An admirable attempt to reason with these folks, but it’s a lost cause. Some FReepers would be happy with nothing less than total legalization of any and all drugs no matter what sort of impact that has on society around them. You see, they are responsible users, and to heck with everyone else. It’s all about their liberty to get high. I equate them with the 2nd Amendment folks who believe they should be able to own howitzers, chemical weapons, or nuclear bombs. To make matters worse, these folks attack other conservatives because we’re not pure enough. As the liberals wrap society in a cocoon of socialism, even going so far as to threaten our access to health care (!), the druggies are pissed at us that we won’t fight for their right to get high. Pathetic!
Keep your authoritarian hands off my nuclear bombs too!
"In fact, the general welfare clause covers drugs with no stretch at all. It is just the sort of thing that clause was intended to address."
Do you agree with the above statement on the GW Clause... yes or no?
2. Do you think the Wickard ruling is in keeping with the original understanding of the Commerce Clause... yes or no?
The government has the authority to own howitzers, chemical weapons, or nuclear bombs, needless to say. Where do you suppose they got that authority? Where does the power of the government come from under our Constitution?
“To make matters worse, these folks attack other conservatives because we’re not pure enough.”
Yes, I used to think that drugs should be legalized, and then that opinion was blown out of the water in the space of just a few words.
I just hope that these misguided individuals will enjoy a similar epiphany at some point.