Prohibition:
A Series of Questions
Does the government own us? Is it a benevolent entity that exists in order to protect us from ourselves? Does it really know what is best for us? These questions should seem ludicrous to most people, but are they really? Take a glance at our drug policy in this country, and these questions become quite relevant. Ask many Americans, and they will tell you that we are living in a free country. That in this country they are free to do pretty much whatever they want, with few obvious exceptions: murder, theft, rape and assault just to name a few. Now what do these things have in common? They are crimes because they are committed against other people. They are crimes because they deprive others of their rights. This is pretty straightforward stuff, so where am I going with this?
In this country it is illegal to put certain "controlled substances" into your body. If I were to ingest one or more of these drugs, who would I be wronging? What person would I be depriving of his/her rights? Personal use of drugs can cause direct harm to no one but the user. If that by itself is enough to prohibit such behavior, then alcohol and tobacco surely would need to follow suit for consistency's sake. But I am not arguing against alcohol or tobacco, I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy and absurdity of our drug laws.
This brings me back to my first question: does the government own us? The answer to this question is and should be an overwhelming "no." Then why, in a so-called free country, is my government telling me what I can and cannot do to my own body? If the government does not own me, which in fact it does not, it has no right to restrict what I can and cannot put into my body. I will repeat that: MY body. The government cannot protect me from myself: to do so is to infringe on my individual rights.
Some may argue that it is in the interest of public safety, and that these substances are illegal because they can cause you harm. But really, I feel as if that argument is not even worth addressing. I could sit here and tell you that for instance, marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, its legal counterparts. But that is not necessary for the sake of this argument. If I want to use a substance that could potentially cause me harm, then that is my right as an American and as an individual. There is no other argument to be had here. It's done. This is not a free country if that is not the case. No man is truly free unless he is allowed to make his own choices, mistakes or not. Prohibition is hypocrisy at its finest, and has no place in a free society.
-D.
Sunday, 5 April 2009 at 0253.