General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The food Nazi's in New york just pissed me off.. [View all]tama
(9,137 posts)And it was clear that disagreed with the continuum argument. Easier to say so directly than with a rhetorical strawman question.
I stand with the continuum argument, because it leads us to the deeper issue, which is intolerance masked as worry about "public health". Government that pollutes our planet, murders us in endless wars, incarcerates us because of idiotic and inhumane laws, psychologically terrorizes us in countless ways, is not a credible negotiator not to mention authority in matters of public health, of which it is itself the worst enemy. Hope this clarifies why I don't trust the good intentions of "government", who ever that is, when it speaks of "public health".
Intolerance in this frame is complex issue of various conflicting situations, which can be difficult to negotiate but usually not impossible. Should you tolerate breathing cigarette smoke if you don't like it? I don't think so. Should a smoker tolerate verbal or physical assault from some authoritarian bastard of "health fascism" if he's not forcing others to breath smoke? I don't think so. What about being forced to live in a city to be able to feed yourself and your family, forced to breath exhaust fumes of cars and get stressed from the constant noise pollution? Is that a public health issue? Should we tolerate it? You see, the line of questioning is starting to get more and more tricky, with no easy answers in sight. And I cannot but accept and tolerate that these negotiations are not simple and easy.