Debate: Capitalism vs. Democracy
Side: Capitalism

Ah, discredit Wikipedia, ok.But anyway, if you wish to break down freedom of choice laws, let's go:1. Second Hand Smoke - Still no evidence to suggest that it causes cancer or major illnesses. The studies done that try to suggest that it does will merely say "wait a minute, he lived with a smoker? Second hand smoke, then". 2. Drinking and Driving - Another skewed study that goes after blood alcohol levels instead of actual impairment. The average blood alcohol level for alcohol related deaths is .15%, but that information was obtained by, once again, finding that a car accident victim had alcohol and adding it to the statistic. Had nothing to do with seeing if it was because of intoxication in the first place. Passengers included.3. Murder is directly effecting another. If you come and kill me, you have made the conscience decision to take my life (or maybe you were crazy, but that comes back to the speculation. The evidence is apparent, you deprived me of my life). The consequences for something like this? We deprive you of your freedom/life. The punishment fitting the crime. We can not say the same for the prior two, since they are based on faulty science. I'm glad you brought it up. More people need to be aware of how idiotic it is to put people in jail for nothing more than traditional speculation (and that is exactly what it is). Conservatives and Liberals to blame.And no, I am not Randian. I do agree with the ideas of Objectivism, but I would save a baby that's dying... my personal choice to save the baby, which Randians would most likely be against.And what Authoritarian Capitalism do you speak of? Oh, you mean government supported monopolies, government approved business deals, and government bailouts for major corporations? That is not what true Capitalists want. That is Corporatism.And what disorder are you referring to caused by freedom of choice? If drugs are legalized, are you suggesting we will have disorder? No evidence. If prostitution is legalized, are you suggesting we will have disorder? I've shown the faultiness of your evidence. Gambling, pornography, censorship. All issues solved with personal choice, and you speak of some disorder without presenting any hard evidence that it would even exist. All I can assume is that you can predict the future and have seen some horrible consequences for letting people decide for themselves. But if you have this amazing power, surely you can show us how we can prevent the people from going down the wrong path... oh wait, government control. Okay, you were right.As for Global Warming, you've shown yourself that there's plenty to debate about. Now, if you full on accept that global warming is man-made and a serious issue, okay. But I do not. And truly, there has been nothing to convince me that if we don't do something about global warming, it will be the extinction of the human race. Man has survived extreme climate change from thousands of years before, I'm sure we can do it again. In fact, we have the ability to do it these days more than anything.But in the end, I get it. You're afraid of the consequences of just letting people live their personal lives however they want. Conservatives are afraid of people questioning traditional methods, and Liberals are afraid of people not caring about any issue that they bring up (political correctness, environmentalism, animal rights). When it comes right down to it, suppressing freedom of choice is purely a control move. Not a safety move, not an "ends justifies the means" move, but a control move to keep us in check with their ideologies. So I get it. But even more, that is why I disagree.