Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: savagesusie

“They don’t want sharp minds like the Jefferson/Franklin/Washington/Paine/Lincoln variety.”

Actually - during the time of the forefathers, there was no law against growing pot. In fact, the laws at the time dicated that landowners HAD to use a certain amount of their acreage for hemp cultivation (because at the time, the hemp rope was crucial for all of the naval logistics that came from a society based on maritime trade.)

Franklin, Jackson, Jefferson, Lincoln, Madison, Monroe, and Washington are all cited as having smoked cannabis with some regularity, with Lincoln on record as saying that one of his favorite things to do was to sit on his porch and smoke a pipe of “sweet hemp.”

Current politicans who have admitted to cannabis use include George W Bush, Sarah Palin, Barrack Obama, Al Gore, Newt Gangrich, Rand Paul, Bill Clinton, and many more (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_politicians_who_admit_to_cannabis_use)

Liberty means that people have the rights to make up their own mind on issues instead of having the government dicate what is acceptable.


66 posted on 10/22/2012 11:01:42 AM PDT by Ueriah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Ueriah
Liberty means that people have the rights to make up their own mind on issues instead of having the government dicate what is acceptable.

So the founding fathers thought liberty meant you could smoke hemp but that you were not allowed to not grow it on your own land?

Liberty seems to be a highly subjective concept. My definition doesn't include allowing the free trade of intoxicants any more than it includes bringing back cigarette ads on TV game shows.

71 posted on 10/22/2012 11:09:37 AM PDT by JediJones (ROMNEY/RYAN: TURNAROUND ARTISTS ***** OBAMA/BIDEN: BULL $HIT ARTISTS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

To: Ueriah

bull.

Your simple mind doesn’t realize that we didn’t have anything even closely resembling a “welfare state” that would pick up the butts on the side of the road and feed them and care for their children during the 1700’s through the early 1900’s.

I agree-—laws are WAY too intrusive today-—but as long as taxpayers are paying for all the druggies and their progeny they drop all over the place—then I don’t want it made legal. It leads to irresponsibility and death and confiscation of decent hard-working Americans who pay for their play.

It should not be “PROMOTED” by government, since a “Just society” has to promote public Virtue (All the Founders, Montesquieu, Locke, Plato Aristotle,
etc.) Justice IS a virtue and that is the only reason for government—plus to protect private property. Since druggies are mostly the destroyers of private property and thieves and liars, I think govt. has an interest in discouraging it. Government CAN NOT promote evil. (sodomy and abortion) but as you can see we have a post-constitutional government like Levin states.

People who used drugs illicitly usually were killed and their genetic pool died out. They had very few friends who were decent human beings—people didn’t want to “marry” potheads and degenerates when we were a Christian nation.


104 posted on 10/22/2012 8:43:44 PM PDT by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson