[clajiness]

> The key here from a government standpoint is Obesity impacts the life of the obese person only.

This couldn't be more wrong. Maybe you have a source for your claim? Doubtful, but maybe.

Per the Harvard School of Public Health: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesi...

"Excess weight harms health in many ways. It increases the risk of developing conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, osteoarthritis, and some cancers, to name just a few, and reduces the life span. Treating obesity and obesity-related conditions costs billions of dollars a year. By one estimate, the U.S. spent $190 billion on obesity-related health care expenses in 2005-double previous estimates. The enormity of this economic burden and the huge toll that excess weight takes on health and well-being are beginning to raise global political awareness that individuals, communities, states, nations, and international organizations must do more to stem the rising tide of obesity."

"Days missed from work are a cost to both employees (in lost wages) and employers (in work not completed). Obese employees miss more days from work due to short-term absences, long-term disability, and premature death than non-obese employees. They may also work at less than full capacity (also known as presenteeism)."

"Employers pay higher life insurance premiums and pay out more for workers’ compensation for employees who are obese than for employees who are not."

It sure sounds like obese folks affect more than just themselves. I'd prefer that my health insurance premiums don't rise more than they have to due to your love of ice cream.

[syshum]

Ironicly government is what cases your health insurance to rise due to obese people. Government prevents companies for charging more based on health conditions, except smoking. So a company is prohibited by law from taking obesity into account for premium costs

Further I take it then you do support the concept of Limited Government?

If this is your metric for what should involve government, then my guess you do not support the idea of Limited Government at all. See when I talk about threats to other, I am talking about direct, articulable threats, not second or third order events that may have an impact under some circumstances

When I say the government has an ethical mandate to protect me from others, I mean protect me from physically assaulting me, from stealing my property, etc.

Not generalized adverse effects that may happen latter down the road if enough other people also happen to do the same thing.