Posted on 08/06/2012 12:20:12 PM PDT by grundle
SO out of curiosity are you suggesting that the states can do whatever they want whenever they want? Is it okay if the states decide that DOMA is incorrect and so they will pass same sex (or any other version of aberration) marriage and have no interference from the federal government?
Since I am not on SCOTUS and I never will be my opinion is of little value to anyone. I do read those who are better educated on these things than I am (such as Mark Levin and Anton Scalia and others). Even they admit to limitations to the Constitution. It is our best hope for freedom no doubt. But it is not the word of God. It was written by men and serves us well. I am an originalist. Not agreeing with you or Jim Robinson on this issue does not worry me. Since we probably agree on so much more than this.
Vaporizers??? And how well do you control dosage with that???
Look I’m done. This disagreement is merely that. There are more pressing issues that we need to deal with before this really even hits my radar
I'm saying the Tenth Amendment means what it says. If you had read it, you'd know it does not say the states can do whatever they want whenever they want.
(such as Mark Levin and Anton Scalia and others). Even they admit to limitations to the Constitution.
I don't even know what that's supposed to mean - and I'll bet neither Levin nor Scalia has ever used those words.
I am an originalist.
An "originalist" who thinks consistent adherence to the Tenth Amendment is extreme ranting and raving?
Your sense of consistency is by no means perfect either. You want one form of consistency and yet would not even comment on the one that might be of concern to some.....DOMA. In the 1950s and early 1960s there was much discussion and many cases that involved states rights and the limits of federal authority. Like it or not those cases have consequences for today.
Scalia and Levin HAVE used exactly those words.
Look I am doen with this. Go do some reading. I don’t care if you agree with me or not. Just because a citizen has an opinion does not guarantee that it is correct
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaporizer_%28cannabis%29
And how well do you control dosage with that???
Quite well - every bit as well as you do by smoking.
There are more pressing issues that we need to deal with before this really even hits my radar
... he said after 8 posts on the issue.
I'm all for DOMA, which by allowing states to enact or reject same-sex marriage protects the states' rights that you are content to see violated by the federal War On Drugs.
In the 1950s and early 1960s there was much discussion and many cases that involved states rights and the limits of federal authority. Like it or not those cases have consequences for today.
Of course rulings by the liberal SCOTUSes of the past have consequences - ones that should be rejected by conservatives, and whose overturning should be supported by conservatives.
Scalia and Levin HAVE used exactly those words.
That there are "limitations to the Constitution"? Prove it.
A Google search on "Mark Levin" OR Scalia "limitations to the Constitution" returns only 2 results, neither of which supports your claim.
The second result does paraphrase Justice Thomas as saying there are "key structural limitations to the constitution that ensure that the federal government does not amass too much power at the expense of the states." One such structural limitation is the Tenth Amendment - I guess Clarence Thomas is another extreme ranter and raver.
Scalia used the term in a recent interview with Fox News....his was a reference to the 2nd amendment but it reveals his thinking. Have you even read Men in Black?
since I don’t smoke go pound sand
I never said nor implied you did.
To say the word "arms" doesn't encompass all known weapons is very different from saying that the feds may properly exceed their enumerated powers.
Have you even read Men in Black?
No - does it say Scalia says the feds may properly exceed their enumerated powers?
“every bit as well as you do by smoking. “ If you meant as well as is done by smoking, then that is the way to say so.
So if you do not use medical marijuana (vaporized or otherwise) you really don’t have a clue as to how dosage is controlled. Smoking is not a good clinical manner for dosing.
I am done now. Don’t bother to respond
Nonsense - titrating the dosage of a rapid-onset medicine is very simple: take a little, see if the desired effect has been achieved, repeat as necessary.
I am done now.
You were done before you started.
Don’t bother to respond
I always have time to correct Drug Warrior falsehoods.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.