Roberto Carlos Alvarez-galloso
Since when did the Government have a right to dictate what to eat, drink, wear, or even smoke? At the present time, we are living in a federal republic, which is eroding into a communist state with trappings of a medieval absolute monarchy. Instead of a Thought Police or a Block Committee, the Television and the Government is there to dictate what should be eaten, worn, or how to live.
The State should withdraw from regulating what the citizen eats. It is the citizen and not the government that recognises what is convenient for the individual. If people want to eat healthy, that is their choice. If a person wants to gradually die from clogged arteries, clogged veins, and other diseases associated with eating unhealthy food that is his/her choice.
The State has no moral right to dictate what is good or bad, when students of public schools have meals that are anti nutritious and downright toxic. The same applies to astronauts in space or the member of the armed force serving in Korea, the Middle East, or any other place.
The individuals, and not the State, should be the protagonists of their health and their healthy relationship with their physician, nurse, and social worker, without the excess interference of a state that prides itself in gluttony (excessive taxes, excessive regulations, and excessive gossiping).
If the State cannot protect personal information, it cannot dictate food. If the State insists on passing repetitive laws on immigration with TPS (Temporary Protective Status), instead of obeying laws already in place (or reducing the duplicate, triplicate, quadruplicate laws), it has no right to dictate food.
In closing, the state reminds me of a Basque legend called Gargantua, which ate and ate until excessive obesity arrived. The cure became a great ball of flatulence and manure. The State in its present form will end up in a great ball of flatulence and manure, which would make the Kyoto Protocol cringe.
Since when did the Government have a right to dictate what to eat, drink, wear, or even smoke? At the present time, we are living in a federal republic, which is eroding into a communist state with trappings of a medieval absolute monarchy. Instead of a Thought Police or a Block Committee, the Television and the Government is there to dictate what should be eaten, worn, or how to live.
The State should withdraw from regulating what the citizen eats. It is the citizen and not the government that recognises what is convenient for the individual. If people want to eat healthy, that is their choice. If a person wants to gradually die from clogged arteries, clogged veins, and other diseases associated with eating unhealthy food that is his/her choice.
The State has no moral right to dictate what is good or bad, when students of public schools have meals that are anti nutritious and downright toxic. The same applies to astronauts in space or the member of the armed force serving in Korea, the Middle East, or any other place.
The individuals, and not the State, should be the protagonists of their health and their healthy relationship with their physician, nurse, and social worker, without the excess interference of a state that prides itself in gluttony (excessive taxes, excessive regulations, and excessive gossiping).
If the State cannot protect personal information, it cannot dictate food. If the State insists on passing repetitive laws on immigration with TPS (Temporary Protective Status), instead of obeying laws already in place (or reducing the duplicate, triplicate, quadruplicate laws), it has no right to dictate food.
In closing, the state reminds me of a Basque legend called Gargantua, which ate and ate until excessive obesity arrived. The cure became a great ball of flatulence and manure. The State in its present form will end up in a great ball of flatulence and manure, which would make the Kyoto Protocol cringe.
No comments:
Post a Comment