Posted on 11/06/2006 2:12:14 PM PST by cryptical
NEW YORK — In a city where you can get just about anything delivered to your door _ groceries, dry cleaning, Chinese food _ pot smokers are increasingly ordering takeout marijuana from drug rings that operate with remarkable corporate-style attention to customer satisfaction. An untold number of otherwise law-abiding professionals in New York are having their pot delivered to their homes instead of visiting drug dens or hanging out on street corners. Among the legions of home delivery customers is Chris, a 37-year-old salesman in Manhattan. He dials a pager number and gets a return call from a cheery dispatcher who takes his order for potent strains of marijuana. Within a couple of hours, a well-groomed delivery man _ sometimes a moonlighting actor or chef _ arrives at the doorstep of his Manhattan apartment carrying weed neatly packaged in small plastic containers. "These are very nice, discreet people,"said Chris, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition only his first name be used."There's an unspoken trust. It's better than going to some street corner and getting ripped off or killed."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Wouldn't take too much work to infiltrate this and bag a whole boatload of druggie scum, both users and dealers.
Whatever, it's entirely irrelevant to the point I was making about the injustice of drug laws that treat equal behaviors unequally.
Are you saying that since Rush or Bill Bennett are not perfect they cannot be opposed to any moral vice? Rush can't oppose abortion because he smokes cigars?
Of course they can be opposed to vice. All I'm saying is that it is wrong to criminalize vice. Regulate it (like we do alcohol), yes. Prohibit and criminalize it (like we do pot), no. Again, unequal treatment before the law for the same behaviors incorporates injustice into the law.
Tell me who in the history of the United States was ever morally perfect?
Can't thing of anyone. And I never argued otherwise.
What is your criteria for a man being able to stand against moral vice?
For the most part, not being a hypocrite with regards to the vice he opposes will do.
Is moral perfection your standard?
Actually, it's just the opposite. Because none of us are perfect, we need to be very circumspect in the power we give to the government in all matters, including vice. After all, one man's vice (alcohol is of the devil), could be another man's virtue (God gave us beer to make us happy). Who's right? Who knows? Do we really want to jail people merely because we don't approve of their personal moral choices? Should people who reject normative Christian morality be jailed because their actions (vice) are reflected in their rejection of Christian moral norms?
As none of us will ever agree in total as to what is vice or what is virtue when it comes to our personal moral choices, it's best that we leave each other alone, while setting reasonable boundaries for public safety (DUI) and keeping the peace (drunk and disorderly). Certainly, some will self-destruct from their indulgence in vice. In that case, the sin is its own punishment. Vice laws haven't changed that and never will change that.
Vice laws don't stop sin, it merely turns sinners into criminals. Preach agaisnt vice, abstain from vice, but don't criminalize ordinary human weakness. The laws of man will not save sinners, that is the purview of the Almighty.
I know that you and I disagree on some important issues. Your actual point is not a legal one but a philosophical about how we decide right and wrong and we can investigate this further when I have time, sorry. For the time being I will say in brief that we do decide right and wrong and we always have since long before and after the articles and the constitution.
The laws of man will not save sinners, that is the purview of the Almighty.
I am not sure who gave you the idea that laws could save sinners.
To help you to understand what law was/is for let me remind you that the law is only for the unrighteous. If men were angels we would have a different reality, but men are not angels.
The law is designed to discourage certain behavior, either because of public concerns, safety etc. and the law is also a great teacher to instruct people that certain behavior is unacceptable or wrong. The law was never intended to make people righteous, I hope this has helped your understanding of the purpose of the law.
In short, religious people should refrain from bullying sinners via vice laws, using majoritarian politics as their means. It diminishes the moral credibility of the church, as they are no longer counselors to the world, but the jailers of sinners.
Try to look at this whole thing through the eyes of a 25 YO pot smoker. The pot laws you likely support (and think of as wise and just) look like tyranny to him. He knows the political support for pot prohibition comes from the religious majority in this country.
Given this scenario, would you expect him to have a favorable or unfavorable view of religion? Probably unfavorable, yes? Is that what religious people want, to have people (sinners) look at them like tyrants? Do the religious really want to present themselves as the jailers of sinners? You know where I stand, you have the floor. ;-)
I know you were kidding, but there's the germ of an interesting, albeit nefarious, idea in it. Felons generally have their voting rights suspended, don't they?
You are wrong in so many ways.
Are you really trying to pretend your concern is over the credibility of the church and the influence of conservative Christianity? Instead, your sentence sounds a lot like something the extremely liberal Barry Lynn would say.
Suggestion for the 25 Y.O. pot heads. Don't break the law and you won't get into trouble.
No longer counselors for the world? Were they counselors for the world in the past? Did we have more or less laws against moral vice in the past or are there less laws against vice now?
Show me a country where the moral laws do not exist, but the influence of conservative Christianity is stronger than ours was when we had more laws against moral vice like we had in the past.
Riddle me this, oh wise one, and tell me why this isn't injustice in the law. It's a hypothetical I posted earlier.
The two units of a duplex apt. are both rented by single men, 25 YO, with simialar jobs and income. The man in UNIT A gets drunk everynight of the week. The man in UNIT B gets high on pot everynight of the week. Their behaviors are morally equal, seeking intoxication, yes? But as we both know, the law won't bother the man in UNIT A, but the law can punish the man in UNIT B. So we have the same moral behavior (intoxication) being treated differently before the law (alcohol vs. pot). Unequal treatment before the law for the same moral behaviors is the very definition of injustice. To split the hairs like you do is to support injustice. The fact that you can't see the obvious inconsistencies in the law doesn't mean they aren't there. I assure the 25 YO pot smoker does, and he knows where the injustice comes from.
Are you really trying to pretend your concern is over the credibility of the church and the influence of conservative Christianity?
Whether you believe it or not, yes. My father, Christian, deacon, SS teacher, should be a natural GOP voter because of the SocCon's in the GOP, but he's not. In fact, he finds it difficult to vote for GOP because of the SocCon's. He is afraid that Christian's using their religion to claim moral authority in the gutter world of partisan politics ill serves the Christian witness of ministering to the flock and winning lost souls. Some of the those lost souls might include 25 YO pot smokers. He thinks it's not such a good idea for Christians to put themselves in the position to be seen as the jailers of sinners. I'm sure you will differ.
You claim that unless we legalize all moral vice we can no longer be counselors for the world? Were we counselors for the world in the past?
Did we have more or less laws against moral vice in the past or are there less laws against vice now?
Show me a country where moral laws do not exist, but the influence of conservative Christianity is stronger than ours was when we had more laws against moral vice like we had in the past.
I see that you know someone who is a Christian, but it was not them but you who was expressing concern about the decreasing influence of Christianity upon our population due to laws against morality, even though we have had laws against certain vices since we became a country. After all you seem to be trying to sell the proposition that if only we would legalize pot, then people would repent of moral sin and young people would leave the leftist immoral pothead culture and come to Jesus Christ.
No, you can be counselors to the world, but because Christianity has picked up the stick and handed it to the government to punish sinners, the moral high ground is lost. Coercion is not counseling.
Were we counselors for the world in the past?
Irrelevant to the point I'm making. Besides, do you really want to expose Christianity's less than glorious past where Christians killed Christians?
Did we have more or less laws against moral vice in the past or are there less laws against vice now?
I'm not certain, but I think less. I realize vice laws have been around for ages, but in most places the enforcement was lax. In a wiser time, Christians understood that any goodness they exhibited came from them being a Christian, not the other way around. Thus they understood that the vice they saw was evidence of that person not having God in their lives. You've surely heard the saying, but for the grace of God, there go I. I don't see that sort of attitude in most Christians today.
