Replies

The Constitution gives the Federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce. The power to ban the import and export of commodities as part of "regulate" was tested rather early on with the banning of the slave trade. The banning of interstate commerce in goods originating from Cuba is a more recent example. And the States of course always had the power to regulate intrastate commerce and have done so.

I do believe libertarians are generally against these sorts Constitutional provisions as they conflict with libertarian principles as much as liberals are against the 2nd amendment. Therefore it is quite fair to say that both oppose the Constitution although on different points.

However, the most profound impact of drug legalization would be reflected in the sharp rise of various social ills and accompanying activity in the family/juvenile court systems, with growing demands upon social service agencies and treatment programs.

When social ills are at an all-time high, one cannot have a 'sharp rise' in them. (Many brought to you by the nanny state, BTW).

indulging in drugs is morally wrong, placing all substance abusers, and those around them, at risk for physical, psychological, and spiritual damage.

Since the topic appears to be the legislating of 'morality' let's take it a bit further, shall we:
How about a law that puts Jimmy Swaggert's ass in jail the next time he's caught with prostitutes (or for crying about it).
Another law suspending Oral Robert's $3Mill pleas for dough, less he be called 'home'.
And finally, a law forbidding the wearing of obscene layers of caked-on make-up while trying to shake down the flock as in Jim and Tammy Faye Baker.
Does your burqua loose it's effectiveness on the bedpost overnight?