[WyldKard]

I can't point it out, because you're correct on the 10th Amendment. But here's one for you: please point out the part of the Constitution that restricts the states from passing sodomy laws, anti-prostitution laws, anti-drug laws, even anti-atheist laws.

Unless the Federal Government has a power deligated to it by the Constitution, it is assumed those powers are held by the States. So yes, States are perfectly correct in passing anti-sodomy laws, anti-prostitution laws, etc. I think such laws are folly, but I would rather see the issue handled on a State by State basis, as was the intent of the Founding Fathers, than see the FedGov overstep its bounds.

I mean, slavery was Constitutional, wasn't it? The states, under the Constitution that you would "live and die for", can ban or allow whatever they wish.

It wasn't UnConstitutional, perse. At least, not until the various Amendments outlawing slavery were passed. While I think slavery was abhorant, I am afraid I must agree with what the South was trying to do when it wanted to break away from the Union.

And now you are trying to change the topic. I've been a tremendous supportive of States rights. Unfortunately, most Conservatives-in-Socialist-Clothing think the Federal Government is chief in all things, and that States Rights are a myth.

So let me ask you: Do you think the Federal Government has the power to wage a War on Drugs? Do you think the War on Drugs should continue as is, or should the matter be left up to the States?

[hinckley buzzard]

"And now you are trying to change the topic."

You are right. He wants to pursue issues of liberty and the constitution. You pretended to, but it is now clear that you are only interested in the legalization of drugs.

What is it with you libertarians? All the issues in the nation, and the only one you want to rant about is the WOD.

At least he was honest.