This past weekend I had an awesome ride to the John Day area of Northeastern Oregon where the best riding roads on the planet reside. The national Moto Guzzi rally was taking place while we were there and we saw a lot of people with silly half-helmets and A.B.A.T.E. T-shirts. We had an interesting discussion with one of the half-helmeted A.B.A.T.E types about motorcycle helmets and helmet laws.
According to their website, A.B.A.T.E. stands for A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments and is a non-profit organization dedicated to the Freedom of Choice. Truth be told, they are mostly a one-issue organization and that issue is to kill any attempt to require motorcyclists to wear helmets. I shudder to think how many people have died or have been permanently brain damaged because of their misguided efforts.
The right loves to talk about personal responsibility and they are not completely without a point, but as they use the term, “personal responsibility” is a justification for their own selfish wants. It is a convenient way to deny that society has any responsibility to individuals. Progressives are big on the rights of the individual but can we ignore the individual’s responsibility to society?
The balance between personal choice and accepting responsibility for those choices is nothing short of a debate between democracy and fascism. John Bradshaw, in “On the Family” says that the difference between a sick family and a healthy one is that in a sick family, individuals exist for the family while a healthy family exists for the individuals. Does that truth extrapolate to the bigger “family” of society?
The individual claims the right to ride without a helmet but when she becomes permanently disabled, society becomes responsible for her care. That being the case, should society have some say in the individual’s choices? Does ensuring the safety of the individual meet the test of society existing for the benefit of the individual or does the individual’s right to choose to ride without adequate protection trump the needs of society to not be held responsible for the choices of individual citizens?
Another prime example in this debate can be seen at your local grocery store. The best parking spots, closest to the door, are reserved for the handicapped. When you watch who actually uses those spots it becomes obvious that obesity is the most common handicap in America today. People are morbidly obese to the point that it’s considered a handicap because they made choices to eat too much, eat the wrong things and live a sedentary lifestyle. Does that truly entitle them to special privileges?
These individuals make choices that cost all of us in higher health care costs and lost productivity. At what point do their rights as individuals trump what is best for society? Shouldn’t we at least put those handicapped spots in the furthest corner of the lot and stop providing little electric shopping carts for the morbidly obese? Instead of facilitating their bad choices by zipping them around the grocery store while they fill their electric carts with Twinkies, bacon and Cheezy Poofs, shouldn’t we at least make them walk some of it off by pushing a shopping cart like the rest of us?
I know this may sound a little hypocritical coming from me since I have health issues stemming from my own poor choices but I never reached the point that my choices qualified me for special privileges as handicapped. I’ve also come to believe that many of my poor choices were made because I was never taught to make better choices. What’s more, I did reach a point where I decided that enough is enough and I have taken action to correct the consequences of my choices.
The right will be quick to point out that they have been calling for ‘personal responsibility’ all along but, like usual when it comes to the mantra from the right, it’s just not that simple. Many of those same people believe that they have a right to reproduce like rabbits but they are not held responsible for that choice and they don’t feel that they should be. Not only do they not have to pay the additional taxes that it takes to educate and care for all of those children, they actually get a tax break because of that choice. Why must all of us pay for their personal choice?
There are no easy answers to situations like the above examples nor is this anywhere close to a comprehensive list of situations where we must balance the rights of individuals to make their own choices with the greater good of society. I would like to hear your thoughts on the subject of personal responsibility and how we, as a society should go about balancing these two important but conflicting concepts.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Mr. Culture
Out on a limb
Miguela Holt y Roybal
Margaret Feike
Trudge164
Charles Yoo
Salon.com
Comments
The right to ride without a helmet, become so obese they cannot wipe their own bottom, have kids they cannot afford. It's sad that "its my right" is used to validate unhealthy behaviour. The behaviours continue even in hospital, while we staff try to correct the problems that got them there.
Agreed, and you raise a lot of good points here. Bill Beck did a post recently along these lines; in a comment he described those who want all the benefits of a civil society without any of the obligations as "shoplifters on civilization." That about covers it, as does this post.
But seriously, please don't use morbid obesity as a simple matter of choice. There is a correlation, for example, between poverty or class and obesity, and the fact that the government subsidizes items like starched corn syrup doesn't help anyone's health. Look at farm subsidies if you wish, or look at schools serving organic food and taking away soda machines. But its discrimination to treat one class of individuals differently than others. If someone is disabled, they are entitled to a disabled sticker, unless we want to punish those every single one of those who have "made poor choices" in becoming disabled, including those injured in automobile accidents etc. by making them hobble into the store. No.
On the other hand, a helmet law is NOT an instance of discrimination a class of individuals since everyone is required to wear one. I support this kind of government interference because it doesn't demonstrate prejudice against any particular group, and the results are extremely beneficial to society as a whole.
Cindy, you ask a lot of good questions and that was my intention with the article. As you say, the list could go on and on so I ask again, where DO we draw that line between two competing yet legitimate concepts?
with respect, I used to work in social services. One thing they tell you never to tell an upset person is "calm down." It comes across as a judgement and often makes a person's anger escalate. Just so you know and can protect yourself in the future...
As to your statement. I compare your claim, "I'm not trying to slam fat people" compared against your title, "ABATE This Fatso" and find it doesn't pass the smell test. Not even close.
You could just say you have fat people prejudice (and/or you want hits from people with or against fat prejudice) and leave it there. I get it. Many liberals enjoy fat prejudice as one of the one only safe "hate" categories left these days. I happen to notice because I consider it a subset of the troubling hatred of poor people category (and people of other races since statistically this tends to be where the "fatties" are) and it's a huge pet peeve of mine.
Hence my comment.
As for helmets, they should be required. If anyone objects, hit them in the head with the largest hunk of metal that can be found until the head is gone, and stuff their body in the oil gusher at the bottom on the Gulf of Mexico.
To me, I don't care if you want to stuff yourself with junk food,until you explode, or not wear a motorcycle helmet when riding, but when I have to pay for it in health care costs and in paying some schmo to clean up your brains off my highways then I feel that society has a right to setp in.
I also told him I would always make sure his life insurance is current and paid for! Now, what he chooses is up to him and I've made my boundaries clear. Easy peasy (kind of). A post that is sure to stir up a lot of discussion, and that's the best kind of post there is.
R.
I think Trudge summed up my opinion pretty well: "To me, I don't care if you want to stuff yourself with junk food,until you explode, or not wear a motorcycle helmet when riding, but when I have to pay for it in health care costs and in paying some schmo to clean up your brains off my highways then I feel that society has a right to step in."
That's well and good when it comes to the motorcycle helmet but what about all the other personal responsibility VS the greater good of society issue, such as so many outlined by Cindy?
How DO we, as a society, decide how much tolerance we have for paying for the choices that individuals make?
Yes, my headline was deliberately provocative to draw attention to the post and to stimulate a discussion. And yes, there are lots of handicaps, obvious or otherwise and lots of reasons why people are obese. I've had my own issue with obesity. Can we move the discussion past that now and talk about what this post is really about?
Having said that, I'm reluctant to take care of people who deliberately abuse themselves. Smokers--well, that's something of a no-brainer, isn't it? Except it's an addiction, one that might cost me although I don't smoke. Obesity? Does eating beyond what's healthy despite warnings really represent freedom of choice or something else? What about living beyond one's means? Do I as a taxpayer have an obligation to bail you out? Instituting a lawsuit against a fast food joint because it made you fat? Will I have to pay for that?
On one hand, there's the concept of protection and on the other hand there's the concept of freedom. Is it "fair" to ask the government to butt out of your life and then expect heroic measures to save you if you become ill or destitute as a consequence of your foolishness? Or is it a matter of the strong taking care of the weak again?
I don't know the answers or how we determine what we will and will not tolerate as a society. So far I'm seeing only more questions. Does anyone have the answers? I know I don't.
I wish! But their bodies are so broken down that their joints cannot support their own weight. It is a sad consequence, but at that weight, it is almost guaranteed that they will not be able to get better without some serious program or another that also deals with their mental health.
It's amazing how "responsible" people will get in a real crisis. We have so much here that we've become gluttons for everything...including exercise and healthy habits. Everything is so damn over the top.
I've decided to just rest for a bit.
Great post! I'm with you, amoungst the confused masses of society. I think much of the problem with the right/left is that, well, they're on the right and the left, and rarely the two meet!
You know about me and my opinion and passion for things with motors and wheels. As an auto enthusiast, I always wear my seatbelt. I suppose my inordinate awareness of the laws of physics and newtonian laws make it a simple decision for me. As a cyclist, I wear a helmet, again by choice. However, I've been known to go without if I'm merely toodling around the block, and not venturing out onto the big-boy roads. I have 3 helemts, actually. A half, for slow speed, hot weather time wasting, a 3/4 for most commuting, and a full for when I venture out on to the expressway. Some motorcyclists are dead against helmets, period, and many have tried to convince me to NOT wear one... Again, damn you Newton for swaying my understandings...
Anyway... As it relates to personal responsability. For my megre years, I'm old in mind. I think that personal responsability as it relates to our fine country has gone the way of the dodo. Like some, I think it may be a cause and effect of poor education. The one thing I know for sure is that education is not that which is taught in schools. It is that which is passed down from the wisdom of parents and grandparents.
This "wisdom" I feel has skipped a couple generations as of latley. It's the generations of "me" people who are the cause of this degridation. Parents who let TVs raise their offspring, and such. Kids who grew up never having known the cool caress of mud on a hot summer's day. You know the one's. They buy purell by the 55gal drum full.
Such "sheltered" upbrining in society has sprung 2 generations of people who think that they're above and beyond it all. That they're decisions are the only decisions that count, and that reprocussions of said decisions are something to be left to chance.
The things that were once taught to us by our families, at home, that shaped the what would appear to be "reasonable few" are dying. Matters of manners, virtue, and honor in dailly life are becoming more and more rare. So much has been pushed off on the schools for teaching children and young adults.
I remember going to school, learning the basics, and that was it. If I got out of line, a phone call was made home, and I got the verbal lashing of a lifetime. These moments were rare, but they happened. There was no "school counselor" to see how I felt about a matter. It wasn't the education system's responsability.
So, my point... I think much of personal responsability boils down to three things. Manners, honor, and virtue. Once these three, basic elements of civilized society are again held high, the matter of personal responsability will be a non-issue.
So, is the issue really that of personal responsability, or the "social attitude"? I'm thinking the latter...
GREAT POST!!!
Later,
Aaron
I'll also admit that I currently ride very fast. According to my GPS, my top speed this weekend was 116 mph. I try not to endanger others and I always wear full protective gear including a helmet and an armored riding suit. Am I exceeding my rights?
On the other note, obesity is not a handicap. Obesity is a lifestyle choice for most obese Americans. I am well aware that there are people with medical conditions that effect weight, and they are excluded, of course, but if you choose to eat yourself into oblivion, then no blue license plates for you, Shamu.
Do they have a right to make decisions that all of us have to pay for?
On the other hand, if I'm seriously hurt, society in the form of taxes or insurance premiums, will likely pay. I may not have that right but, again, where do we draw that line?
Esse, the only problem with your theory that Darwin will take the dummies out is that sometimes they are only disabled for years on end and then we all pay. If we could count on Darwin to finish the idiots off, I'd be right there with you.
My husband and I have 15 children who call us "Mom & Dad" and we are considering number 16. NO I am NOT getting pregnant again at 46 years old... couldn't even if I wanted to. 12 of our children are adopted and we are considering adopting number 13. Nobody else is supporting the kids but the pair of us.
