Judge Blocks New York City\\\'s Limits on Big Sugary Drinks

[Charlotte Little]

53. Then, I suppose...

...you agree with me that I shouldn't have to pay for the rights of the individual? After all, it's often the "mob" that foots the bill for those out there exercising their individual rights. Especially in the area of healthcare costs. The government often foots some of the bill on our behalves too, including subsidizing health care costs. There goes my right to choose not to have my money spent on others' poor choices. My right over my money is gone while your right to (fill in the ______) is honored. I don't believe that is how this country should operate.

An example - you have a right to go hiking on trails in various areas of the country. But while out, if you climb up a very steep cliff and fall, and a helicopter has to come get you, then you, the individual, should pay the $10,000+ it costs for your rescue and not the "mob" taxpayers. Some people might even say to you, "why didn't you just go walking along the marked trail and not climb the cliff. Wasn't that excessive?" You might reply, "it's my right to climb the cliff." - sure, only if you are the one wholly responsible for the consequences. Otherwise, they should make it illegal to climb cliffs. And...wouldn't you know, it is illegal in certain state parks to go off marked trails and climb cliffs. I suppose that law is stupid too and that we shouldn't care what the majority wants. The individual's right is so much more precious.

Rights are not granted the same way universally, anyway, and they are often interpreted arbitrarily. So, no, rights are not just rights and, no, I do not have to respect their inherent presence. Besides, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where in the constitution it states that we have a right to gorge ourselves into a state of a disease and become a burden on others.