In this essay, I shall analyze some arguments advanced for legal paternalism, which are fallacious or rationally insufficient. Some of the worst arguments for legal paternalism. For example, the argument of life's sacred value, the argument of human dignity or the argument of common good. Why it is important to defend legal antipaternalism against these arguments? Because they are, in spite of their weakness, rhetorically very used in philosophical, ethical, legal, judicial debate. They likely dissimulate other arguments considered less persuasive, like the theological argument or the moral perfectionist argument for legal paternalism.