re: #546 Obdicut

Sure. But that’s also called The Slippery Slope Fallacy. If we accept that there are some necessary restrictions on speech and that there is a danger of going too far, then it doesn’t really add anything to point out that any new limit can have unintended consequences. What would be adding something is to directly show how that consequence would play out.

Well, I believe that I made a valid point upthread by stating that outllawing promotions and incentives by companies for children’s food, creates a precedent for outlawing promotions and incentives for anything a future congress might deem “unhealthy” or not in the public interest.