0
   

REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE

 
 
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 07:30 pm
We don 't have national referenda in America.

The closest that we come to that is the presidential election
every 4 years.

It wud be great if we cud have a national referendum on
the right of every and any American to ingest harmful drugs
or anything he chooses to consume ( if he owns it ).

The anti-drug philosophy of current law is violative of
the libertarian vu point of the Founders.

AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HOME OF THE BRAVE
AND THE LAND OF THE FREE
.



( I expect some collectivist-authoritarian to post:
" we 're not supposed to be the land of the addicted. "
)




David
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 972 • Replies: 19
No top replies

 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 07:40 pm
Personally, I am appalled that the government sees fit to tell adults what they can and cannot put into their bodies. There is no doubt that drugs harm some people, as does alcohol, fatty foods, too much sugar, and many prescription medications. To me, banning the use of any drugs is as ridiculous an idea as banning overweight people from buying candy bars.

IMO as long as a person is an adult, and not directly harming another person by taking drugs, it should be up to that person as to whether he chooses to use drugs.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 07:50 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Personally, I am appalled that the government sees fit to tell adults what they can and cannot put into their bodies. There is no doubt that drugs harm some people, as does alcohol, fatty foods, too much sugar, and many prescription medications. To me, banning the use of any drugs is as ridiculous an idea as banning overweight people from buying candy bars.

IMO as long as a person is an adult, and not directly harming another person by taking drugs, it should be up to that person as to whether he chooses to use drugs.

AGREED,
but I am not aware of government having been granted
any jurisdiction in this regard as to ANY citizen, of ANY age.

That simply is ABSENT from the Constitution;
it does NOT say that if a citizen is YOUNG enuf,
then government can order him all over the place
and have him do its bidding.

Young citizens are NOT SLAVES.

( I think its unfair and unfortunate
that thay are cheated out of their right to vote, but that is another topic. )



David
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:36 pm
Re: REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE
OmSigDAVID wrote:
We don 't have national referenda in America.

The closest that we come to that is the presidential election
every 4 years.

It wud be great if we cud have a national referendum on
the right of every and any American to ingest harmful drugs
or anything he chooses to consume ( if he owns it ).

The anti-drug philosophy of current law is violative of
the libertarian vu point of the Founders.

AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HOME OF THE BRAVE
AND THE LAND OF THE FREE
.

David

This eventually boils down to the question of whether people should have the right to commit suicide.

If you want to give people the right to use drugs however they like, then you implicitly give them permission to commit suicide.

Should people have the right to abuse themselves as much as they want, even up to the point of killing themselves with their actions/choices?
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:38 pm
Re: REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE
rosborne979 wrote:
Should people have the right to abuse themselves as much as they want, even up to the point of killing themselves with their actions/choices?


Yes! (And there a few that'd I'd be willing to help out in their quest!)
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:51 pm
Re: REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE
rosborne979 wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
We don 't have national referenda in America.

The closest that we come to that is the presidential election
every 4 years.

It wud be great if we cud have a national referendum on
the right of every and any American to ingest harmful drugs
or anything he chooses to consume ( if he owns it ).

The anti-drug philosophy of current law is violative of
the libertarian vu point of the Founders.

AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HOME OF THE BRAVE
AND THE LAND OF THE FREE
.

David

This eventually boils down to the question of whether people
should have the right to commit suicide.

Very insightful.
It certainly DOES.





Quote:
If you want to give people the right
to use drugs however they like,
then you implicitly give them permission to commit suicide.

It seems to ME
that thay ALREADY HAVE IT,
before we give them anything.





Quote:
Should people have the right to abuse themselves
as much as they want,
even up to the point of killing themselves with their actions/choices?

YES.

Thay SHUD.

Thay DO.




.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Apr, 2008 09:53 pm
Re: REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE
fishin wrote:
rosborne979 wrote:
Should people have the right to abuse themselves as much as they want, even up to the point of killing themselves with their actions/choices?


Yes! (And there a few that'd I'd be willing to help out in their quest!)

O, u r such a sweetie pie !
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 06:26 am
Re: REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE
OmSigDAVID wrote:
rosborne979 wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
We don 't have national referenda in America.

The closest that we come to that is the presidential election
every 4 years.

It wud be great if we cud have a national referendum on
the right of every and any American to ingest harmful drugs
or anything he chooses to consume ( if he owns it ).

