Posted on 06/07/2010 11:20:04 AM PDT by bamahead
I'm not so sure the line can be so easily drawn. At some point, the damage done to the fabric of society needs to be taken into account.
What about the families of those on drugs? Do we just let the kids go hungry because dad is a druggie? After all, it isn't OUR fault he takes drugs. If he wants the liberty to get high, then we let his family suffer as "punishment" for his addiction?
I am just not convinced that legalization of drugs is the way to go. And yes, I'm aware the same issues can be made with alcohol, which is currently legal. I'm one who was a hungry, sometimes homeless kid because of dad's drinking. Thank God mom finally gave up on him and left. At any rate, the whole "but alcohol is legal" argument doesn't get anywhere with me.
The WOD’s is big business, To big to fail.
Okay, I’m going to go ahead and put you down as a jack-boot there Deb. You see, you are a moron. Show me anywhere where I said I don’t want drug laws enforced and I’ll take it back, but you won’t, so I won’t. You want to equate me with Bill Clinton? F*CK YOU. You’re idea of freedom is a lot closer to what both Clintons want than me or any real FReeper.
I’m guessing your real problem is you can’t get a man. Yeah, thats probably it.
Holy mackerel.
Look at what the drug issue has done for the Libertarian Party since they made it their signature issue.
Yeah, I know. Sorry trisham. “Deb” is on the verge of his conservative credentials being revoked.
The “but alcohol is legal” argument gets nowhere with me, either.
Families of addicts are not “society’s” problem. Teenage pregnancy wasn’t society’s problem either until the shame of being pregnant w/o being married became passe’ in our culture.
I don’t mean to sound heartless, but I don’t think there will be more addicts if drugs are legalized, nor do I believe that less families suffer because they are currently illegal.
My objection to the WoD is based on the corruption and police-state tactics that have emerged as a result, as well as the patriot notion that my personal business has no place within goobermint oversight UNLESS it causes immediate harm to another.
Try it this way: It is legal for me to get drunk as a skunk, but driving that way is (rightfully) forbidden.
The problem at the Party level is that practically made it their ONLY issue. And I admit, the legalization rationale does sound ridiculous standing on it’s own, until you quantify it within an overall movement toward smaller, less intrusive government, and the elimination of the welfare state as a whole.
The Libertarian Party has failed to craft that message as part of the broader move toward smaller government. Purists are only good at picking one issue and running with it...they typically don’t have the mental depth to make it part of a broader strategy, nor are they adept at effectively communicating that strategy. And the Libertarian Party has been controlled by rather unrealistic purists for some time now, since the early 80’s.
Oh, yeah, your happiness at destroying generations of young people with drugs.
But I appreciate your concern about my life. Not easy to find in self-obsessed, dope-drenched losers with no regard for the future of the country.
Only a ‘tard calls people losers instead of arguing one’s case.
‘Tard.
:-P
When someone believes that the only alternative to absolute federal control of the development, manufacture, sale and use of all drugs across the general population is anarchy, I don’t believe you’re going to have much luck getting them to latch on to concepts like constitutional repblics and government powers being limited to explicit enumerations.
You cross-dressing Marxists don’t deserve a “side”.
Got you down as the jack-boot deb, no problemo. Now go back to mucking up your state. And I’m still thinking you’re probably a guy.
I can do both!
True. I have a close relative like that. Completely separated from any semblence of reality or logic, sadly.
I’d like to propose the FR corollary to Godwin’s law, thus: “As a FR dope/LE thread grows longer, the probability of a Libertarian calling a conservative a “statist” approaches unity”.
FDR wasn't one to let a good crisis go to waste, either.
Tyically, its leftist pigs like you who think I'm a man because you can't imagine someone as blonde, aqua-eyed and adorable as I, could ever be so brilliant, kick your pimply ass so completely and also be female. But I am, in fact, a pink-cheeked, Scottish lass.
You are now free to continue polluting your teeny brain with whatever you can get up your nose.
Is that all you’ve got there, Jack-boot? Sounds like you’re admitting to being a slut to me. I think the government should regulate that destructive behavior of yours. What with your juvenile tag-line and obvious infatuation with yourself, anyone can see that your going to need government supervision.
Keepem’ coming jack-boot, I’ve got all day.
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.