[robertpaulsen]

It's not what I want or don't want.

If you insist on making an alcohol analogy, then how about this as a response: The XXI Amendment ended prohibition. Why don't you get the necessary states to pass a XXVIII Amendment legalizing all drugs?

You get the votes, you get the States, you get your drugs. Just like alcohol.

[MrLeRoy]

Why don't you get the necessary states to pass a XXVIII Amendment legalizing all drugs?

Because an amendment banning them was never passed---the federal WOsD is unconstitutional.

[DWPittelli]

If you insist on making an alcohol analogy, then how about this as a response: The XXI Amendment ended prohibition. Why don't you get the necessary states to pass a XXVIII Amendment legalizing all drugs? You get the votes, you get the States, you get your drugs. Just like alcohol.

Bad analogy, since there was an Amendment which outlawed alcohol, but there was never an Amendment which outlawed drugs.

So back to your bogus "consistency" argument. Why is it your position that fans of marijuana's legalization must also want to legalize heroin, etc., yet opponents of MJ legalization can, at the same time, favor legal alcohol? Aren't you at least as inconsistent?

[jayef]

I'm sorry, what Amendment was it that instituted drug prohibition?