Posted on 06/20/2014 9:08:47 AM PDT by xzins
Pope Francis condemned the legalization of recreational drugs as a flawed and failed experiment as he lent his voice Friday to a debate that is raging from the United States to Uruguay.
Francis told delegates attending a Rome drug enforcement conference that even limited steps to legalize recreational drugs "are not only highly questionable from a legislative standpoint, but they fail to produce the desired effects."
Likewise, Francis said, providing addicts with drugs offered only "a veiled means of surrendering to the phenomenon."
"Let me state this in the clearest terms possible," he said. "The problem of drug use is not solved with drugs!"
Francis has described drug addiction as evil and met addicts on several occasions. When he was archbishop of Buenos Aires, he devoted much of his pastoral care to addicts.
To reject illegal drugs, he said, "one has to say 'yes' to life, 'yes' to love, 'yes' to others, 'yes' to education, 'yes' to greater job opportunities.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Governments keep capturing drug kingpins, and it keeps having no effect on the drug trade while former underlings vie to take the kingpin's place.
Not helpful.
In the above verse the Greek for sorceries is pharmakov, from which we get pharmacy. Sorcery was the use of mind altering drugs for non-medicinal purposes.
This was pretty evident in the campish, late 60's "Tales of Don Juan" a story of a Yaqui Indian sorcerer written by Carlos Castenada.
Capturing drug kingpins is not war. D-Day was war.
Instead of “War on Drugs” that would better be called “Criminalization of Drugs”
What do we do to the domestic drug masterminds?
Do you remember Saddam Hussein?
Are we going to use the word ‘war’ or are we going to use the word ‘criminalization’?
He might have been, but that wasn’t the point.
You asked what we do with them.
Me whine? I thought that is what you have been doing as you search for a way to promote libertarianism.
If you prefer the libertarians on abortion and gay issues, national defense and borders and hookers and drugs and porn, then call it as it is, to the left of republicans.
Shouldn’t you wait until that makes sense, to post it on a thread? To just blurt it out for no reason or context, looks weird.
1.4 Abortion
Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration.
I agree, remember post 63 though, and read the rest of the posts to me.
You sure have some exotic and uninformed views of America.
I think I could get behind an actual-military war; but let's be honest: the War on Drugs is entirely about expanding government-power and has been for decades. {I can't speak to the 70s, because I wasn't alive, and I really don't remember much of the 80s [certainly not with enough 'sociopolitical context'], because I was a kid.}
It's not as entirely prohibitive as you are implying though:
(Prov 31:6-7)Also remember that Jesus's first miracle was turning water into wine.
Give strong drink to one who is perishing,
and wine to those in bitter distress;
let them drink and forget their poverty,
and remember their misery no more.
As with any war, it is Constitutional to have Congress declare it and for it to be fought to the finish by a nation and their Commander and Chief. As we look to the Free Republic sidebars and are daily reminded of the progress of WWII after D-Day, in the same way I hope we are reminded of the total commitment and total nation effort it takes to fight and win. It is not a side issue among many issues. It is the central focus of the nation. We fight a war.
Sadly, we didn’t honor the troops who gave their lives and time in this most recent war on terror by having that national commitment. Instead, we were at B-Dubs eating chicken wings and watching football. The way we fought this war has cost us a large chunk of our soul.
What would a war on drugs be? You bet. It’s attacking our enemy on land, air, and sea. It is driving them to extinction. It is sending them to death.
That would be a war on drugs, cartels, nations.
Yes.
I thought that is what you have been doing as you search for a way to promote libertarianism.
*shrug* — I try not to whine, but I would be lying if I said I never whine.
If you prefer the libertarians on abortion and gay issues, national defense and borders and hookers and drugs and porn, then call it as it is, to the left of republicans.
Ha! No way — the Libertarian-party would be far more 'ok' with letting those be the purview of the several states than the Republican-party. The Republican-party has absolutely no intention of addressing those issues at all, they are merely a puppet on the right hand of the same 'person' who has the Democrat-party on their left hand — this 'person' has no intention of following through on the "party platform" it uses to dress its hands if it does not conform to its own agenda.
Leaders don't waste their lives with intoxicants is what that says. Wiping away pain is for the injured, and wiping away feeling is for the depressed.
You read that differently than do I.
But, fwiw, onewingshark, I think you are seeing something worth pursuing. You don't want to see and overbearing government directing peoples' personal decisions, and you don't want that over-bearing government wasting lives and resources in a lying campaign.
I agree with that.
I'll take the pain pill to deaden pain, but I won't take it to deaden life.
Interesting. Where’s this from?
A politician or voter who supports abortion at the state level, or any level of government supports abortion, conservatives oppose abortion and gay marriage at all levels from city hall to the federal government..
Conservatives oppose abortion and has won a lot of victories, it is one reason libertarians despise them.
On January 22, thousands gathered on the National Mall in Washington for the annual March for Life that takes place on the date that Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court.
The same week, the Republican National Committee decided that it was time for the national party to wade back into the pro-life waters after a perceived hiatus from using it as a platform issue. A “Resolution on Republican Pro-Life Strategy” formally re-established abortion as a 2014 election issue for the party and seeks to push back on the “war on women” rhetoric that Democrats have made synonymous with the pro-life movement.
The RNC clearly believes once again that a prominent pro-life position plays well with voters. Perhaps the national party has taken note of what’s happening at the state level. Twenty-four states enacted 53 anti-abortion measures in 2013 alone.
Research from the pro-choice Guttmacher Institute shows that in the last three years, states have enacted an unprecedented 205 different abortion restrictions. This was made possible by the fact that over half of the states in the union have pro-life governors and pro-life majorities in their legislatures.
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.