Replies

As to your first question, we are a democratic republic with representatives.
Close, we're a Constitutional Republic. We're supposed to be tied down to the Constitution, not the whims of "a majority". In your "democratic republic" your "majority" aspect carries weight. In our Constitutional Republic it doesn't.
The current representatives are, in the main, dead set against MJ legalization, so it will remain illegal, for now.
Ah, yes..."for now". And the tide is slowly turning. Those same currently elected representatives are supposed to be looking out for everyone's rights, not just those of "the majority".
I didn't locate the "right" to dope in the Constitution...
Just like you can't find the prohibition of "dope" in the Constitution itself either, right?
...that must have been the "lost" Bill of Rights Amendment the Founders forgot to put in 'cause they were all stoned on that hemp Thomas Jefferson was growing.
Okay, I'll play. Nothing has been "lost", it's just been ignored. The Ninth ("The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.") should've covered such things yet it's ignored. It would've been impossible to write down every right the people were to retain.
As to TJ growing weed, yes, he grew it. As to the FF being stoned on it...they sure were some smart guys for a bunch of stoners.

Federal drug laws depend on the all-inclusive New Deal court interpretation of the commerce clause. Any FReeper who thinks that the idea that wheat grown for personal consumption can be regulated by the federal government (Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111, 1942) is anathema to the original Constitution, personal liberty and federalism, but that the same regulation of marijuana is just fine, is inconsistent to the point of irrationality.