I’m fairly certain I’ve ranted about this before, but I can’t find it, and if I have, oh well. I need to rant again. Thanks for your indulgence:
Idiots on both side of the political aisle have pushed me too far! Let be be real, real clear: the question “But why do you need <whatever>” does not trump any other argumenent. It may be (but probably isn’t) an interesting point of discussion, but that’s all. It doesn’t win the argument, it doesn’t add to the argument, it doesn’t even advance the discussion. It’s a digression and one that’s getting irritating.
In the last several days, I’ve had the following questions mewled at me in various political discussions (none here):
But why do you need guns?
Answer: I don’t need guns, but I have a constitutional right to firearms, and that right is not trumped by a need or lack of need.
But why do you need drugs?
Answer: I don’t need or even do drugs. But I believe that there’s a desirable outcome in legalization. Need has nothing to do with it.
But why do you need pornography?
Answer: I see you need a punch in the snoot. Whether or not I need it, I want it. I find it esthetically pleasing.
But why do you need hate speech?
Answer: Speech is speech. As long as it’s not slander, libel or treason, I’m pretty much an “anything goes” kinda guy. (Except for the “But why do…” question). Your insiuation that I’m in favor of “hate speech” because I want to make racist comments hardly furthers the debate. I simply don’t want draconion fascist anti-free speech laws.
But why do you need a sports car?
Answer: I don’t. My best friend who loves sports cars enjoys them. I think SUVs are more practical for the foothills of Colorado myself.
“But why do you need a SUV?”
Answer: Remember the gun question? You’re about to be an object lesson as to why I need a gun.
Aaaargh. NOWHERE in the constitution or in any legal source that I’m aware of is there a NEED test required for everything.
These Need-heads seem to belive that everything should be forbidden unless you can prove a need. It’s sloppy reasoning and a sloppy argument. What I suspect that you weenies mean with the “But why do you need <whatever>?” argument is “I believe the societal benefits of banning <whatever> outweigh the right you have to own/use/do whatever”. If that’s what you mean, then SAY that!
It’s a sloppy argument, it’s sloppy thinking and it’s just slightly better than “But what of the chldren? Won’t anyone think of the children?”