Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Eagle Eye

First of all, you can’t defend your position. All you can do is attack mine.

Second, alcohol is specifically allowed because of the Constitution and the Amendment that did so. It was illegal for a period of time, as you may recall. When we get a Constitutional amendment to allow drugs, then maybe your argument might make sense.

Third, vices between a consenting adult and his/her animal also don’t infringe on other people’s rights.

Fourth, I am not sure how one can have a vice of something illegal. Can you explain that to me? I have no problems with people having vices. I have a problem with people having illegal vices and their wanting to make such a vice completely legal, when, in fact, NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has done so.

You are the self-described libertarian. So, tell us what other liberties you think we shouldn’t have while insisting some currently illegal actions should be “liberties.”


71 posted on 04/06/2009 8:49:59 AM PDT by ConservativeMind (Cancel liberal newspaper, magazine & cable TV subscriptions (Free TV-dtv.gov). Stop funding the MSM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: ConservativeMind
First of all, you can’t defend your position. All you can do is attack mine.

Certainly can and quite easily. Starting with some "Golden Rule" philosophy.

Alcohol was made illegal with a Constitutional Amendment. Back then they knew that they needed an Amendment to do that, and it then makes reason that without a similar amendment the WOD is not Constitutional as was Alochol Prohibition.

You make a GRAVE ERROR in thinking that the Constitution grants rights to individuals; it lists some rights of individuals and states, but restricts the fedgov, NOT the individual.

Third, vices between a consenting adult and his/her animal also don’t infringe on other people’s rights.

It seems you are making the case for beastility, not me. I thought that it didn't need to be stated that it should be two HUMAN adults!! But if you wanna screw your own goat on your own property out of view of the rest of us, I won't lift a finger to stop you!

Fourth, I am not sure how one can have a vice of something illegal. Can you explain that to me? I have no problems with people having vices. I have a problem with people having illegal vices and their wanting to make such a vice completely legal, when, in fact, NO OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD has done so.

To call gambling, drinking, smoking, carousing, etc vices is quite accurate. Some are legal some are restricted and regulated, some are taxed. Why should the US government be involved at all in vices?

Remember, pot was once legal while alcohol was illegal. This isn't a moral issue or else you have to admit that morals fluxuate.

You are the self-described libertarian. So, tell us what other liberties you think we shouldn’t have while insisting some currently illegal actions should be “liberties

You claim to have libertarian leanings but I don't find any truth to that statement at all.

IMO, liberty means that adults do as they please as long as it doesn't inhereintly infringe on the rights of others, doesn't involve fraud, initiation of force, or coersion.

The Consitution does not restrict individuals; it restricts government.

Government should not be in the business of enforcing religious views of one group onto others (Blue Laws, religously caused dry counties, etc)

Freedom is too much for most to handle; most can't handle their own and don't want others to have it either.

There is absolutely no reason that I or the government should be involved in what you read or don't read, what you may or may not ingest or inhale, what you watch on TV, listen to on the radio, etc.

So why would you care what others do in similar categories?

73 posted on 04/06/2009 9:29:46 AM PDT by Eagle Eye (Defending RINOs is the same as defending Liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

To: ConservativeMind

“When we get a Constitutional amendment to allow drugs...”

THERE is the root of your problem. We do not need a Constitutional amendment to “allow” the People to do something. The Constitution is a limit on the authority of the GOVERNMENT’S authority. YOU are laboring under the misapprehension that We, the People, need governmental permission to do ANYTHING. You have drunk the Koolaid of big government, of Woodrow Wilson, of FDR, of LBJ, of Bush I and II, of Clinton and Obambi. No wonder your mind is such a skull full of mush.

We, the People, can do ANYTHING we like that does not constitute an infringement on the EQUAL rights of others, that does not INITIATE any form of aggressive action against others. GOVERNMENT must live under the bonds of the Constitution. READ IT AND WEEP. Read the other writings of the Founders. Get your head out of your butt and you might even be able to see and to smell fresh air, rather than what you’re used to.


76 posted on 04/06/2009 9:42:51 AM PDT by dcwusmc (We need to make government so small that it can be drowned in a bathtub.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson