves. And, it's not the government's responsibility to protect people from themselves, and pre-emptively outlaw possibly dangerous choices. Do the drug laws save lives? I think so. But, they also inhibit freedom, namely the freedom for an adult to choose to use cocaine. And then, based upon that terrible choice, if that person dies, it's their own fault and they made their decision. That's freedom; casualties are inherent to the concept of liberty.
Issue for the States but provided there is a "do not medically help idiots" rider I view this as natural selection at work and am ok with it.
That's exactly my point: The government has no responsibility to protect people from themselves and their bad choices. The government is not in the business of enacting laws for peoples' own good. The government is there to protect me from you, and protect this country from other countries. Period. If you want to flush your life down the toilet, the government shouldn't be clogging the pipes trying to stop you.
And gun companies too? Seems like license to commit felonies. Tell me, if a company management conspires to remove assets thereby destroying your investment you wouldn't want to sue? Philip Morris owns Kraft. Suppose you find pig genitiles in your Velvetta during your annual Superbowl bash, you don't think that you shold be able to sue?
My statement was overly broad, and therefore flawed. My objection is to people suing tobacco companies because they got lung cancer, or suing alcohol providers because a loved one got killed by a drunk driver, or suing McDonalds because they are morbidly obese. Tobacco companies, alcohol providers and fast food restaurants provide a product. They are not responsible for the misuse of their product, nor the negative consequences their product might cause, as long as they are open about those negative consequences. In my view, there is no reason in the world to ban a pain reliever that instantly kills 90% of users. Put a warning about the 90% death thing on the label (probably 2-3 HUGE warnings) and let people make their own choices. And, if people die from using the product, it isn't the company's fault.
Those are.... You mean things like not opening a tittie bar within 500 feet of a school? Stuff like that?
That, and other things. The Justice Department is cracking down on pornography that it considers to be obscene. I think it is ludicrous. As I wrote, the only things that are obscene, in my view, are child porn and snuff films. That isn't what the DOJ is cracking down on, and so, in my view, they are currently aiming to curtail protected liberty.
