Ryan in the House
Member
And that my friends, is the sad result of Civics education in our land today.
Nice way to chop up my post in order to completely change the way I am percieved, Michael Moore.
And that my friends, is the sad result of Civics education in our land today.
Nice way to chop up my post in order to completely change the way I am percieved, Michael Moore.
Great way to pick and choose what parts of the constitution to abide by, Democrat.
Now that is a good point.as it effects the health a welfare of the public directly and without their consentThe only problem I see with legalization would be that non users are subjected to second hand smoke. Sure, one could move away, but there is always that one uncurteous SOB that insists on firing one up right in front of your children. I definitely do not want my children nor myself involuntarily exposed to marijuana use by second hand smoke.
I dont "pick and choose" what parts of the Constitution to abide by. I interpret it differently that you. The Constitution legalizes everything under the great blue sky as long as it does not harm or repress anyone else. It does not take into consideration that people might not want to see drunken fools barfing on our sidewalks. It does not take into consideration that people dont want their kids to see a flock of exhibitionists jiggling their way along our streets and sidewalks. It does not take into consideration that the majority should have a hand in how they want to be governed. Majority rules.
As for compromising, that also comes to play with guns. Someone just reading the Constitution could think "Right to keep and bear arms. Got it. I'll buy a fully operational AK-47 first thing in the morning." But, laws created after the Constitution are added as the situations arise, and as the issues become popular.
Majority rules.
Now you're attacking a logical fallacy. Good. I want to acknowledge that."Democrat" is an insult? Why not call me a poop face?
I agree. Please take this concept and expand it.It's up to you to decide if it's more important to be associated with a political affiliation or a political idea.
So if I do not own a car, is it ok for me to get high? Altered judgement and behavior in and of themselves are rather innocuous.Why do I think consumption of intoxicating substances is immoral? I think of the effects. It puts them in a position where their behavior and judgement is altered, and where they are at a danger to not only themselves, but a danger to people around them. You smoke weed and drive, you drink beer you drive, you're endangering people around you.
I never said it is. I never said it was. What's image got to do with anything?Being high is NOT a positive image, I hope you know. It has never been a positive image; not in society's eye.
Well, for one, I wouldn't do it because it would provide no useful information.Why dont you take a poll, and see how many responsible adults want to take their kids to parks where people are hitting up joints and getting high, or taking them to places where people are so drunk they're pissing their pants and vomiting all over the place.
How is an image of a person smoking a joint different from an image of a person smoking tobacco? Is the simple fact of having a small burning piece of paper in one's hand so awful?Any responsible parent, and I'm not talking about parents who smokes weed with their 15 year old kid, would agree that they dont want those images to become etched into their child's mind as a prominent and acceptable part of our society.
Well, first of all, I think your idea of how to spell bologna is wrong. I also do not understand why you keep bringing up barfing drunks. Consumption of alcohol does not automatically cause vomiting. Supposing my children do happen to see a vomiting drunk, I would think this would a be quite valuable as an illustration of what can happen if you are not careful in your alcohol use.You might think my idea of what is appealing and not is wrong. You might think that a bunch of high wandering fools is a good thing to invision in America; or you might not care. You might not care if your children see drunks in public parks who are barfing up their balogne sandwiches all over the ground. But I do.
Guns can be used for social enjoyment as well. Is there something wrong with enjoyment?I don't look at guns the same way I look at judgement-impeding drugs (that can and often times lead to accidents) or alcohol. Guns exist to keep the peace (and yes, they're around to kill, but I won't protest that), and they exist for defense, and even sport. Marijuana and alcohol are for social enjoyment.
Well, you hit the nail on the head there. It's the MISuse that is the problem, not use per se.The only similarities I see is that misusing them is a crime, just as misusing guns is a crime.
What is this fixation on appeal and image that you have? Life ain't pretty. Deal with it. This is the real world, not Disneyworld.It's unappealing when people misuse things like that, and especially when it has an impact on society.
You have my answer as a parent above. I have already demonstrated that the majority opinion is not always right in a previous post.You might not think it does, but just ask parents what they want their kids to see in a park. Ask them if they mind watching a bunch of drunken idiots falling all over the place, making loud and obscene noises. Ask them if they want their kids to experience a group of high pot-smokers first hand. If the majority of the parents say "No... I don't want my kid to see any of that." then you KNOW this kind of thing has an impact on society. It's not just Liberals either; go ahead and ask the Conservative parents. Ask ANY parent, regardless of their political bias.
No. We want to make you think.Do you all just want to argue?
It is rather ironic for one so concerned with morals to speak Lord's name in vain.For Christ's sake!
Then don't look. You have the freedom to turn your head.Does that mean we should be expected to respect the rights of those who walk around naked? I don't want to see people expressing their "persuit of happiness" by letting it all hang out.
Exactly. Wecome to the US of A, which is not now and never has been a Democracy. You got something against the Constitution? Cause, you know, I have sworn to defend it from all enemies, foreign and domestic.I dont "pick and choose" what parts of the Constitution to abide by. I interpret it differently that you. The Constitution legalizes everything under the great blue sky as long as it does not harm or repress anyone else. It does not take into consideration that people might not want to see drunken fools barfing on our sidewalks. It does not take into consideration that people dont want their kids to see a flock of exhibitionists jiggling their way along our streets and sidewalks. It does not take into consideration that the majority should have a hand in how they want to be governed.
IMO, when you allow yourself to become inebrated, you are willingly giving up the right for self defense (along with the priviledge to drive a vehicle). Not because of the law, but because you have hindered your judgement, weakened your physical abilities to be aware of your surroundings (sight, sound, attention to detail, etc) and reduced your ability to react to threats. To put it simply, armed or not, you make yourself vulnerable to attack and are just relying on luck to keep yourself out of trouble.
You have one 28 year old woman surrounded by 8 convicted rapists. No doubt that she is not a member of the majority. Does that mean that they can assault her because they are the majority and the majority rules?
If you have 10 KKK members and one black guy, is it OK for the KKK to hang said black guy? After all, they are the majority.
America is NOT a democracy. It never has been, it never was intended to be.
The idea was considered and rejected by the Framers.
It is rather ironic for one so concerned with morals to speak Lord's name in vain.
Well, for one, I wouldn't do it because it would provide no useful information.
Well, first of all, I think your idea of how to spell bologna is wrong. I also do not understand why you keep bringing up barfing drunks. Consumption of alcohol does not automatically cause vomiting. Supposing my children do happen to see a vomiting drunk, I would think this would a be quite valuable as an illustration of what can happen if you are not careful in your alcohol use.
Guns can be used for social enjoyment as well. Is there something wrong with enjoyment?
if the city,county state or federal goverment say you can't smoke then you can't smoke. if you can't drink and drive then you can't drink and drive.
If the Framers had complete control of how our country was to be run or the next 250 years, then there'd be nudists showing their bodies all over our streets, because that would be granted to them, no holds barred, no compromise. The public has a tendency (and a right) to step in and say they do not want to see that, where as only a very small majority said "It's part of our rights!" Any illusion that the gov't was going to be ultimately controlled and regulated by the Constitution was dismissed when Lincoln gave the Gettysburg Address, "...that this nation under God shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." The position has been held, accepted, and expected ever since.
it's quite simple really, wrong is wrong.
I never said allow people to govern themselves, but they should have a hand if they think something needs to be changed.