True. Now we get into “Just Law”. (See tagline).
Laws should never promote evil—they are “unjust” if they do or if they promote that which is against God’s Laws and the Laws of Nature.
For Radical Liberty—as John Stuart Mill would condone—you can not control any substance even alcohol consumption in children. Also, any government involvement in schools would be evil, because the nature of government is always to make slaves of the state.
The Founders knew that Virtue was essential for any freedom and civil society. That is why the “general welfare” clause and the idea that Just Law (Rule of Law) depends on Virtue and the idea of “Higher Laws” than arbitrary man-made up law (like Hitlers).
So, Moderation, being one of the Cardinal Virtues, along with Justice, Wisdom, and Courage—it would be a duty of government to allow laws which would create laws which would discourage drug-using-—like driving laws under the influence which could kill innocent human beings.
Laws which safeguard children are also necessary, but as I say, government is not in a position—and can never be-—able to be in every house and monitor every action and save every child. With such intrusion—there is no liberty.
This utopian society of Marxism—is a fraud-—Safety at the expense of liberty is slavery. Virtue is necessary for freedom. We have to create a society which is moral—and who choose to do “good” as defined by Christian Ethics (not Ancient Greek ethics where slavery and pederasty and homosexuality and child sacrifice and women were 2nd class citizens was “Good” and ethical.
Education with parental control is the only course to responsibilty-—but government should have the ability to punish actions which destroy other people and their freedoms.
Common Sense and Moderation and the promotion of Justice, Wisdom, Courage, and Temperance were the foundation of Western Civilization.
With Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (John Austin) we took reason and logic out of Law and inserted irrational (feelings determine Right and Wrong) Marxism/paganism into our jurisprudence-—which is unconstitutional because it destroys the intent and meaning of our Constitutional Rights. it destroys Logic and Reason—private property rights and inserts irrational thinking as a “good” which promotes evil through laws—arbitrary laws which conflict with God’s Laws (homosexual “marriage”, abortion, welfare (forced charity which destroys charity) etc.
Should drug dealers be prosecuted when selling to minors. Absolutely. Should cocaine be outlawed—and meth-—yes. The destruction of society and family and the severe costs to civil society was noted in China during the Opium Wars. There is a destruction of the family unit with rampant drug use and promotion-—it should be illegal to promote drugs to children since it is destructive and never a “good” and creates addiction and slavery and destroys free will.
Evil can never be promoted in a civil society. (Abortion, drug use, fornication, adultery-—the obscenity laws were important in America until the 60’s when the Communist ACLU and other organizations under the guidance of Cultural Marxists targeted schools and laws to destroy Virtue. Should we have laws which prevent the promotion of Evil. Yes, I think so because it destroys Civil society. There should be obscenity laws-—our Founders did not agree with the radical John Stuart Mill-—it was Christianity which made the difference.
,
That promotion, if taken far enough, can become the opposite of limited. So the question is whether properly limited government promotion of Christian ethics encompasses prohibition of drugs by any level of government.
True. Now we get into “Just Law”. (See tagline).
Laws should never promote evil—they are “unjust” if they do or if they promote that which is against God’s Laws and the Laws of Nature.
For Radical Liberty—as John Stuart Mill would condone—you can not control any substance even alcohol consumption in children.
I'm against that - children are fundamentally different from adults.
The Founders knew that Virtue was essential for any freedom and civil society. That is why the “general welfare” clause and the idea that Just Law (Rule of Law) depends on Virtue and the idea of “Higher Laws” than arbitrary man-made up law (like Hitlers).
So, Moderation, being one of the Cardinal Virtues, along with Justice, Wisdom, and Courage—it would be a duty of government to allow laws which would create laws which would discourage drug-using
You've made an unsupported leap there: from the necessity of virtue, to governmental imposition of virtuous behavior. I know of no evidence that any of the Founders thought that government force could make people virtuous.
-—like driving laws under the influence which could kill innocent human beings.
I doubt there's more than one person in 1000 who thinks DUI laws' discouragement of drinking is any more than a side-effect of the laws' goal of protecting innocent lives.
government should have the ability to punish actions which destroy other people and their freedoms.
Certainly - and drug use does not destroy other people or their freedoms, whether the drug is alcohol or any other substance.
Should drug dealers be prosecuted when selling to minors. Absolutely.
Agreed.
Should cocaine be outlawed—and meth-—yes. The destruction of society and family and the severe costs to civil society was noted in China during the Opium Wars.
Ours is a very different society than 19th century China. And unlike China, the USA is not being forced by a foreign power to accept drug shipments.
There is a destruction of the family unit with rampant drug use
Who said anything about "rampant" drug use? This old bogeyman assumes that there are millions of American adults who are deterred from using drugs by their current illegality but under legalization would be undeterred by the inherent harms of drug use. That's counterintuitive, to put it mildly - are YOU such a person?
And while I agree that a parent violates his/her minor children's rights by drugging him/herself into a state of inability to meet his/her parental responsibilities, I vigorously disagree that this is sufficient reason to ban drug use for ALL adults including those without minor children. (If it were sufficient reason, we should return to Prohibition of the drug alcohol.)
and promotion [...] Evil can never be promoted in a civil society. [...] Should we have laws which prevent the promotion of Evil. Yes
I could accept bans on advertising of legalized drugs. But to allow is not to "promote."