The anti-drug philosophy of current law is violative of
the libertarian vu point of the Founders.

AMERICA IS SUPPOSED TO BE THE HOME OF THE BRAVE
AND THE LAND OF THE FREE
.

David

This eventually boils down to the question of whether people
should have the right to commit suicide.

Very insightful.
It certainly DOES.

I tend to agree that people should have the right to do to themselves what they want, even to kill themselves. But I would point out that there is a hazy middle ground here where there are circumstances where other people want the right to stop people from doing something while in a temporary state of depression or instability.

There are times when people are deemed to be mentally unstable, and unable to make a decision like suicide, for themselves.

OmSigDAVID wrote:
Quote:
Should people have the right to abuse themselves as much as they want, even up to the point of killing themselves with their actions/choices?

YES.

Thay SHUD.

Thay DO.

There's a difference between having the right, and having the ability.

Currently, people do not have the right.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 07:03 am
Quote:
Should people have the right to abuse themselves as much as they want, even up to the point of killing themselves with their actions/choices?


Rosborne979- Absolutely- In the case of someone who is suicidal, I think that friends, relatives, etc. have an obligation to attempt to dissuade the person, even going to the extent of having a person committed to a psychiatric institution. As I have said before, "suicide is a permanent solution to an often temporary problem", but that decision should not be in the purview of the government. Bottom line though, after making reasonable attempts, and the person is still hell bent on killing himself, I would back off.

People are doing things to kill themselves all the time..............just go to a midnight buffet on any cruise, but no one (hopefully) would dream of legislating regulations for midnight buffets. People are smoking themselves to death thru lung cancer.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 07:50 am
Another way to phrase this is: should people have the right to give themselves brain damage and become a drag on society.

If someone becomes impaired through ingesting harmful substances, let's not give them any kind of free treatment. Who wants those losers taking up resources that could be used by reckless skiers?
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:18 am
DrewDad wrote:
Another way to phrase this is: should people have the right to give themselves brain damage and become a drag on society.

Ah ha, I knew this was going to come up.

And what about all those bodies left laying around when people commit suicide, who's going to clean those up. Maybe people should have the right to commit suicide, but only if they pre-plan for their own disposal. But that would mean that the homeless wouldn't have the same right to suicide as people with money.

Society incurs a cost from having people in it, whether those people live or die and in whatever condition they choose to live.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:26 am
By the way, the money society would save by giving up this ill-conceived and ineffective "war on drugs" would more than make up for the cost of taking care of people who needed it.

This ridiculous war on drugs is one of the main problems in the US right now. Followed closely by corporate lobbying in politics and a screwed up tax system.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:28 am
Apart from that (and the gun lunatics), everything is just hunky-dory in the land of the free and the home of the brave.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:31 am
rosborne979 wrote:
And what about all those bodies left laying around when people commit suicide, who's going to clean those up. Maybe people should have the right to commit suicide, but only if they pre-plan for their own disposal. But that would mean that the homeless wouldn't have the same right to suicide as people with money.


Interesting side-question - Do the dead have rights? Or do "rights" end once your dead? If the latter is the case then the poor don't have any right here that they can't exercise.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:41 am
Setanta wrote:
Apart from that (and the gun lunatics), everything is just hunky-dory in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Well, I didn't mean there weren't other issues. I'm sure I could fill up pages if I tried to list all the problems Wink

I just felt like pointing the finger of blame at a selected few core items (which would have sweeping beneficial effects if changed. IMO).
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:48 am
As you were, Roswell, i was just indulgin' my constitutional irreverence . . .
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 09:53 am
Setanta wrote:
As you were, Roswell, i was just indulgin' my constitutional irreverence . . .


Commie! Razz
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 10:20 am
According to the author of this thread, i am an authoritarian, collectivist liberal pinko . . .

. . . get it right, Buddy ! ! !
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 10:32 am
Setanta wrote:
As you were, Roswell, i was just indulgin' my constitutional irreverence . . .

Ha, no problem Santa Smile
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Fri 4 Apr, 2008 12:25 pm
I'd actually agree that the war on drugs is ridiculous. It's not something you can combat from the supply side.j
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
  1. Forums
  2. » REFERENDUM ON FREEDOM OF DRUG USE
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/11/2021 at 11:42:11