Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ahtman wrote:

sebster wrote:

We do lots of unhealthy things, should we legislate every one of them?

No, some should be and some shouldn't. When you sign up for the army you can expect there to be more restrictions, because people are counting on you with their lives. But this one isn't even being legislated, so I don't even know why we're having this conversation.

It's all part of a broader movement to sweep away peoples ability to choose, not just in the military. It would only start in the military and than spread out from there. The problem is inherent in your statement above. Some yes, some no, but where and who gets to decide? Why should the government be telling anyone, as a general rule, what they can't do with their free time and money? Prolongation of their life is the individuals choice. We don't exist for the betterment of the state and are contractually obliged to put so much time in to further the profit margins of a company and pay taxes.

If person like country fried steak, which is not healthy in any way, so what?

I agree with the idea that for the most part people should be free to choose their own poisons. Eat what you want, smoke what you want, drink what you want. For instance, I think the excise taxes on cigarettes are wrong, and are only there because it's an easy source of revenue. But that's a default citizen. going about his life. If you start joining organisations you may find you have to accept a little more responsibility.

If you become a the standards of behaviour expected of you becomes a little higher. While a 19 year old can go and get out Friday night, get absolutely hammered and wake up in a gutter on Saturday morning, we expect more of lawyers, doctors, accountants or a member of any similar professional body. If they carry on like the 19 year old, they get booted from their professional associations.

And that's just for folk with memberships in civilian organisations. When it comes to joining a group like the army, you accept they will have many, many times the level of control over your life. That's just how it is, the army couldn't work any other way. So if people want to keep to a live free or die lifestyle, don't join the army.

But then we have to remember that even considering we're talking about the army, where there's the greatest chance of this proposal getting up, it was still rejected out of hand. If we're looking into this for signs of greater social trends, the only one evident here is that smoking isn't going to be banned.

sebster wrote:And that's just for folk with memberships in civilian organisations. When it comes to joining a group like the army, you accept they will have many, many times the level of control over your life. That's just how it is, the army couldn't work any other way. So if people want to keep to a live free or die lifestyle, don't join the army

Seriously, QFT. We are talking about the armed forces, which have as much control over soldiers as they want. We are not talking about general population. It's a volunteer army in America, so if you don't like it, don't join. No problem!