[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

pawdoggie: "Talk about "irrationality". The day that (unfermented) wheat can give you a buzz or cause you to be cited for DUI, is the day that wheat and marijuana will be on the same plateau of "regulatability"."

If you are saying that federal drug laws do not depend on Wickard, you are woefully uninformed

No, what pawdoggie, Bill Bennett, Antonin Scalia and thousands of other so-called FReepers and "conservatives" are saying is that the Constitution IS a living breathing document whose words mean nothing and might as well be toilet paper for members of the Supreme Court if its original intent means somebody might get a buzz (which they did until 1937). It means they don't have the honesty to propose and wait for the passage of another constitutional Prohibition Amendment. It means they are liars.

[pawdoggie]

No, what pawdoggie, Bill Bennett, Antonin Scalia and thousands of other so-called FReepers and "conservatives" are saying is that the Constitution IS a living breathing document whose words mean nothing and might as well be toilet paper for members of the Supreme Court if its original intent means somebody might get a buzz (which they did until 1937). It means they don't have the honesty to propose and wait for the passage of another constitutional Prohibition Amendment. It means they are liars.

I'm still looking for the "right to smoke dope" provision in the Constitution. It's probably right next to the "right to porno" clause in the 1st Amendment. As to "original intent", however, I think that back in 1798 America hanging porno poster outside your house or smoking a doobie on your front porch would not have commended you to your neighbors (assuming that they let you live, of course). BTW, they didn't have any "Megan's laws" back in post-Revolutionary America, either. They never thought anyone could be so perverse.