[wtfsvi]

[ 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 ] Yes, that's fine. But can you find people that think outlawing trans fat will hurt society? Except for people like me and you, who think so because of slippery slope ideas and philosophical ideas about individual rights.

[ 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?

[/ QUOTE ] I did not say it was OK, I said there is a significant difference between outlawing something that nobody really wants (but they might not care one way or the other, so they might buy it if it's allowed and convenient), like trans fats, and something that a few people want a lot, but other people think is bad, like poker or sky diving. I'm not saying any of these two are OK, but one is a lot worse than the other.

edit: The third difference is the one vhawk pointed out. The welfare state has to pay for you if you get sick from all the unhealthy stuff you eat, so as long as you want to have a welfare state you might not get away with allowing people to do whatever they want. I know that you don't want to have a welfare state, but most people want it and think it's important.