Should Prisoners be set Free When Their "Crime" Becomes Legal?

[rexbeccarox]

Well, because we differ in our opinions about what people can do with their own bodies, we probably won't come to an agreement on this, but I'll address your points:

I support bodily autonomy and self-determination - I just don't think it is an absolute right (none is)

I do, though.  Like I said, we're probably going to have to agree to disagree on some of these points.

1. the right to live and physical well-being are both individuals' choices, IMO.  I think assisted suicide should be legal, for example. 

You don't understand my point - The right to live and physical well being are inalienable rights, meaning no one can harm you or take your rights away. The right to live means, above all else, that you have the right to circulate without being murdered and the right to physical well being means people can't beat you for fun or use your body for scientific experimentations (just a couple of examples). Assisted suicide isn't a problem because, with consent, some rights can be restricted by yourself.

I understand your point, but I think physical autonomy is an inalienable right. That some laws violate them doesn't make it right, IMO.  

2. I think the idea of banning smoking altogether is ridiculous.  

Great, but many people disagree.

And I disagree with them.

3. if a consenting adult of sound mind consents to slavery, I have no problem with it.

I entirely disagree. If you support human rights, then you must know human rights' theory is based on the principle of inviolability  and inalienability - Meaning that you have personhood, rights and you can't lose them. Consenting into slavery and becoming a slave means, by definition, losing your rights and becoming property of someone else, you have the same legal status as a chair or a desk.

Not losing your rights, rather giving them up, which I think should be someone, of consenting age and sound mind, should have the right to do.

So, if you support this, does it mean it's ok for me to have a slave, rape them, beat them and use them for labour as I please? Your quest for individual autonomy is familiar, but it has contradictions - Namely that you think human rights are important but also don't mind people losing them. That's not going to work.

Again, it's not losing a right if someone is choosing to do it. It's an important distinction.

I see no problem with weed both from an individualist and collectivist standpoint.


As for seatbelts and helmets laws - When I think of those laws I don't really think about the terrifying burden of wearing them, but of the children and families who lose relatives because they were distracted and didn't wear it...

But we deal with heartache and death every day. The "what about the children" types of arguments don't really sit with me.

Not to mention it's a great way to grab some state-funding that is necessary to run public services.

So are laws that call for fines for violating said rules.

A fine is a healthy reminder to wear your seatbelt - My dad only wore them because he was afraid of being fined - And it worked. When you drive you are using your vehicle but roads and public spaces are usually the government's property - If the government provides a space for you to drive it is only fair to abide by the road's rules - Namely how to drive, park, brake, turn, wear the seatbelt, etc.

How to drive, parking, braking, etc. are important laws to protect the rights of other motorists; wearing a seatbelt isn't, IMO.