If America had a golden rule, a sizable number of people (trust me I polled America) would probably agree that it sounds something like this: Do unto yourself what you wish as long as it affects no one else. We praise individual liberty (communities are for squares and communists, man) and proudly state that a person has the right to do whatever he wants with his own body (it’s not as if there’s a deity they might have been created by or anything). You can cut it, abort it, draw on it, or even wash it, if you so desire. That’s what makes America great, right? I can choose whether to get creamy or crunchy peanut butter without stepping on anyone’s toes (Who in God’s name actually enjoys crunchy?) And some of a more libertarian mind would even say that we should be able to choose between our rock-hard crack cocaine and our powdery afternoon delight. Why?
Because that’s America and as long as the only thing burning is the crack pipe or your nasal cavity, then it’s no one else’s business.
Now, is there some truth to this argument? In short, yes. Certain decisions affect single individuals more than they affect groups and some other decisions can only physically affect one person. But is that really the entirety of the issue? Let’s say I decide I want to get hopped up on cough syrup for a night of robo-trippin’ down codeine lane. Things are going well for a while. I see a monkey, a couple midgets with big cigars on unicycles, and laugh so hard milk comes out of my nose (and I didn’t even drink any milk). But boom, it all comes to end when I decide to throw in some Mr. Boston and a couple Xanax pills to ease the high. The next thing I know I’m hooked up to more IV’s than a heroin addict is syringes. I’m dead. Seemingly, that experience only affects myself. Only I am dead. Only I have heard the great buzzing at the violet-light end of the spectrum of life.
But is that really the case? What about my family? I would assume my dad is at least marginally upset, my one friend is probably minorly inconvenienced and disappointed that I left him anything in my will, and my extended family needs to take time off of work to attend my funeral. In reality, many more people than just myself were affected. The damage to them may not have been physical; it may have been psychological, emotional, or (Lord knows why) sexual.
And so, it bothers me when I hear that the great American principle is plausibly harmful self-choice. Admittedly, individual choice is important, but we can’t glorify it. And more importantly, we can’t legalize everything in the name of the right of self-harm. Just because something seems only to affect an individual does not mean its consequences are not far-reaching and possibly even more dangerous for others. Say I die doing something stupid, someone I know gets sad, compounding other difficulties in his life, and he kills himself. I’m not directly responsible, but the emotional damage there is clear. So, let’s take a step back and view choice as it ought to be and not glorify it; let’s accept that we can debate what should and shouldn’t be legal, but that “you should be able to do what you want to yourself” is not necessarily a good reason. And most importantly, let’s relax restrictions on cough syrup. I don’t like having to show my ID when I’m sick.
