Mother Betsy's Smoking Ban
Does Mother Betsy, the Decatur councilwoman, really know best about what is good and righteous? Regardless of her intentions, she is attempting to impose her righteousness on the community and is abusing the power of her position. Do we elect council members to represent us or to think for us? The time has come for the council to REPRESENT us, not simply try to protect us from ourselves. I urge the other council members to keep this in mind while Betsy works to impose a smoking ban on Decatur. Please resist her (probably genuine) motherly concern for our well being, and help keep government out of the personal protection business.
“The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community against his will is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.” This is the basic premise of libertarianism, the political philosophy of the Founding Fathers.
1859 - John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty"
Labels: Betsy Stockard, Decatur, liberal
posted by VPCheney @ 5:56 AM
4 comments
4 Comments:
And from somewhere WAY out there in left field... Mother Betsy's alter ego?
Cristy sounds like a dis-gruntled ex-wife who didn't get the alimony she was hoping for...
I think this issue is one where we disagree on principle. I must admit I'm not too familiar with the ins and outs of libertarianism (if that's a word), but I gather that government intervention on the private lives of people is not one of it's tenets.
Where I come from (and this is LR talkin' not a GOP talking point [Matt list #6]) the government can intervene in the private lives of people when the the actions those people do affect others around them. If I choose to make methamphetamine in my garage, I'm not hurting other people by doing it, but the selling and distributing it does. Likewise, if I choose to convert my property in downtown Decatur into a hogfarm, I'm not hurting anyone. That is, until the smell and the potential manure runoff affects my neighbors.
In either case, there are laws on the books because the majority of people thought these actions not beneficial to society, and in some cases harmful. I see the public smoking ban as a similar situation.
Did you notice, VP, that I didn't berate you or call you names as I disagreed with your position? Isn't that nice that two people can have a meaningful conversation, disagree, and not spit bile? (Matt list #1.)
BTW, you may want to reference the Matt list. See comment #7 on this post
Reasonable people can have differing points of view.
Government intervention in an individual's private life is a misuse of that government, in my opinion. Democrats have made a living for more than half a century intruding on and attempting to control the individual behavior of the citizenship. ("For the betterment of all." is their excuse, but the Dems need you to NEED them.)
Libertarianism (yes, it is a word) is a belief that individuals will generally make good decisions when it comes to their personal lives. Personal responsibility is a key component of a democracy. Democrats believe that individualism is counter productive to the Nanny State that they support, because in their view, only the government can make good personal decisions for the constituency. "We know best what is good and what is best for you," is the mantra. I don't want Betsy making those kind of decisions for me, and I don't want her making it for you either. However, MJ deserves whatever Mother Betsy shovels his way.
I just posted a great quote by JS Mill on conservatism… Love your blog by the way I got here on a blog search… Come on over to www.debaterelatepontificate.blogspot.com sometime I’d love to add someone like you to our dialogues…
Post a Comment
<< Home