Posted on 10/08/2002 4:35:09 AM PDT by Wolfie
Observation.
So you recognize the possibility of sincere opposition to anti-drug laws, not motivated by the desire to use drugs? That would be a start.
Paint by the numbers reductionism.
Apples and oranges. The former "right" is wielded against state sovereignty; the latter right is (usually) not. (The latter is also firmly grounded in the plain text of the Constitution, unlike the former.)
Free states have prohibitions on illicit drugs. All fifty states.
Paint by the numbers reductionism.
Nonsense.
re·duc·tion·ism
n.
An attempt or tendency to explain a complex set of facts, entities, phenomena, or structures by another, simpler set: “For the last 400 years science has advanced by reductionism... The idea is that you could understand the world, all of nature, by examining smaller and smaller pieces of it. When assembled, the small pieces would explain the whole” (John Holland).
Distortion. Roe v. Wade limits state or federal restrictions on abortion, based on an invented "Constitutional right."
Distortion. Roe v. Wade limits state or federal restrictions on abortion, based on an invented "Constitutional right."
I have no idea why you think you're disagreeing with me.
If their state constitutions allow that, then I don't question the constitutional legitimacy of those state laws.
However some states are attempting to change their position. Predictably, the fed is ignoring the states 10th Amendment prerogative to do so.
The fed needs an amendment to pass such laws for the states, as it did with alcohol. But that all changed with FDR's commerce clause. Not that you mind...
Backwards. State constitutions act to limit state powers.
You: "State constitutions act to limit state powers."
Reading comprehension problems, Roscoe?
So the honest thing for you to say would be "the 'pro-dope' contingent on FR are either zealots or are not honest about their agenda." Why did you exclude the former possibility?
Evidently; see post 107. Maybe Roscoe is an argue-bot?
The courts have also ruled again and again that the second ammendment does not apply to an individuals right to own firearms. Guess the gun grabbers aint violating any rights either?
So much for rights given to us by God, i guess their granted to us by the whims of politicians now.
More reductionism. Some zealots are knowingly dishonest.
"Elsewhere around the country, schools in Blackford County, Ind., test for tobacco use in...students who take driver's education or apply for parking permits."
Oh yeh, I sure wouldn't want to park next to someone who was high on Virginia Slims...
Well, here there may be a justification. If the driver/smoker is not a competent smoker, then they could be distracted by hanging ash or dropping their cigarette, and while distracted, plow madly through the parking lot...
(rolls eyes) I'm being kind in calling it a thought process...
Silence alone is sufficient.
Do you think all those opposed to affirmative action are racists?
It's the same with the WoD.
What does this mean?
Your equating "affirmative action" with restrictions on illicit drugs?
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.