Quote:I understand your point, but I think physical autonomy is an inalienable right. That some laws violate them doesn't make it right, IMO.
If it's inalienable why do you support people giving it away then? That's a contradiction. Either it's inalienable or not. You can't have it both ways. Inalienable means you can't give it away, and some rights are inalienable by definition. assisted suicide is not giving away a right, it's merely consenting on someone terminating your life with your approval and decent justification.
Quote: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.
Restricting rights is a necessity in any society. We all restrict our own rights everyday for many reasons, and it's how it works. But losing rights, specially the most important rights, is unthinkable and inhumane. Giving up is the same as losing, it's just different words for the same thing. If rights are inalienable, why can I give them away? If they aren't, why can't the state take them all away?
Quote:Again, it's not losing a right if someone is choosing to do it. It's an important distinction.
Except that choices are influenced by many variables and sometimes coerced. THere is no free choice. THe point of rights being inalienable is that you can't lose them, even if you truly want it. It's the reason why you can't become a slave - Because you are a human, and the UDHR says you always have dignity and forbids slavery. BTW, if you support human rights, why do you oppose the article that says slavery is banned and condemned? How do you manage to support human rights (mostly based on dignity, well being, happiness, fulfilment, etc.) and also be ok with something like slavery? Are you really ok with the fact some people stop being people and can be treated worse than animals? Do you really think this is ok? And don't you think it would lead to the strongest enslaving and coercing the weakest, like it has happened many times?
Quote:But we deal with heartache and death every day. The "what about the children" types of arguments don't really sit with me.
OK, that was a bad argument. Essentially, I believe that the state, since it exists, has duty with all of us and needs to provide important services and protect citizens when necessary. That's why many people support public healthcare, education, etc etc - I also believe the state has a duty to protect us physically and not allow outsiders to threaten our security - Security is a human right, IMO - That's why every state has an army. Following this reasoning, I think obligating people to wear seatbelts is completely normal and a form of decreasing the chances of death. I don't see anything wrong with it. Only a libertarian (hardcore one) would think it is oppressive to be forced to wear a seatbelt when it comes incorporated with the vehicle (helmets cost money, but bikes aren't a first choice for many people). I know you'll disagree, but I think it is a reasonable law - It's not oppressive to plug in your seatbelt, that's an exaggeration. There's many cases when the state protects citizens, either by forcing you to abstain from X (such as forbidding entry into a place infected by hazardous chemicals) or forcing you to adopt a behaviour to protect yourself or others (for example, parents have a special legal duty of protection with children so if you do something stupid like, i.e. seeing your child drowning and wilfully allowing them to drown without trying anything, you can be prosecuted by negligent murder)
Quote:So are laws that call for fines for violating said rules.
My point - The state needs money. Let's not be naive, cops are told to purposefully search for vehicles wrongly parked and people without seatbelts. Money matters.
Quote:How to drive, parking, braking, etc. are important laws to protect the rights of other motorists; wearing a seatbelt isn't, IMO.
If I crash and my body is projected upfront, I hit another person and kill them isn't that pretty much violating the rights of other motorists? Because it is frequent in high speed accidents and it hurts people b sides the driver. Really? Why can't I simply park in the middle of the road? I'm not hurting anyone else, it's people's fault they don't turn around. And it's possible to be a skilful driver and drive well without brakes
