View Poll Results: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

Voters
47. You may not vote on this poll
  • Everything should be permitted that doesn't "harm others"

    32 68.09%
  • We should have some societal standards based on morals

    10 21.28%
  • We should have more standards than what we have now

    4 8.51%
  • Other

    5 10.64%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 147

Thread: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

  1. #61
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    And you are right, we do have the right to abuse lots of things, and I think it's bad enough already (personally I think alcoholics should be criminally charged and alcohol regulated more). Just because we don't ban all harmful things doesn't mean we should legalize more.
    This is my own thoughts about the matter: I don't care who abuses what, and if an abuser kills himself with his habit, then that problem has been self-limiting. One of the problems that we have, as a society, is that we want to save people from themselves. I have no problem with letting people get themselves out of their own messes.
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  2. #62
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:50 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,174

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Why exactly should drugs be illegal? Don't talk to me about cartels or theft or whatever - those are not related to the ACT of doing drugs. The act of doing drugs harms no one, except sometimes the individual doing them (and sometimes not - depends on the user, depends on the drug). If someone has gone beyond dabbling and has become an addict, how does that make them a criminal? They're sick. When did sickness become a crime? And the really ironic part is that there's a good chance that they were sick even before the drugs, and wound up an addict because society's resources failed to help them. We essentially incarcerate people for what is not only a victimless crime, but a problem that resulted from our failure to help them in the first place.

    What form of sex between consenting adults should be illegal? And why? Because it weirds you out? You're not in their bedroom. What business is it of yours?

    Who has the right to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their own bodies and lives? Since when does the state own your body?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Individual drug use fuels drug cartels.
    Illegal prostitution attracts crime to neighborhoods and lowers property values. Plus, of course, all prostitution is not voluntary. Ask Leroy about his "commissions."

    And why on earth would you exclude "theft"???
    Those are harms caused by prohibition, not by the actions themselves. Don't forget, there used to be violent cartels selling alcohol during Prohibition too. This is NOT a drug problem. It's a prohibition problem. The actions themselves are things that people will do no matter what, and other cultures have proven that the harms they cause can be drastically reduced or eliminated entirely through proper regulation. They may still harm to the individual doing them, but that is the individual's choice.

    In the case of involuntary prostitution, again, prostitution ITSELF is not the problem. The problem is that they are not consenting to what is being done to their own bodies. You're absolutely right, illegal prostitution attracts crime. But guess what? Legal prostitution doesn't, or is at least far less likely to.
    Last edited by SmokeAndMirrors; 03-21-12 at 08:24 PM.

  3. #63
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,797

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    It depends on how you define harm. I think there qre things that may not directly physically harm people, but may indirectly harm people or society. If everyone acted responsibly, there probably wouldn't be an issue and we wouldn't need to have the discussion, but far too many people don't.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  4. #64
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,797

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by lizzie View Post
    This is my own thoughts about the matter: I don't care who abuses what, and if an abuser kills himself with his habit, then that problem has been self-limiting. One of the problems that we have, as a society, is that we want to save people from themselves. I have no problem with letting people get themselves out of their own messes.
    Not only that we want to save them, but they expect society to pay the way of those who do self-destructive things. I don't care if you want to shoot up battery acid, so long as nobody has to pay your way, not your medical costs, not your living expenses, nothing whatsoever when you render yourself dead or crippled. You do it to yourself, you suffer the consequences 100% on your own. Until we can do that, it's absolutely my place to say what you do, it's my tax money funding your lifestyle.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  5. #65
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    Illegal drug use is harmful to others. Prostitution is harmful to others. Addiction to substances is harmful to others. I thought you probably meant those kinds of so-called victimless crimes. They are not victimless.
    I watched an episode of cops the other night that made me shake my head. About a dozen cops and a female cop posing as a prostitute wasted an entire day busting lonely pathetic harmless old men that wanted a 20 buck BJ. Serious waste of man power and tax payer money if you ask me.

