We live in a representative democracy.
I vote for public officials who most closely represent my views on the illegality of drugs, among other things.
You don't agree with the war on drugs? Find a candidate sharing your stance, vote for him or her, and quit whining about others imposing their morals on you.
Communitarian socialists of FR, -- join hands!!
Unite in your democratic stance to stamp out immorality!!
Even your namesake, tpaine, radical and rebel that he was, would agree that a 'free society' does not imply a society free of moral considerations. Laws in a representative democracy are ultimately agreed-upon boundaries on behavior, after all. Behaviors that cause the disintegration of a given society should not be encouraged or affirmed by that society, since no polity can exist for long if the legal structure sustaining and preserving it are undermined or removed. Your namesake was an advocate of common sense. Try exercising some.
Owning 'dangerous products' like drugs, guns, porn, - has never been constitutionally 'illegal', - and never will be.
Engaging in morally repugnant activities like gambling, pornography, prostitution, gay marriage, polygamy, bestiality, etc. -- In private, -- has never been constitutionally 'illegal', - and never will be.
You communitarian warriors simply cannot admit that you are engaged in an anti-constitutional 'war'. -- You are convinced that the moral majority can 'rule'.
Your namesake was an advocate of common sense. Try exercising some.
Owning 'dangerous products' like drugs, guns, porn, - has never been constitutionally 'illegal', - and never will be.
Engaging in morally repugnant activities like gambling, pornography, prostitution, gay marriage, polygamy, bestiality, etc. -- In private, -- has never been constitutionally 'illegal', - and never will be.
You communitarian warriors simply cannot admit that you are engaged in an anti-constitutional 'war'. -- You are convinced that the moral majority can 'rule'.
--- do you argue, then, that implementing laws and public policies that either passively allow or publicly endorse destructive individual behaviors has no destructive effect on a given society?
Read our Constitution. It is very restrictive on governments at any level "implementing laws and public policies" that infringe on our individual rights to life, liberty, or property.
To bad you can't argue this issue squarely, on a Constitutional basis. FR has more that enough communitarians that simply insist that 'moral majority rule' trumps the clear words of our Law of the Land.