Nearly every week you hear of something else that should be banned. Is this practical? Is there any limit to what we can ban?
2006-11-06 03:10:33 · 9 answers · asked by Barbara Doll to you 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Yep. Would be much better if we had more of an education and personal choice state so that people would take responsibility for their actions.
There is no limit to what we can ban, there comes a point where you cross the line and we are no longer democracy but a communist state. Some would argue we got there already.
2006-11-06 03:19:27 · answer #1 · answered by MI5 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's what you get with left wing totalitarian Governments. If there is a limit, this Government will take you all the way to it. What they are really trying to achieve is absolute control. To do this, they will first turn us into dependant little children, incapable of knowing what is good for us. Banning, as you put it, is merely a symptom of a developing left wing Government.
2006-11-06 17:05:51 · answer #2 · answered by Veritas 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is kind of like the dilema the HAL 9000 computer faced in the movie "2001: A Space Oddesy" where the computer is given opposing sets of instructions, one is to take explorers out to Jupiter and the other is to keep them safe. Computer can't resolve the conflict so kills the expolrers.
EVERYTHING can be "proven" to be unsafe or harmful so the only way to resolve the conflict is to ban EVERYTHING including human (and other) life. Then there is nothing harmful left nor a target for it to destroy.
2006-11-06 11:17:30 · answer #3 · answered by Michael 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it's becoming more and more like that in all Europe. Soon we will have to live in a cage and not even speak with others for fear of offending. Next one will probably be the "ban" on calling someone a man or woman, using "person of male / female gender" instead.....
2006-11-06 11:19:25 · answer #4 · answered by Grilla Parlante 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Some bans are good, like keeping innapropriate materials away from children and banning unscrupulous financial practices like payday lending. Yet when the government decides to put its fingers in every pie, by trying to ban unhealthy food in schools, banning smoking in bars, banning handguns that allow homeowners to defend themselves, they waste taxpayer money by attempting to legislate morality.
2006-11-06 11:17:50 · answer #5 · answered by seantherunner 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunately there are more bans now in this free and demotratic country than back in the days of communist countries. Life in those countries was not as restricted as it is now in this country. Is that why our ancestors fought for? If they were brought back to life they would be ashamed of themselves for breeding such nonsence of a population. Anyway, going from one extreme to the other is just not going to be healthy at all. Why can't we just be in a happy medium?
2006-11-06 11:21:13 · answer #6 · answered by Luvfactory 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I guess as long as people are doing things that are inconsiderate to the general public then bans will continue ad infinitum. There’s no winning.
2006-11-06 11:24:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Certainly do, sadly. Bliar and his cronies want to control and approve everything we do. Brown wants to ban smiling and happiness.
2006-11-06 11:18:58 · answer #8 · answered by pcar964 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Bans are necessary where asocial or antisocial behaviour abounds.
2006-11-06 11:19:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