Sunday, August 7, 2005

My body is my property

Ian makes note of another post by Brent Colbert wherein he fails to understand the difference between fundamental rights and man-made ones. I tried to respond, but like Ian experienced, the comment was marked as potential 'spam' and so needed the approval of the blog administrator. Either there is a problem with Mr. Colbert's comment section or my comment was rejected, i.e suppressed. This is what I wanted to ask, in response to these words:

Brent, you say: "Which laws do we ignore and which do we enforce? Is it a question of severity or individual rights? What happens when your perceived rights conflict with my rights?"

So I am curious: Would you please explain how a person freely choosing to smoke a joint interferes with your rights? Does the right of the potato chip addict to consume what he chooses also interfere with your rights? It matters not one bit here that marijuana is illegal and potato chips legal. We are not talking about man-made rights, but actual, inherent rights.
I invite Mr. Colbert to elaborate on his argument further here. The comment section is alive and well.

2 comments:

Meaghan Champion said...

See Ian's Updates too

It's an interesting remark in light of of the "Technical Glitch" defence.

My how these Blogging Tories love their "technical glitches" to explain things huh?

Little Tobacco said...

rights are between the state and the individual, not between individuals. Mr Colbert seems to miss this point.