Not only do we support OUR children... In addition to the taxes that we pay here in Canada we also own property in both Michigan and Montana and pay property taxes in both states to support things like roads, schools, fire, EMS, police, libraries and community buses. If *someone's* loved ones benefit from those taxes I'm not going to complain about writing the check to pay them. I don't CARE if the income taxes that I pay in both the US and Canada are used to help people... dammit people NEED all the help they can get these days.
On the issue of handicap tags... most of the people around these parts who have them are senior citizens... and I'd personally rather see them parking right up front than I would see people who likely shouldn't still be driving at all trying to park in some of the other spaces in the parking lot.
It is too general a statement to say that the majority of folks using handicap parking are morbidly obese. My 88 year old petite Mom is all of 110 lbs soaking wet.
We have a handicap sticker because she has extreme osteoporosis, two hip replacements and Lumber spine compression fractures.
There are many elderly who need walkers, ect...as does my Mom and the Handicap parking is one of the kindest things that our cities can do for the elderly. There are abuses in any given element.
Some years ago my hubby and I went to Great Britan and of course saw Windsor Castle. My hubby was mortified to see a McDonald's across the street from the castle. The U.S. has taken fast food to another level again.
I don't think you can force people to be responsible for themselves.
There are many cases where laws just won't do the trick as they can not be enforced and we live in such uncertain times that people are simply going to do as they please.
I really miss the former Surgeon General, Dr. Coop. He was a health care leader. What's up with the Surgeon General, shouldn't he or she be seen and heard on the debate for a healthy U.S.?
Thanks for listening and thanks for posting Cap'n.
Susan May
These individuals make choices that cost all of us in higher health care costs and lost productivity. At what point do their rights as individuals trump what is best for society? Shouldn’t we at least put those handicapped spots in the furthest corner of the lot and stop providing little electric shopping carts for the morbidly obese? Instead of facilitating their bad choices by zipping them around the grocery store while they fill their electric carts with Twinkies, bacon and Cheezy Poofs, shouldn’t we at least make them walk some of it off by pushing a shopping cart like the rest of us?”
Are you serious here? You are claiming that obese people are overusing handicapped spots? And this is bothering you? And somehow there is a connection between “fatso” and personal choices and society not helping certain people because they made bad choices?
And so you somehow overcame your own indulgences by making wise choices and now others better get with the program? And there’s a connection here with having children and welfare?
Sorry friend, but you sound like one grumpy and angry old fella who is having a real bad day – or life. Doesn’t anyone else here see that this post ridicules people you don’t like in the name of an essay on personal responsibility? I know I’ll get slammed by some for being “all self righteous” with my comments but too bad. This post is discriminatory and mean spirited. What’s up next? People hurt playing sports should be euthanized?
The only thing you’ve said here that resonates is that you didn’t/t really have any choices in your life because you only knew one way to do things Well, that’s true for about all of us unless we’re fortunate to catch a break and learn a new way of living. How about a little more understanding and compassion instead of condemnation? And stop parking near the handicapped spots – it just seems to piss you off.
I don't see that at all Grif. Maybe, just as you're accusing Cappy of doing, you just want something to bitch about. It seems to me that the issue of personal responsibility, what it includes and what it doesn't, is a fair topic for discussion. Would you deny that many overweight people are overweight because of lifestyle choices? I was a drug addict for many years, but when I hear someone saying less than flattering things about addicts - as many people do, you can see it anywhere - I don't use it as an opportunity to get up on my high horse but rather as a chance to reflect on the personal decisions that both got me into the jam I was in and got me out of it. Certainly I don't attack those who think being a drug addict is a less than ideal thing - it IS a less than ideal thing, but nobody was responsible for me being one but me.
That said, there is at least an element of truth to all of them.
