Cecilie1200
Diamond Member
\Actually it seems the drug companies are doing an end around by advertizing to the end user so they demand the doctor prescribe this drug to them. Since the end user never went to med school, they have no idea what they need. In fact some may not even know what exactly they are suffering from... the end user is not intellegent enough to prescribe thier own drugs
Can I quote you on that? Heh, I guess I just did.
Actually, I appreciate your candor. I don't often hear it put that way, but you're right: this kind of regulation distributes rights based on intelligence, or at least the current government's estimation of such. Interesting.
Exactly. People aren't smart enough to take care of themselves. I hear ya.
Well, most people don't have medical degrees, so yeah. Also, it's a very good idea to have an objective third party monitoring your use of a lot of medications.
I'd agree with you that it's a good idea. But I'm not willing force my notion of a 'good' idea on other people with the law. At the end of the day, whether something is a good idea is a subjective decision - the answer will be different for every person. The "we-know-better" mentality of meddling statists is wearing thing.
Whether or not a good idea needs to be enforced by law depends entirely on the idea and the subject it addresses. I don't actually have a problem with restricting access to certain dangerous items and substances, depending on what they are and the nature of the restriction. And I don't consider it automatically "statism" to believe that governments have legitimate purposes, or that anarchy is not the perfect natural state.