Originally Posted by Vasu
|
Okay, this is a pretty lame point. I'm not going to get opinionated on the pot thing as yet, but this caught my attention. Rights are only valid when they don't affect the freedom of others. There can be no "right" to slavery. The right to smoke pot won't affect your freedom, but the right to kill everybody would. There's the difference.
Slightly off-topic. Sorry.
|
See the icon, the one with the slime laughing his arse off. That means it was a joke. ooh also, the LMAO with the bunch of !!!!!!! after it was another sign. Not to mention that not everyone would be dead. There would have to be one last person who pulled the trigger that killed the only other person alive.
And how is giving someone the right to smoke pot, climb behind a wheel of a car, and hit my 17 year old son head-on, not taking away rights? It would take away the rights of my son, it would take his life.
The deal with the rights and freedom was about having the freedom to make choices that only affect the person making the decision. Allowing the freedom to chose between smoking pot and not smoking pot, does affect other people. Just like choosing to drive drunk affects other people. Hrae says that it should be his right to choose. My point was that to give us the choice would affect more than just one person. Go back and reread it again and you will see where we started going in that direction.