[philman_36]

For success, they must rid themselves of the image of "The Party of Drugs."
That is a little hard for them to do when the WOD is continually brought up solely as a means to demonize them isn't it. Once it is brought up are they or any others who might agree with them supposed to remain silent without defending their position? Is it better to dodge it or deny it than face it openly and honestly.
And in the opposite manner the R & D position for continuing the WOsD should be a means to show just how awful it really is and how wrong it is. Instead refuge is taken under nebulous clouds like "moral relativism", "the good of society", "public control", "general welfare" and a hundred other things that only reflect poorly upon the other parties when shown to be duplicitous or out and out wrong. It's all subjective to each individual "debater" with no objectivity whatsoever other than demonization.
Same as the abortion funding. Sure, funding has been cut for foreign funding for such things, yet it continues unabated here at home under the R & D banners and nothing is done about it by those in elected positions capable of doing so. A blind eye is turned towards it or it is given scant attention only at predetermined intervals, like at election time to gain votes.
So much more...In the end the snake devours its own tail or subjugated America. Take your pick.

[rdb3]

A few points here.

First, you are all over the place.

Second, you are proving my point for me. Whether you or anyone else likes it or not, a stance taken in favor of legalization and/or decriminalization leaves the door wide open for you to be attacked. What's the name of this game? Politics.

It shocks me to no end how conservatives and libertarians insist on applying the rules of basketball to baseball. It doesn't work. For an upstart political party, leading off with legalization/decriminalization was, and still is, foolish. Now, before you and others start frothing at the mouth, pay close attention at what I'm saying, for you will no doubt demonize me for my words here. Your stance against the WOD is commendable. Let me say that again so that there is no misunderstanding; Your stance against the WOD is commendable.

Got it?

I hope so.

Moving forward, you are cutting off your nose to spite your face by attacking the WOD in the name of legalization/decriminalization. Both Pubs and RATS will decapitate you if you keep at it in its name. It is terribly easy for both Pubs and RATS to scare the hell out of the public concerning drug use. And there's a kernel of truth in their attack, for drugs destroy. My sister is GONE! Heroin and cocaine. She's a shell of her former self. Legalizaton/decriminalization has nothing to do with this, just her use of those drugs. That's the image that will be used against you time and time again if you keep going at it like you are now.

So, what is there to do? You flank the issue. You attack the tentacles of the WOD such as federal snooping into personal bank accounts, the amount of money spent at one time that triggers an investigation, the amount of money carried on the person that feds think is too much, no-knock raids and violations of the IV Amendment, etc. All of these monstrosities are the fruit of the poisoned tree. They can also be attacked sans legalization talk.

That would be a good start. If and when these goals are achieved, you can then make the case for legalization/decriminalization by explaining how the WOD was the culprit in the gross violations of our Constitutional rights, growth of the several States' and federal government, the cost of waging the WOD in terms of money and lives, etc.

It should be a step-by-step process, not one fell swoop. Did socialists invade our Congress in the name of socialism? No. In fact, even the Progressive Caucus shuns the term "socialist," yet what they are really about is socialism. Only Rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) goes by the title "socialist." Most here understand that. So, if the goals of an unpopular system can still be achieved under a different name, can the same be done as L[l]ibertarians and the WOD issue?

Think about that.

As a believing Christian, I am rather ambivalent towards drug use. I think marijuana should be legalized right now, and those serving sentences for marijuana use or distrubution should be released now. I have a hard time with the criminalizing of a plant that grows naturally and its natural properties can make you high. That's absurd. That's a totally different issue than processed drugs such as crack. On the other side, I absolutely loathe hard narcs. Having said that (and besides personal autonomy, there's really no upside to drug use), I'm willing to let the use of hard narcs be decided ultimately between the user and Christ. I'll stay out of it, but I will call you a complete moron is you use them. A person can reserve the right to use them, while I reserve the right to call that person an idiot.

Fair enough?