Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Persevero
I understand.

While your arguments may be justifiable scripturally, I cannot support that as being politically conservative, particularly when applied to national drug policy. We have a national government of limited enumerated powers. Those powers are enumerated in the Constitution, not in the Bible.

I don't encourage or generally condone drunkeness either, but you need to consider the unintended consequences of giving politicians and bureaucrats the power to decide how much wine you should have with dinner, and the police the power to enforce it.

165 posted on 06/28/2010 4:06:47 AM PDT by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic

I agree we have to be careful about unintended consequences.

As a practical matter, I don’t think outlawing drunkenness means the feds decide how much wine you have at dinner. Laws against drug abuse would necessarily involve public behavior, unless police were called to the home.

It is for instance against the law (properly so) to torture your dog. But we don’t have animal control going door to door checking to see if anyone is torturing their dog.

If though, for instance, my granddaughter drinks herself stupid every weekend, and she has a 3 and 6 year old to care for during that time, I might call the cops and ask for a check. The cops could see for themselves whether she was in a state to care for dependent children. If she’s not, I’d want her arrested for child endangerment.


166 posted on 06/28/2010 8:50:02 AM PDT by Persevero (The Second American Revolution, “THE GREAT FLUSH”, starts Nov. 2, 2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson