Again today, the phrase 'nanny state' came up in conversation

[Fovea]

and I realized I had a reflexive desire to hit people in the nose for using that phrase.

When I mentioned this to my partner, she asked me why I was so violent in my reaction. I told her that people who hate the nanny state are often quite ok with the torture state.

[eallen]

1. Is it really either-or?

Can one not object to torture, most importantly, as treating even criminals civilly is a pillar of liberal civilization, while at the same time worrying that sometimes regulations go overboard in protecting people for their own good? It's not the skateboarders and sailors and kayakers and rock-climbers who are defending torture. If you talk to those groups, you'll find that some of them do have a thing or two to say about the nanny state. Now yeah, I know you're reacting to the ditto-heads, most of whom get into a vehicle to go to a store a quarter mile distant. But there are plenty of other groups who sometimes worry about the nanny state. Just saying.

:hippie:

[Fovea]

4. It is not always a question of overreacting, IMO

I was working in an Emergency Room the year Kansas repealed its helmet law.

And the sudden influx of kidney donors was a positive good. Whether it was good enough
to compensate for the loss of life among the 16 through 30 year old male population
is a question best left to their families than the nanny state, I guess.

In the era of personal responsibility, you can, as the group Devo sang, dare to be stupid.
Certainly big tobacco is all for that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

2. Better a "nanny state" then a "mommy dearest" state.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. not on DU...

well, not very many. :P

I happen to be against both.