Show me a country where moral laws do not exist, but the influence of conservative Christianity is stronger than ours was when we had more laws against moral vice like we had in the past.
I'm not arguing the past, but the injustice that exists today in our drug laws. The question is irrelevant as I see it.
I see that you know someone who is a Christian,
Wow, nice of you to acknowlegde that I know my father. I used him as an example of someone who took for granted the propriety of vice laws and has since had second thoughts, especially the drug laws. I could also point to my sister, who used to support the WOD as well. She changed her mind when a min. security prison was built near a town where she taught school. Inmates families moved into her district and she got to know them and their stories. She came to realize that they were just like everyone else, except they chose other drugs besides alcohol to use recreationally.
but it was not them but you who was expressing concern about the decreasing influence of Christianity upon our population due to laws against morality, even though we have had laws against certain vices since we became a country.
Yes, there've been vice laws on the books for a long time. But enforcement was lax for the most part. Except of course in an election year, when enforcement went up so as to lock in the Christian vote. Newsflash, remember those dance hall gals we used to see on Gunsmoke? In the real west those type of gals didn't just serve drinks and play cards and they were everywhere.
After all you seem to be trying to sell the proposition that if only we would legalize pot, then people would repent of moral sin and young people would leave the
I can't say whether anyone will repent of anything. What I've tried to point out, and you fail to grasp, is that the injustice of the drugs laws alienates drug users from the church. Would you want to have anything to do with an institution that wants you behind bars? Especially with an institution that can't even make up its mind on alcohol.
...leftist immoral pothead culture and come to Jesus Christ.
Aha! Now we get to the crux of the matter. It's left vs. right with you, just like OriginalIntent. Thanks for exposing yourself here. This is all really an attempt by you to punish folks that disagree with you politically, isn't it. You can dislike the leftist "drug culture" all you want, just don't abuse the law for political purposes.
The point I'm making is very simple, the drug laws are unjust (my alcohol vs. pot scenario), the vast majority of Christians support the status quo concerning the drug laws, ergo Christianity is a party to unjust laws. The people (aka sinners) who are punished under these unjust laws know that Christians are the political force behind these laws and come to the proper conclusion that Christians are not interested in justice (you proved that in spades with your "leftist drug culture" quip), only in punishing the unsaved (or, if you prefer, leftists). It also makes a mockery of the Christian position of freedom of conscience, whereby the individual is free to choose the path of God or not to choose His path. Those who don't choose God's way are obviously more likely to sin. They will have to answer to God, it's not our place to punish them for making the wrong choices. Typically speaking, those wrong choices are usually punished by the problems the sin itself causes the sinner.
In short, the message Christians are telling sinners is this: We don't believe in forced conversions, but we do believe in forcing you to live like us.
The latter undermines the former.
All crimes are sins, but not all sins are crimes. Vice is sin against God, and therefore is between God and the sinner, not you and me. Therefore we have no claim over the person involved in vice. The sinner will be punished by God. Crimes (violence, theft) are sins against another human being (as well as God) and therefore are the concern of all of us and are properly subject to the police powers of the state. Drugs are a vice, not a crime.
One last point, most of the disorder we see today concerning drugs is due to the drug laws. The violent black market in drugs wouldn't exist if these drugs where regulated like alcohol. I thought we'd learned that lesson in 1933, but I guess not. So you choose, end the greater evil of the violent black market by legalizing/regulating drugs or stay on the path we are on and live with the violence (and get back at the Lefties). You know my choice. Which do think would be more pleasing to God, way fewer murders with slightly higher drug usage with drugs legalized, or the status quo with high murder rates and drug usage continuing unabated? Don't let your disdain for Leftist politics cloud your mind here.
BTW, the "leftist drug culture" quip you made, it certainly confirms my dear father's fears that Christians truly are abusing their moral authority for political gain. It's a sad thing to behold. Perhaps you should focus more on your faith and less on politics. Mixing the two seems to be leading you astray.
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.