Posted on 02/02/2002 6:32:51 AM PST by Khepera
You bet your rear end that I'm going to be rude when I see people trying to legalize behavior that will result in more innocent people killed and more people's lives destroyed by drugs.
Homosexuals are killing themselves, spreading disease and disportionately molesting kids.
Only a fool wouldn't care about behavior that is destroying the participants and having a tremendously negative impact on our nation. Those that don't are LIBERALS and moral relativists and belong with Hillary, Barney Frank and Joycelyn Elders.
You just negated the purpose of Christs death........Grace. Are your sins any whiter than someone elses? Mine aren't. Christs love turns people away from sin, not human condemnation. God cries for His children that sin, the same as a human parent. He punishes His children the same as a human parent. He hates sin/bad behaviour the same as a human parent. He doesn't hate his children. Christians are to hate the sin, not the sinner. You can loathe someones behaviour and still love them as God does. That means you pray for them.
I equated your wanting to use stolen tax money to control the consensual behavior of others, not "legalization of drugs", to totalitarianism. Are you really so afraid, of people who use non-government-approved medications and guys who like Judy Garland, that you think we should all be slave labor for the government, in order to pay for stopping them from having what they consider a good time? The government and its confiscatory agencies can harm a family far more easily and permanently than the most obnoxious queer or druggie can.
It is a cancer that is destroying conservativism and our nation.
It? Are your conservative friends becoming gay or running off and becoming addicted to drugs? Are you afraid that you will too if there isn't a law to force you not to?
I thought conservatives were supposed to be all for smaller, less intrusive government, not crushing everybody under an oppressive tax burden in an attempt to enforce their personal behavioral preferences on those who don't share them.
You bet your rear end that I'm going to be rude when I see people trying to legalize behavior that will result in more innocent people killed and more people's lives destroyed by drugs.
Look around you. After thirty years of Nixon's War, the "drug problem" is as bad as ever. Worse, even. How can that be? We have all these laws?
Maybe it's time to try something different.
But, alcohol isn't illegal. How can you include that in your "drugs are mmm, bad" statistics?
And, you haven't seen FR libertarians calling for an end to laws against murder nor drunk driving laws either. Although I'd prefer that people who were found driving irregularly be stopped irregardless of whether their erratic driving is caused by alcohol, barbituates, antihistamines or just plain tiredness. Why do we care why they're a hazard? If they can't drive safely for whatever reason, they should be stopped, period.
Maybe if the cops weren't so busy breaking into people's houses to inventory their inanimate objects, and hassling them, filling out paperwork and sitting court to prosecute them for possessing small amounts of same, they'd have more time for doing important things like stopping murderers and dangerous drivers.
In fact, I'm sure the next agenda on the liberaltarian list will be to attempt to 1) legalize prostitution nationwide and 2) lower the age of consent laws. That's coming if liberaltarianism and liberalism are defeated.
The law deters crime. The stronger the law, the more the deterrent. That's why drug use has dropped from 26 millon to 14 million in the past 20 years. Tougher drug laws is one of the reasons for the drug in the crime rate (since 70% of all criminals in prison were high on drugs when they committed their crimes).
Legalizing marijuana and relaxing the drug laws in the 1960s and 1970s resulted in more users, more innocent people being harmed and more crime. The excesses of the WOD were a result of the out-of-control drug use and weak laws given to us by the free-love, free-drug hippie generation.
Ok. So, how long do you give them to repent? Your post sounds like you have a time table. And I don't remember anywhere in the Bible, a story where Christ advocates stoning a sinner for their sins, do you? As I said, condemnation & hate of the sinner has NEVER won anyone to Christ. There's a big difference between hating sin and hating the sinner. God hates sin, not us.
Please provide a source for your statistics.
This country miserably fails to punish public intoxication and fails to properly punish drunk drivers that kill others. If one repeatedly drinks and drives or kills another motorists, he or she should be charged with murder.
I don't disagree. We've had some horrid incidents here where people who were let off easily for a crime involving drunk driving later killed someone doing the same thing.
But stopping dangerous people who go about intoxicated in public is a far cry from going around criminalizing every substance a person might use to intoxicate himself, or, as now, even things that are similar.
Can you explain why it's a good idea for the dea to make soap and shampoo illegal? That's what announced they're considering, for products that contain hemp. They've already criminalized hemp-containing snack foods, even though a person could eat a truckload of them and not get "high".
Maybe if the jails weren't full of the likes of marijuana "criminals" there'd be more room there for others such as you describe above.
As for the unhealthy sexual behaviors of others, why should we pay to prosecute them for it, if they're not doing whatever it is in public (and assuming that they're not assaulting someone or making time with a minor)? Let their insurance companies charge them higher rates.
But, acts like committing adultery are crimes. Adultery is a crime against one's spouse.
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.