child porn violates a childs right not to be violated
heh
child porn violates a childs right not to be violated
Huh? Can't speak for the people you know who use drugs, but do you spend much time in the inner city? I'm originally from Detroit; I've seen what can happen to an entire city ... Perhaps the folks you know simply toke up on occasion when they break out their old Led Zeppelin LPs, but have you ever experienced being the family member of anyone addicted to crystal meth or crack? Ever spent any time cleaning up meth labs in a rural area where huge percentages of the area teens have been or will be in in-patient drug treatment programs resulting from meth addiction?if drug use predictably and consistently led to personal disaster and social costs for everyone and crime and corruption and all those horrible things, why haven't I seen more of those outcomes among people I know? Why haven't we seen more of those outcomes among the 70 million or more who have tried illegal drugs?
Really? Where is this right to life found?
Yes, and alcohol.have you ever experienced being the family member of anyone addicted to crystal meth or crack?
Ever spent any time cleaning up meth labs in a rural area where huge percentages of the area teens have been or will be in in-patient drug treatment programs resulting from meth addiction?
My position is that rights are not some god-given thing out of the air but constructs of society and subject to societal agreement. And societies leave clues to those rights in their legal literature and other places.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.
RealGun said:Help me out, if you don’t mind. Tyring to learn something here.…
You didn't answer the other point I brought up by posting that, namely that most of the Founders, as well as many people today, thought that those rights came from where, exactly? Not the contract we make amongst ourselves and call a government. They predate the government, and cannot be taken away by it, except under the terms of our contract.
But even if someone agreed that the rights came from god, what is the source, i.e. how do we know that?
Such (injured) people have always been a burden to someone. It might be family, it might be private philanthropy, it might be religious orgs. But whoever pays for it, society as a whole pays for it.
Whoa, Nelly! Whatever harms one member of society harms everyone? Why? Because "society" is one big collective living thing?
You mean you never realized this? Trust me, resources are limited so if resources are spent in one area, e.g. taking care of the brain dead, they wont be available for other areas, e.g. buying jet fighters. The days of people living independent lives on the frontier are pretty well over.
Some things even I cant help.I live in East Texas.
fallingblock said:See, the .50 cal does NOT reduce the reason or responsibility of its user.…
Recreational drugs do this, some to a VERY substantial degree.
Citations to back up your assertion?Since rather extensive biomedical research has, in fact, established that psychotropic drugs are certainly capable of inducing violent and anti-social behavior in otherwise "normal" people...
Another one is emerging.I state again that publius' and the others' focus on the Fed's inappropriate use of the Commerce Clause to regulate drugs and guns is absolutely correct.
This is, IMHO, the ONLY valid link between RKBA and drugs.
I don't think someone who has a couple of drinks when he gets home is "abdicating reason" by doing that. I don't see the probability or possibility of harm, really. Maybe it's 40 years of watching my parents do that, without ever seeing them become unreasonable or seeing them harm anyone as a result, but I just don't see the danger. I don't see it if someone comes home and smokes a joint, either.Isn't it obvious that by abdicating reason, however temporarily, when using recreational drugs, one establishes probability or at least possibility of harm to others?
...
See, the .50 cal does NOT reduce the reason or responsibility of its user.....
Recreational drugs do this, some to a VERY substantial degree.
The right to life encompasses a lot. It includes the right to defend that life, hence the right to keep and bear arms, and it includes the right to imbibe anything you please, as long as you do not directly infringe on somebody else's rights. Eleven pages of discussion about a simple thing like this? Amazing.We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.