Marijuana Shown to Relieve HIV Nerve Pain

Voice of America ^ | Feb 16th, 2007 | Rose Hoban

[secretagent]

I don't know if we have the same issue in mind, so I'll use this Jefferson quote again:

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others."

Do you disagree?

[robertpaulsen]

"One principle he offered: "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others."

It's axiomatic that the police powers of a state include moral laws.

[secretagent]

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others."

Do you agree?

[robertpaulsen]

"The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others."

That quote is right up there with "separation of church and state" as to the abuse of its meaning. Putting your quote in context, you'd see that Jefferson was battling with church leaders who wanted a larger role in the new federal government.

[robertpaulsen]

"Do you agree?"

Absolutely. I am assuming you'll allow me to define "injurious to others".

[robertpaulsen]

Are you going to answer any of my questions, or is this some kind of one-sided interrogation?

Why do you endorse limits on "the will of the people", and where do you get that authority?

What makes you say it's axiomatic that legislatures are limited in their law making ability to those laws governing behavior which harms others?

What is your definition of harm?

You've got some catching up to do.

[secretagent]

I am assuming you'll allow me to define "injurious to others".

Please proceed.

[robertpaulsen]

I'll wait my turn.

[Mojave]

One principle he offered: "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others."

And noted on the same page:

"But our rulers can have authority over such natural rights only as we have submitted to them."

The lex majoris partis.

By the way, Jefferson himself drafted a law against sodomy, so his idea of harm encompassed societal values and wasn't limited to simplistic "initiation of force" rationalizations.

[secretagent]

Why do you endorse limits on "the will of the people", and where do you get that authority?

(1) Because sometimes the majority gets it wrong. (2) Sheer eloquence, I guess.

What makes you say it's axiomatic that legislatures are limited in their law making ability to those laws governing behavior which harms others?

Axiomatic to me, and to some others. Obviously not axiomatic to most legislators.

What is your definition of harm?

For legislative purposes: Physical injury, a credible threat of same, and theft of property.

[Mojave]

For legislative purposes: Physical injury, a credible threat of same, and theft of property.

And how does the legislature pay for the protection of those?

[robertpaulsen]

"injurious to others"

Constitutional laws, reflecting the will of the people, passed by the legislative process, which also encompass immoral behavior deemed harmful to the functioning and continuance of a society in which to raise the next generation of citizens.

[secretagent]

By the way, Jefferson himself drafted a law against sodomy, so his idea of harm encompassed societal values and wasn't limited to simplistic "initiation of force" rationalizations.

Interesting. I don't expect moral perfection from Jefferson, especially since he held slaves.

Do you have a link, or Google keywords? I tried without success.

Re rationalizations, "societal values" can also serve.

[secretagent]

And how does the legislature pay for the protection of those?(rights of individuals)

I assume you mean ideally. Right?

[secretagent]

Thanks.

[Mojave]

I don't expect moral perfection from Jefferson, especially since he held slaves.

His behavior was moral in that regard. He had his own personal wolf by the ears. Let me give you some clues for your own study of the matter, if you want to pursue it.

Father-in-Law
Estate
Creditors
Chattels
Sister-in-Law
Paris
Anti-emancipation laws

As for the sodomy matter, see: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/amendVIIIs10.html

[tacticalogic]

Fringe on the flag time!

Unless you're ready to make that accusation of "advocating opium smoking" official or retract it, I don't want to hear from your pie-hole.

[tacticalogic]

Constitutional laws, reflecting the will of the people, passed by the legislative process, which also encompass immoral behavior deemed harmful to the functioning and continuance of a society in which to raise the next generation of citizens.

"Constitutional", and "reflecting the will of the people" by what measure? How do you determine when the legislature passes laws that are not constitutional, or do not reflect the will of the people?

[robertpaulsen]

"How do you determine when the legislature passes laws that are not constitutional, or do not reflect the will of the people?"

If they're not constitutional, they'll be challenged and ruled thusly. If they do not reflect the will of the people, the people will let their legislators know.

Furthermore, if the people wish to limit their laws to those that prohibit behavior which harms others, they may do so. But I'm not going to be the one who limits their choices -- I would not be so arrogant as to say I know what's best.

[tacticalogic]

If they're not constitutional, they'll be challenged and ruled thusly. If they do not reflect the will of the people, the people will let their legislators know.

IOW, if the legislature passed it, and it hasn't been overturned by the USSC we're supposed to take it's constitutionality and it's objectives as being the legitimate "will of the people" as self evident truth, only to be challenged in the ballot box or before the court and above reproach until that happens.

Furthermore, if the people wish to limit their laws to those that prohibit behavior which harms others, they may do so. But I'm not going to be the one who limits their choices -- I would not be so arrogant as to say I know what's best.

You'd be so arrogant as to say that "the people " saying so directly via ballot initiatives is "mob rule".