评论
打印
If solace and comfort are how we judge the worth of something, then consider that tobacco brings solace to smokers; alcohol brings it to drinkers; drugs of all kinds bring it to addicts; the fall of cards and the run of horses bring it to gamblers; cruelty and violence bring it to sociopaths. Judge by solace and comfort only and there is no behavior we ought to interfere with.
如果说安慰和慰藉是我们判断事物价值的标准，那么请想一想：香烟带给吸烟者安慰；酒精让嗜酒者沉醉；各式毒品让吸毒者沉溺；纸牌的投掷和赛马的奔跑让赌博者兴奋；残酷和暴力给反社会的人带来快感。若只以安慰和慰藉作标准，那么没有任何行为我们应该干涉。
To be sure, it is easy to see that all these things bring harm to their practitioners, but can it not be argued that if some people get pleasure out of a practice that does harm to them it is nevertheless their body, their choice, their health, and their life to do with as they wish? Who are we to be the "big brother" who attempts to dictate our notion of a superior way of life to others against their will?
诚然，不难看出，所有这些东西会给沾染上这些习惯的人带来伤害，然而如果一些人从能对他们构成伤害的行为中得到快乐，尽管他们是按照自己的意愿对待自己的身体、自己的选择、自己的健康、自己的生命，我们就不可以为此辩驳了吗？那我们凭什么充当“大哥”，试图把我们所谓的更好的生活方式的观念专横地强加给他们，而违背他们的意愿？
There is indeed something to this if it is only the practitioner's body and health and life that is involved and no one else's. But what of the smoker whose effluvium damages the lungs of nonsmokers forced to breathe his or her reek? What of the drinker who drives and kills? What of the addict who lures others into addiction? What of the sociopath who directly harms others as his or her path to joy?
如果上述行为仅与行为者的身体、健康和生命有关，不涉及其他人，那么，这其中确有道理可言。然而不吸烟者被迫吸入呛人的烟而使肺部受损算什么？醉酒者驾车撞死人算什么？瘾君子引诱他人吸毒算什么？反社会者以直接伤害他人为乐又算什么呢？
By and large, then, society demands that these harmful physical practices be controlled insofar as it can be done humanely.
因此，总的说来，社会要求将这些有害的人身行为控制在人道的范围内。
