Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Smoking is dangerous. Smoking can lead to cancer and other illnesses. On the other hand, if I am aware of the risk, why take the choice away from me? Who gets to decide what is too risky and what is not? Isn't that question answered in the political realm? DC wrote that the SG should not be involved in politics or public policy, so why was he commenting on the legality of smoking?
|
This is a very libertarian view. Would you also like to see heroin and cocaine legalized? Maybe we should disassemble the FDA to allow poisons in all food and drug products, so long as they say that they're poison.
As to policy making, the SG should be able to make recommendations, along with the US Public Health Service, based on scientific evidence, to the house or senate so that they can decide on legislation. He is an educator, and as such must explain how dangers to the public, like smoking, should be treated. Obviously, he cannot simply outlaw smoking.
Don't forget, not all liberals have the same views. DC is brilliant, like many liberal members, but I'm sure very few liberals agree on 100% of the same solutions or perceptions. I happen to think that public health should be an issue of government, and it would work best in congruence with socialized health services.
Do you smoke?