In the absence of a Sovereign, say on a deserted island, you have the right to do whatever fits your morality. For example, for some it might mean that they dont kill animals for food, while others might actively hunt.
Deeming Regulations have been released!!!!
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
Maybe we just need some new words. Maybe "right" doesn't have a clear meaning.
Unless you invoke a Deity or some other absolute source, isn't it just what groups of people decide is appropriate? The word "natural" is a hard one for me to understand in this context.
This is an interesting discussion, but I guess it's a long way from the right to vape. That one for sure is going to be decided by groups of people, no matter how much philosophy we aim at it.
Unless you invoke a Deity or some other absolute source, isn't it just what groups of people decide is appropriate? The word "natural" is a hard one for me to understand in this context.
This is an interesting discussion, but I guess it's a long way from the right to vape. That one for sure is going to be decided by groups of people, no matter how much philosophy we aim at it.
If I lived on a Deserted Island, I wouldn't have to worry about Deeming.
Or the Flavor Ban that we will probably see.
Or the Flavor Ban that we will probably see.
I suppose we have different definitions of what a right is. In my opinion, a right has to change human interactions in specific ways in order to interact with the world, which is what makes it exist; as there are not enough humans to create a human interaction on an island with a single person, a right has no point at which it can interact with the world.
I think that you are looking at the state of having the right to perform legal actions (that is, people who would visit violence on you for vaping would be punished for violating your rights) and assuming that is the natural state, which I don't believe is the case. In the absence of a sovereign, anybody would be free to kill you for vaping if they could.
I think it would be better to understand what those who originally came up with "natural rights" were going against. It's not that the monarchy couldn't infringe on every aspect of your life at their whim but that they shouldn't.
Of course now the nannies are doing similar under the guise of for our own good and getting away with it.
This is turning into a semantics rabbit hole.
The FDA is attempting to take away my right to vape as I choose.
I have an issue with that.....
The FDA is attempting to take away my right to vape as I choose.
I have an issue with that.....
I am also not a fan of that, but effectively combating it requires using arguments that don't have false premises.
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.
-- CS Lewis
-- CS Lewis
I don’t understand why vaping doesn’t have more political support from Republican politicians. It is virtually a republican wet dream. Personal freedoms, over regulation that is demonstrably hurting an industry and American workers and business owners, and there is actual science to prove it from institutions that are recognized worldwide as being credible. We have an administration that is obviously not afraid to chip away, or eliminate completely, prior regulations that it deems as being bad for American business. Why is vaping still under attack?
"Nicotine, while not a completely benign substance, isn’t what causes the death and disease associated with tobacco use.
It’s the combustion and associated toxins.
And it’s the nicotine that keeps smokers coming back to a lifelong addiction to cigarettes.
But nicotine exists on a continuum of risk; from the most harmful cigarettes to medicinal products like patches and gums that are so safe they don’t require a doctor’s prescription. We see an opportunity for new technology like electronic nicotine delivery systems to offer adults access to nicotine without all of the same harmful effects of combusting tobacco. This might also include e-cigarettes regulated as over the counter pharmaceutical products.
To advance that goal, we’ll soon release a draft guidance that lays out the toxicology testing that an e-cigarette would need to undertake to win approval as an OTC drug product.
At the same time we’re also jump-starting new work to re-evaluate and modernize our approach to the development and regulation of safe and effective medicinal nicotine replacement products such as nicotine gums, patches, and lozenges that help smokers quit.
This is a pivotal part of our overall public health approach.
.
.
.
The flavors ANPRM we released last month seeks information to inform potential regulatory actions FDA might take with respect to flavors in tobacco products, which include a ban on flavors in combustible products.
Flavors are a problem.
They entice kids to initiate on cigarettes. Menthol may make it easier to hook young smokers. We have the legal authority, and public health obligation, to address these risks."
Keynote Addresss by Commissioner Gottlieb to the 2018 FDLI Annual Conference
BTW - The is No Such Thing as a "Right" unless it is associated with a "Guarantee".
It’s the combustion and associated toxins.
And it’s the nicotine that keeps smokers coming back to a lifelong addiction to cigarettes.
But nicotine exists on a continuum of risk; from the most harmful cigarettes to medicinal products like patches and gums that are so safe they don’t require a doctor’s prescription. We see an opportunity for new technology like electronic nicotine delivery systems to offer adults access to nicotine without all of the same harmful effects of combusting tobacco. This might also include e-cigarettes regulated as over the counter pharmaceutical products.
To advance that goal, we’ll soon release a draft guidance that lays out the toxicology testing that an e-cigarette would need to undertake to win approval as an OTC drug product.
At the same time we’re also jump-starting new work to re-evaluate and modernize our approach to the development and regulation of safe and effective medicinal nicotine replacement products such as nicotine gums, patches, and lozenges that help smokers quit.
This is a pivotal part of our overall public health approach.
.
.
.
The flavors ANPRM we released last month seeks information to inform potential regulatory actions FDA might take with respect to flavors in tobacco products, which include a ban on flavors in combustible products.
Flavors are a problem.
They entice kids to initiate on cigarettes. Menthol may make it easier to hook young smokers. We have the legal authority, and public health obligation, to address these risks."
Keynote Addresss by Commissioner Gottlieb to the 2018 FDLI Annual Conference
BTW - The is No Such Thing as a "Right" unless it is associated with a "Guarantee".
Many Republicans are absolutely not libertarian. They are moralists. It's like the Democrats come up with something to claim it's a sin and those Republicans will gladly jump on board and take all the blame for the issue as their own.
I recently saw, "The problem is some Republicans are actually Democrats, NO Democrats are actually Republicans."
At the national level, all support of vaping has come from Republicans plus at first 2 Dems on the original Cole/Bishop amendment. Bishop being one of them. No Republican Senators on the "letters" sent to the FDA, urging to finish the final rule of the Deeming.
I know you said 'more' but there are the puritanical Republicans who may fully support industries and less regulation, but not in areas they consider (wrongly) as 'moral issues'.
Mainly, because of Democrats, and other vested 3 and 4 letter agencies - although more recently, there's been some 'fallout' even in those.
That's what I want to know. Why is it we elected a new executive but the alphabets remain the same? And I'm talking bigger than vaping.
Ayn Rand:
“Rights” are a moral concept—the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others—the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context—the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society, between ethics and politics. Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A—and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work.
“Rights” are a moral concept—the concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual’s actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others—the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context—the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society, between ethics and politics. Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.
The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A—and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work.
I was talking more about the ACA, ALA, and other self-interested groups that either give or get grants for junk science.
Wrong! Trespassing, violation of privacy. You still miss the obvious point...
Trespassing = "I get to decide what you can do with your body on my property".Wrong! Trespassing, violation of privacy. You still miss the obvious point...
Privacy = "I get to decide what you can do with your body's sensory organs".
Clearly, you can't do just anything with your body and have it be legal.
Wrong, wrong, wrong and illogical. We might as well have appointed Bloomberg.
G'nite and good luck.
Similar threads
- Locked
