I'm not important. Attempting to ensure that the lines between libertarianism and conservatism aren't blurred is my only reason for engaging you on this thread.
I think it's admirable that you wish to preserve constitutional liberty; so do I. I disagree with the conclusions you seem to have drawn regarding the intent of the authors of the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights.
And...I am in full agreement with many of the libertarian posters on this thread who call for an end to the Federal War On Drugs; in my opinion it's an issue for the individual states and their respective citizenries via their state legislatures. I don't think it wise to call for the end of drug prohibition at the Federal level, however. If the Federal courts were to rule all drug laws unconstitutional, the states (and their citizenries) would have no say in the issue (and there's a parallel to be drawn here with Roe v. Wade). I think that a Texas outlawing crystal meth and crack and an Oregon fully decriminalizing marijuana and hashish usage can coexist.
There is no constitutionally protected right to smoke crack. Therefore, the issue is within the purview of the states in my opinion.
It's unfortunate that libertarians so often fixate on morals issues such as drugs and pornography. It alienates conservatives, who are interested in preserving traditions and social structures that have coexisted with the Bill Of Rights for years (in fact, the Bill Of Rights makes no sense outside of American traditions and social structures, and the Founding Fathers knew it).
I'm not important. Attempting to ensure that the lines between libertarianism and conservatism aren't blurred is my only reason for engaging you on this thread.
BS. -- Your first post here was a direct attack on my lack of 'conservatism'.
I think it's admirable that you wish to preserve constitutional liberty; so do I. I disagree with the conclusions you seem to have drawn regarding the intent of the authors of the Constitution and the Bill Of Rights.
Yet you've never argued specifically as to my supposed 'intent'.
And...I am in full agreement with many of the libertarian posters on this thread who call for an end to the Federal War On Drugs; in my opinion it's an issue for the individual states and their respective citizenries via their state legislatures. I don't think it wise to call for the end of drug prohibition at the Federal level, however. If the Federal courts were to rule all drug laws unconstitutional, the states (and their citizenries) would have no say in the issue (and there's a parallel to be drawn here with Roe v. Wade). I think that a Texas outlawing crystal meth and crack and an Oregon fully decriminalizing marijuana and hashish usage can coexist. There is no constitutionally protected right to smoke crack. Therefore, the issue is within the purview of the states in my opinion.
As I've said, your first few posts here convinced me that your opinion is not one I can value.
It's unfortunate that libertarians so often fixate on morals issues such as drugs and pornography. It alienates conservatives, who are interested in preserving traditions and social structures that have coexisted with the Bill Of Rights for years (in fact, the Bill Of Rights makes no sense outside of American traditions and social structures, and the Founding Fathers knew it).
It's unfortunate indeed that you have irrational ideas about libertarians. -- Get some help. - Then call me next year.