Have we opened Pandora's Box?

The Libertarians among us....heck, pretty much everyone I know of any political party....are aghast at the move begun in NYC and now spreading to ban sales of "super-sized" soft drinks or to impose an additional tax on sugar-sweetened drinks.  "The government is butting into my life!  It's none of their business what I eat or drink!"  Add to this government rules mandating motorcyclists and bike riders wear helmets, motorists wear seat belts, kids be in car seats, etc. and they seem to have a valid concern.


Here's where things get tricky.  As long as we as a society agree to treat anyone who walks into a hospital emergency room with an ailment or injury, regardless of whether they can pay or not, lifestyle regulation IS the government's business.  How can you ask the taxpayers to foot the bill for treatment of obesity, reckless behavior, etc, and not put some requirements on people to do their part in exchange for potentially free (to them individually at least) medical care?


This isn't an Obamacare issue.  This is something that has been going on for decades, ever since our national sense of decency and compassion dictated that we not let people suffer.  The idea of putting demands on people to eat and drink and act responsibly in exchange for agreeing to foot the medical bills for those who can't/won't pay for it themselves suddenly doesn't sound so intrusive.  We just can't go around giving out blank checks.  If we do, where is the incentive for those of us who CAN afford it to keep paying our insurance premiums?


Much as my knee-jerk reaction is to condemn even more government intervention in our lives, it does make sense in this case.  Problem is, where is it going to stop?  Do we want to be compassionate, or do we want to "live free"?  Is there a third option?  I sometimes feel like we've opened Pandora's Box.


S