I think that answers concering the balance between personal responsibility and the needs of society lies somewhere between the extremes in the examples and the extreme of never making anyone accountable for anything. THAT is what I intended for this discussion to be about.
How are we to have a discussion if we can't consider unpleasant points of view without anger and vitriol?
And I for one am grateful that some people in our society were willing to give me a break when by the standards here I didn’t deserve it. And I’m willing to extend that hand to others now – regardless of why they got where they are.
"I don’t see why using pejorative terms like fatso and describing them as filling their carts with Twinkies brings anything to a serious discussion. It’s over the top."
You say it's over the top but they are views held by a lot of people and they are not so without merit that they shouldn't even be discussed.
"And I for one am grateful that some people in our society were willing to give me a break when by the standards here I didn’t deserve it. And I’m willing to extend that hand to others now – regardless of why they got where they are."
I agree with that statement completely.
Amen. I know Cappy already seconded that, but it bears thirding too.
Fat, skinny, ugly, lets just all hold hands and sing something, maybe 'Baby Got Back!'
By the way, this should be on the cover.....and P.S. there are many people who abuse that whole handicapped parking, I've seen perfectly healthy folks jump out of their car and almost skip through the store, and then watched a lady, close to death, have to take a parking spot further away because the last handicap spot was taken by skippy, and yes, I did report their asses to the management of said store, and lets just say, Management didn't take kindly to skippy.......
EVIL GRIN!!!
As for those "healthy" people using handicapped spots, I have a friend with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. You have to spend time with her to see how profoundly handicapped she is and what a hell her disease has made of her life. She looks perfectly healthy, but she really, really needs that handicapped sticker.
I'm all for helmet and seatbelt laws. I live in a country with a lot of car accidents. I don't know how many accidents I've driven by. All the ones involving motorcycles looked like the biker didn't survive. The ambulances don't carry corpses, so if they don't find a pulse, the body lies on the road until a hearse comes. The hearses don't have sirens and flashy lights. I think a few more sights like that and the average American would be screaming helmet laws.
The two are connected.
Too many free riders and the rest of us will vote away your free lunch.
I do think we should stand up and shame people only out for that free lunch. I spent a little time working for the federal gov't and a decent percentage of my co-workers were only looking for a job for life where they would not be fired except for the most egregious failure to lift a finger in the pretense of working.
Social responsibility should only step in when or if personal responsibility fails. Far too many individuals have no sense of personal responsibility or lack the ability to allow it to guide their decision making, so society must step in. Are we our brother’s keeper? Since the progressive movement/social reform era of the 19th century, the answer is increasingly YES! Today’s question should be to what extent. Where is the line? Should society say who we should marry based on psychological and IQ tests to ensure the best possible outcome and prevent divorce? Should a person be able to have multiple remarriages (serial monogamy) is that personal responsibility? Should people be allowed to move to rural areas where procurement of employment is slim or unlikely? Is that personal responsibility? Should society require a business plan with goals, objectives and outcomes for every adult decision we make in order to ensure due diligence and personal responsibility is taken. We could keep going and as a society we will continue to increase social responsibility and decrease the importance of the individual’s personal responsibility. As a society, we know what is best. Really, personal responsibility is so, so passé. Sad but true.
Personal freedom is a good thing, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum, just as an individual doesn't exist in a vacuum.
Either way, it's metabolism, addiction, lack of knowledge or ability to find proper nutrition. I doubt anyone would Choose to be morbidly, dangerously obese. OTOH, people drive w/out seat belts and helmets all the time.
As for the Don't Tread On Me gun-toting recipients of social welfare, it's the same old shit -- they want -- nay demand -- all the benefits of living in a civilized society (of course thanks to them it's only semi-civilized), but they don't want to pay for them.
My mind is open, but this case is closed.
See my post, "Big fat lies Part 2."
http://open.salon.com/blog/xylocopa/2009/12/05/big_fat_lies_part_ii