LETTER OF THE WEEK

IF CORPORATE REGULATION IS SO WRONG, THEN WHY IS REGULATING OUR LIVES OK?

By Geoff Kennedy

Paula Easley whines corporations aren't free to lard food with trans
fats and pesticides and expose their workers to cigarette smoke (
"Lifestyle police take away our rights," July 22). She interprets
regulating corporations as control over "our lives."

Which "lifestyle police" decide corporations have more rights in
public than people in their own homes? Why don't women have the right
to decide if their pregnancy will kill them, which sex they may
marry, which country they get their medicine from, whether that
medicine includes marijuana, whether to burn their own property if
it's a flag, whether they can phone or e-mail friends without
government spying or whether the material in their homes is porn? (
Disclosure: I'm a pro-life male hetero who's never smoked pot, bought
medicine from Canada, burned a flag or used porn. )

Why aren't people in other countries free to govern themselves
without being controlled by U.S. Nanny in Chief George W. Bush?

And which nanny put Paula Easley in charge of deciding for us that
"today secondhand smoke exposure is not widespread?"

What's the principle here? The nanny state is bad, except when we
become the nannies?

Geoff Kennedy

Anchorage

Pubdate: Sat, 05 Aug 2006

Source: Anchorage Daily News (AK)