  6. #66
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    ... But legalizing illegal drugs is very harmful and would not benefit American society. People don't have a right to abuse substances nor do they have a right to self treat with legal prescriptive drugs.
    I posted in another thread about self-medicating illegally, not me but someone close. Doctors, several of them misdiagnosed this person and prescribed one drug after another. All were inappropriate or exacerbating his condition. This person obtained illegal medications from overseas; they worked better than anything prescribed. It was for years that doctors finally figured out, because of a cat scan that led to other analyses etc., that he got the proper drugs, i.e. newer versions of what he was getting illegally from India.

  7. #67
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Not only that we want to save them, but they expect society to pay the way of those who do self-destructive things. I don't care if you want to shoot up battery acid, so long as nobody has to pay your way, not your medical costs, not your living expenses, nothing whatsoever when you render yourself dead or crippled. You do it to yourself, you suffer the consequences 100% on your own. Until we can do that, it's absolutely my place to say what you do, it's my tax money funding your lifestyle.
    That applies to texting while driving right?

  8. #68
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:08 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,432

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Actually drug abuse tends to self correct. Most of the drugs used today have been used in some form for a great many years, yet we managed to build a technological civilization.

    A generation burned down on crack. This form is far more addictive than its snorted counterpart and much cheaper than "fre-basing. So it took them by surprise. The next generation, having seen the wreckage is forewarned.

    When I first started getting high, one of my friends' mom was THE white heroin dealer in San Diego. Expoaure to junkies took heroin off our lists of things to try.

    Far too many of our problems with drugs derive from their illegality. People hide their use, which makes it harder for friends and family to intervene.

    Further, an obscene amount of deliberate misinformation is distributed through official channels as to the risks and consequences involved. They tell kids pot is just as dangerous as crack, kid tries pot, discovers it isn't anywhere near as bad a s they were told, and then tries crack or meth assuming they were.lied to about that as well and BANG! Big problem.

    In other words, much of what we consider "dangers" of drug use are DIRECTLY atteibutable to their illegality and not their actual inherent hazards. (Which there are, don't get me wrong. But they would be manageable hazards if we took a more enlightened approach to the subject. What we do now is akin to absinence only sex ed in schools. It simply does not work and is actuall counterproductive)
    I agree with much of what you say here.


    Quote Originally Posted by lizzie View Post
    This is my own thoughts about the matter: I don't care who abuses what, and if an abuser kills himself with his habit, then that problem has been self-limiting. One of the problems that we have, as a society, is that we want to save people from themselves. I have no problem with letting people get themselves out of their own messes.
    This is what I call the short-sightedness of the so-called "victimless crime" mindset. What you describe is only the immediate situation. The consequences and ramifications can, and often do, reverberate far beyond the lone individual. Spouses, kids, and so on are often affected, negatively, by the individual's demise. One could argue that they weren't doing much anyway, but that's not necessarily true.

    Now, I'm closer to your point of view than you probably think reading thus far, but I stop at, and reject, the "victimless crime" designation. No, there are almost always victims... just not necessarily direct victims.

    (Yes, I know you didn't use the "victimless crime" phrase specifically in your post, but it is a common preferred phrase for this POV.)


    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    I watched an episode of cops the other night that made me shake my head. About a dozen cops and a female cop posing as a prostitute wasted an entire day busting lonely pathetic harmless old men that wanted a 20 buck BJ. Serious waste of man power and tax payer money if you ask me.
    Perfect example of going to far to the extreme in the other direction.

  9. #69
    Educator partier9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    A town in a country, on a planet
    Last Seen
    05-23-13 @ 11:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    972

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Honestly i think legalizing prostitution would help the women who do that, because it would allow the government to put down rules and regulations to protect them and they could sue their pimps.

    Drug use on the other hand is a different matter. Saying I don't care what you inject into your body sounds nice but in reality it probably wouldn't end well if everyone was allowed to easily get what are now illegal drugs. My guess is that it would cause serious societal problems and drugs such as heroine and coke would be made illegal again.
    If I had a billion dollars?

  10. #70
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,797

    Re: Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    That applies to texting while driving right?
    I'd say that texting while driving is inherently dangerous, not only to you but to those driving around you and should be criminalized. The same ought to go for anything else that people do that distracts them while driving. If you want to do it on an empty stretch of road, where no people, animals or property can possibly be damaged but your own, feel free. Just don't expect them to send out an ambulance at taxpayer expense to clean up the mess.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

Page 7 of 15 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •