Should marijuana be legal?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Whitacre_Girl
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Deus_lo_vult said:
Well, for one you dithrered and artfully phrased your answer to a question that should elicit an immediate “yes” from a Christian. My question about the family member committing suicide was a socratic exercise meant to elicit an answer that would be thought provoking. I never accused you of literally displaying a comparable level of apathy.

I took your logic to its natural logical extreme. Your allegiance to libertarianism is disempowering to law enforcement authorities who can and do save people from themselves EVERY DAY.

You are asking civil authorities to be the passive third party that looks on helplessly while people destroy themselves. The role of government in a libertarian society is analogous to the people who looked curiously on while Kitty Genovese was raped and murdered. You’re asking the government to be indifferent to suffering.

Conscientious, compassionate Scott Lafrance’s are not on every street corner in every city when rapes are committed. Police on the other hand, are usually not far away. You may believe that conscientious individuals should be allowed to solve the ills of our society in their own personal capacities, but that’s not the world we live in. How often do people see suffering on the street and ignore it? Very often…every day, in fact.

So, as a logical extension (it’s a METAPHOR, not to be taken literally), you might as well be that person who sits idly by while evils are committed. When the government can save lives, it should be empowered by us (as citizens of a republic) to do so. That’s why abortion should be illegal. Libertarians like Ron Paul do not believe it should be.

Not stopping an action when one has the power to do so is the same as being complicit in that act.

This is just an underhanded way of insulting me without actually addressing me personally. By saying “Thanks for that”. you are indicating sarcasm. By saying you are “amazed at the smug self-righteousness of people here sometimes”, you’re actually referring to me, and that’s a subtle way of calling ME “smug and self-righteous” without using my pseudonym.

Scott, you’ve been here on these forums a lot longer than I have, so I’d venture to guess you’re a little more familiar with the rules of conduct. Yet, even I’d tread carefully when using antagonistic language. You know how the moderators feel about that sort of thing. And no, this is not a threat. Just be mindful for your own sake.
Click to expand...
Um, Ron Paul is staunchly pro-life. Where on Earth did you get the idea that he is not?
 
LaSainte said:
Um, Ron Paul is staunchly pro-life. Where on Earth did you get the idea that he is not?
Click to expand...
He’s not for criminalizing abortion, because he has misgivings about the enforcement of anti-abortion laws. As far as I’m concerned, he’s no better than “pro-choice catholics” like Sebelius or Pelosi. You cannot be pro-life and politically undermine the pro-life position by failing to use your power as an official to put a stop to it.
 
Deus_lo_vult said:
He’s not for criminalizing abortion, because he has misgivings about the enforcement of anti-abortion laws. As far as I’m concerned, he’s no better than “pro-choice catholics” like Sebelius or Pelosi. You cannot be pro-life and politically undermine the pro-life position by failing to use your power as an official to put a stop to it.
Click to expand...
Actually, he has repeatedly proposed a “sanctity of human life” act that would declare, under the constitution, that life begins at conception-such a law would
force individual states to prosecute any abortions as Murder 1. That’s pretty hardcore as far as abortion laws go.
 
LaSainte said:
Actually, he has repeatedly proposed a “sanctity of human life” act that would declare, under the constitution, that life begins at conception-such a law would
force individual states to prosecute any abortions as Murder 1. That’s pretty hardcore as far as abortion laws go.
Click to expand...
But he’s against strict federal controls as well. I think it should be a two tier criminalization. If senators were still appointed by state legislatures and not elected, I might be more comfortable with this solution, but unfortunately, they are not, and state governments have no representative before federal government.

The genie’s not going back in that bottle, I don’t think senators will ever be appointed again.
 
Deus_lo_vult said:
But he’s against strict federal controls as well. I think it should be a two tier criminalization. If senators were still appointed by state legislatures and not elected, I might be more comfortable with this solution, but unfortunately, they are not, and state governments have no representative before federal government.

The genie’s not going back in that bottle, I don’t think senators will ever be appointed again.
Click to expand...
Honestly, Ron Paul would probably save more unborn babies than any one of the candidates because of his proposed way to torpedo Roe vs. Wade in addition to a personhood amendment:

“As President, I will sign and aggressively advocate for a law that removes abortion from the jurisdiction of the federal courts,” said Paul. “This approach, done by simple majority vote and stroke of my Presidential Pen, would effectively overturn Roe v. Wade and allow states to pass strong pro-life legislation immediately. Millions of lives would be saved by this approach while we fight to make every state a right to life state.”

No waiting around for Supreme Court justices to die or retire, he jus wants to take it out of their hands altogether and immediately. I think it’s a great approach.
 
LaSainte said:
Honestly, Ron Paul would probably save more unborn babies than any one of the candidates because of his proposed way to torpedo Roe vs. Wade in addition to a personhood amendment:

“As President, I will sign and aggressively advocate for a law that removes abortion from the jurisdiction of the federal courts,” said Paul. “This approach, done by simple majority vote and stroke of my Presidential Pen, would effectively overturn Roe v. Wade and allow states to pass strong pro-life legislation immediately. Millions of lives would be saved by this approach while we fight to make every state a right to life state.”

No waiting around for Supreme Court justices to die or retire, he jus wants to take it out of their hands altogether and immediately. I think it’s a great approach.
Click to expand...
I don’t know…state legislatures all over the country are defying public opinion and legalizing homosexual ‘marriage.’ What does that say about our chances of protecting the unborn?

I mean, you could argue that if one state de-criminalizes it again, it would stop them from dragging the rest of us with them, but when you think about homosexual ‘marriage’, it gives me great pause.
 
The OP stated that they wanted to know our thoughts on legalizing marijuana in the United States; which sounded to me like they were looking at it from a non-religious viewpoint. From a purely legal constitutional standpoint, Marijuana should be legalized, taxed, regulated, and sold to those individuals 21 and over in the country that wish to use it. The government has abused their power over the people by picking and choosing which substances they are going to allow us to put into our bodies, as if they know whats best for me. I was a daily smoker of marijuana for the better part of 8 years, I haven’t touched the stuff over the past 2 years. If the government said that I could choose to have Alcohol, Tobacco, or Marijuana legalized, I would choose Marijuana and it wouldn’t even be that close.

Alcohol is the #1 killer of our teenagers in this country, and they can’t even legally buy it. Tobacco directly contributes to the deaths of over 1 million people each and every year; yet it is still legal. How many stories do you hear of drunk abusive parents who mistreat their kids, or these two drunk people are at a bar and a fight breaks out and someone gets killed? I can assure you based on my personal experience and being around others who chose to smoke marijuana, you will not see an abusive parent who only smokes Marijuana. You will not see that same bar fight happening if the same two guys were smoking legally purchased Marijuana in the bar. People just react differently under the influence of both substances, and the safer overall substance is the only one that is criminalized.

Now from God’s point of view, I don’t believe he wants us to use Marijuana much at all if any. Unlike Alcohol, you can’t just get a little high when you smoke marijuana. After a few puffs you get all the way there; there really isn’t much of an in between “high.” The Bible doesn’t prohibit alcohol altogether, afterall our Lord turned water into wine at the wedding. At the same time we should always keep in mind that we are not to pollute our minds and bodies because it takes away from the Lord. If we can dedicate ourselves to God and still choose to recreationally use Marijuana on rare occurrences, then I suppose it could be okay in moderation.
 
This is purely my opinion as I have not read this anywhere before; to me it seems pretty obvious why Marijuana is still criminalized. If Marijuana were decriminalized, you would see close to a majority (45-55%) of users grow the plants in their own homes and back yard without fear of reprimand from the government. Compare that to those people who brew their own Alcohol or grow and roll their own cigarettes (which is very low,) and you see stark contrasts. The government would not be able to control Marijuana even if it were decriminalized, and the expected tax revenue would be much less than anticipated because I personally see a majority of people who choose to smoke marijuana growing it themselves. Lobbyists from Big Alcohol and Tobacco do not want to see such a huge competitor come into their pool of income, they will fight tooth and nail to see this never happens.
 
Kc906 said:
[snip]

Unlike Alcohol, you can’t just get a little high when you smoke marijuana. After a few puffs you get all the way there; there really isn’t much of an in between “high.”

[snip]
Click to expand...
I don’t know what you were smoking, but my cousin’s friend in New Jersey (who informs me on these matters) says that reefer comes in various strengths and that, in fact, it is possible to take just one hit.
Unrelated question: What is RCC policy/practice on children receiving wine at communion?
 
Deus_lo_vult said:
He’s not for criminalizing abortion, because he has misgivings about the enforcement of anti-abortion laws. As far as I’m concerned, he’s no better than “pro-choice catholics” like Sebelius or Pelosi. You cannot be pro-life and politically undermine the pro-life position by failing to use your power as an official to put a stop to it.
Click to expand...
So, your answer to a woman who has an abortion is to throw her in prison?
 
Kc906 said:
This is purely my opinion as I have not read this anywhere before; to me it seems pretty obvious why Marijuana is still criminalized. If Marijuana were decriminalized, you would see close to a majority (45-55%) of users grow the plants in their own homes and back yard without fear of reprimand from the government. Compare that to those people who brew their own Alcohol or grow and roll their own cigarettes (which is very low,) and you see stark contrasts. The government would not be able to control Marijuana even if it were decriminalized, and the expected tax revenue would be much less than anticipated because I personally see a majority of people who choose to smoke marijuana growing it themselves. Lobbyists from Big Alcohol and Tobacco do not want to see such a huge competitor come into their pool of income, they will fight tooth and nail to see this never happens.
Click to expand...
Marijuana is criminalized now and the government can’t control it. 🤷
 
now that its lent it should be a good time to remind all and sundry that everything is either ***illegal, immoral or fattening ***😃
 
I say legalize, regulate, and tax it. Some people say it is a gateway drug. But the gateway is the illegal contacts with drug dealers. They also sell the other drugs. Also the drinking age needs to be lowered. It is easier to buy marijuana off the street than alcohol from a store. Keep opiates and amphetamines illegal.
 
Deus_lo_vult said:
I don’t know…state legislatures all over the country are defying public opinion and legalizing homosexual ‘marriage.’ What does that say about our chances of protecting the unborn?

I mean, you could argue that if one state de-criminalizes it again, it would stop them from dragging the rest of us with them, but when you think about homosexual ‘marriage’, it gives me great pause.
Click to expand...
That is the beauty of Paul’s plan. Taking the power away from the courts will save countless unborn almost immediately, rather than spending decades trying to stack the supreme court in favor of overturning Roe V. Wade. A subsequent personhood amendment to the Constitution would instantly make abortion murder throughout the country. Any states that do not comply will be subject to strict Federal penalties. In terms of lives saved, I think it’s an ingenious proposal. I haven’t heard any other candidate come up with such a bold solution.
 
LaSainte said:
That is the beauty of Paul’s plan. Taking the power away from the courts will save countless unborn almost immediately, rather than spending decades trying to stack the supreme court in favor of overturning Roe V. Wade. A subsequent personhood amendment to the Constitution would instantly make abortion murder throughout the country. Any states that do not comply will be subject to strict Federal penalties. In terms of lives saved, I think it’s an ingenious proposal. I haven’t heard any other candidate come up with such a bold solution.
Click to expand...
We had a six year window (2001 - 1007) when Republicans controlled the White House and both halls of Congress. What happened with Roe v Wade? Nothing.
 
cornbread_r2 said:
I don’t know what you were smoking, but my cousin’s friend in New Jersey (who informs me on these matters) says that reefer comes in various strengths and that, in fact, it is possible to take just one hit.
Click to expand...
You are 100% correct, back during the days I used I would prefer to get the “weaker” kind because I could buy more quantity for the same amount of money as the “stronger” stuff. Of course it’s possible to take just 1 or 2 hits, and if you have a high tolerance built up from smoking the stuff you probably wouldn’t feel as much. Possible yes, normally people smoke the stuff to feel the effects of it; I know thats why I did it.
Scott_Lafrance said:
Marijuana is criminalized now and the government can’t control it.
Click to expand...
Exactly my point; just because something is criminalized and the government pursues those people who might still be involved, it doesn’t get rid of the problem. It just drives the problem underground just like during Prohibition; in this case it drives people to drug dealers who in many cases deal with more than just Marijuana. Adding on top of that point; the DEA and government officials are aware how easy it is to grow a Marijuana plant within the confines of ones home. I personally believe they would be quite afraid of legalizing something and having a majority of the users not paying taxes on it.
 
I have some questions:

How would legalization of marijuana end and/or significantly impact the drug cartels?

The various branches of Italian organized crime control the heroin trade, for example. But they also are into various other illegal activities. Removing the heroin trade from their control would cause them to look for some other illegal trade to control. Are the drug cartels soley into marijuana?

Also, if the libertarian goal is for minimum government oversite and control, how would legalization of marijuana arrive at that goal? If it were to be taxed and regulated, would the governmnt not be involved to the same extent that it is now?

Finally, what about other drugs, cocaine, heroin etc. What would be the reasoning to keep those illegal…or should they also be legal and regulated?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top