Quote:
Originally Posted by mineistaken
My perspective is that junkies COST to society. Meaning EVERYONE pays for their treatment, for their inability to work and so on and on. Not to mention some addicts actually steal or hurt in order to get the dose.
That are the reasons to prohibit it.
Same logic - some people say that safety belts should not be enforced as it is HIS/HER own life. Do you agree with that?
I do not because losing those lives actually COST to society (one less person to contribute etc etc). That is why they are enforced, even though it is his/her own life...
|
Your 'perspective' is odd given you are Dutch, correct? This argument that it "costs society" is quite ridiculous. How much does alcohol addiction "cost society"? Are you advocating we abolish drinking? Bet that would go over well in Europe where you all drink like fishes. Drunkenness, sexual and physical abuse, kidney and liver disease, less productivity - all because of (legal) alcohol.
How about the cost to society for smoking? Want to ban cigarettes? Again, since most Europeans smoke like chimneys I doubt this policy would go over very well in Europe.