[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
things which are potentially injurious and yield "practically nothing good."

[/ QUOTE ]

Skydiving.

Baseball (see earlier thread about kids getting killed by scary aluminum bats)

Church.

Ice Cream (tofutti tastes "almost" the same).

Motorcycles.

Poker.

[/ QUOTE ] There is a difference between outlawing trans fats and outlawing these things. I understand that you don't like outlawing either, and neither do I, but there is a difference. The government think it's helping society to arrive much faster to a place where the market would lead us eventually anyway (no trans fats).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure we can find people who would think banning ice cream would be helping society. Clearly, lots of people think getting rid of poker would help society.

[ QUOTE ]
The market is slow, outlawing is quick. And people won't protest. If you took away church or ice cream, people would be outraged because they feel like they get something good from these things. If you take away trans fats, nobody (really, nobody) will care except for people who care just because of principle and slippery slope ideas, like yourself and to some degree I.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the "difference" is that lots of people like one, but lots of people don't like the other?

How many people is it OK to oppress before oppression becomes bad? As long as it's just a few people, and as long as we can portray them as some sort of wackos, it's no problem, right?