Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Ron Paul: Why Can't We 'Put Into Our Body Whatever We Want?'
Dittos Rush! ^ | 2-18-12 | James

Posted on 03/04/2012 4:08:27 AM PST by iloveamerica1980

Opinion piece:

So do we have the right to put into our bodies whatever we want?

Ron Paul fans have attempted to rebuke me in my response to Dr. Paul's recent statement "Why is it we can’t put into our body whatever we want?" in my previous post here

I suggested that not everything available to put in our bodies is beneficial nor wise to ingest. The Bible says: With freedom comes great responsibility. Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your bodies. 1 Corinthians 6:19-20

To which a commenter named Paul responded: "Of course what Paul might ask is where in 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 does the text say we are responsible for what *someone else* puts into their bodies? Does mandated good behavior bring people closer to God? Does Jesus teach us that we gain righteousness by behaving well? By believing in laws to make us good? Christianity is based on our own good behavior no matter what others do around us or to us. There is no command that we make others behave well."

I answered: "The Christian has the responsibility to live out God's Word as written and tell others the truth within it. Dr. Paul used the word "we" including himself. Isn't he also a Christian? We cannot command others to behave well, but the Christian should certainly not encourage people to put in their bodies whatever they want!"

In fact, Dr. Ron Paul is a self ascribed Baptist. Taking Dr. Paul's comment to it's logical and eventual conclusion, those who continue to put "whatever they want" into their bodies will have an affect on the rest of society. Just take a look at the unrestrained society of Sodom and Gomorrah if you doubt this. Many lifestyle choices lead to serious health issues, death of self as well as the unintentional deaths of others who "got in the way". Everyone should agree that the Government has the right and responsibility to "interfere" with the rights of individuals for the common good at a certain point. At which point, we will never entirely agree. Hence, the purpose of democracy.

Politically, I agree with Dr. Paul on quite a bit and admit that even he would be a better alternative as President than out current leader who I believe is governing against the will of the people. (My current favorite is Rick Santorum.) But like any politician, Paul must be held accountable for his ideas and values when they extend beyond the perimeter of public safety and the greater common welfare.

What do you think?

James R. via Dittos Rush 2-18-12


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: ronpaul
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

1 posted on 03/04/2012 4:08:30 AM PST by iloveamerica1980
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

Because our bodies belong to the Gubmint.

(this is from a physician?) Sheesh!


2 posted on 03/04/2012 4:15:10 AM PST by sodpoodle ( Newt - God has tested him for a reason...... to bring America back from the brink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

There are people, who are so deprived of nutritional knowledge, that they think the five food groups consist of pop, chips, gum, chocolate bars and beer.

I don’t have a problem with the government making available information as to what eating healthy means, but that is as far as the government should be allowed to go.


3 posted on 03/04/2012 4:16:17 AM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

When you use dope it would be better for you and your family if you just put a gun in your mouth and pulled the trigger.

Faster Cheaper, and less heartbreaking.

OK all you drug enthusiasts, you who want dope legalised start screaming.


4 posted on 03/04/2012 4:16:58 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

“Everyone should agree that the Government has the right and responsibility to “interfere” with the rights of individuals for the common good at a certain point.”


Statements like this scare the h*ll out of me.

‘Everyone should agree’ a theocracy by any other name is still a theocracy.


5 posted on 03/04/2012 4:17:26 AM PST by maine yankee (I got my Governor at 'Marden's')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle

...as our present government preaches.


6 posted on 03/04/2012 4:17:54 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

At the most basic level, you are not truly free if you do not have the right to put into your system whatever you want. Who gets to decide which chemical compound is legally consumable and which isn’t, and by what argument?


7 posted on 03/04/2012 4:18:11 AM PST by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Well said, Jonty30!


8 posted on 03/04/2012 4:19:03 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980
Christianity is based on our own good behavior

An absolute total misunderstanding of the gospel.

9 posted on 03/04/2012 4:20:35 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maine yankee

maine yankee, I refer to “interference” like demanding we all drive on the same side of the street as opposed to we all drive a Volt. Common sense/ safety laws like this.


10 posted on 03/04/2012 4:22:05 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980
Dr. Paul's recent statement "Why is it we can’t put into our body whatever we want?"

Maybe he does have a point. Just picture how much better society would be if meth was legal.....

Naw, I can't either.

11 posted on 03/04/2012 4:26:32 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

If the results of whatever illegal substance you put into your system endanger the lives of others, then there is your line in the sand. If you eat 20 Big Macs a day and still want taxpayer funded “free” healthcare, then the rest of us have a problem.


12 posted on 03/04/2012 4:26:35 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper

I couldn’t believe it either, hence my response.


13 posted on 03/04/2012 4:29:07 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

I care about the government telling us what to eat. The main thing is that they are WRONG! Their food pyramid or plate or whatever they are calling it now is UPSIDE DOWN and wrong. If you eat the way they want you to...you are going to be ill and FAT!


14 posted on 03/04/2012 4:29:55 AM PST by Cricket24 (Proud to be a CONSERVATIVE WOMAN!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cricket24

In all things employ the use of “balance”, you’ll usually never go wrong.


15 posted on 03/04/2012 4:32:00 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

So, if the said person were to consume the aforementioned ‘illegal substance’ in the privacy of his or her home, without endangering anyone else while the substance runs its course, would the actions be “legal”?

As long as you have an external entity deciding for you what you get to put in your mouth and what you don’t, fundamentally, there is no true freedom. There is no argument which can justify tobacco and alcohol being legal, by applying the premise of your argument.


16 posted on 03/04/2012 4:32:56 AM PST by James C. Bennett (An Australian.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cricket24

I don’t know what is in the food pyramid at the moment, so I cannot comment on that.

But I do know that it should be about 55 percent long chain carbs and about 30 percent protein and about 25 percent fat.


17 posted on 03/04/2012 4:37:24 AM PST by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: James C. Bennett

I agree with you in part, but we all know that most people who consume the aforementioned ‘illegal substance’ but can you guarantee that they are going to be staying home for the night? Also, what happens when the drugs backfire for whatever reason and they can’t afford to pay for their emergency room visit?


18 posted on 03/04/2012 4:39:47 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

Sorry, didn’t do a proper grammar check on that last response.


19 posted on 03/04/2012 4:42:15 AM PST by iloveamerica1980 (Topop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: iloveamerica1980

How the question is framed determines the answer. The Question is NOT should drugs be made legal? The Question is does the Federal Government have the authority to impose Drug Prohibition absent a Constitutional Amendment?


20 posted on 03/04/2012 4:46:23 AM PST by Mechanicos (Why does the DOE have a SWAT Team?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson