Posted on 12/30/2001 1:25:13 AM PST by NoCurrentFreeperByThatName
Irrational leap. Without anything in support, begging the question is all that's left.
In its discussion of the scope of "liberty" protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment the Court [cited below] stated:
Neither the Bill of Rights nor the specific practices of the States at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment marks the outer limits of the substantive sphere of liberty which the Fourteenth Amendment protects. See U.S. Const., Amend. 9. As the second Justice Harlan recognized:
"[T]he full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause `cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution.
This `liberty´ is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms; the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on.
It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints, . . . and which also recognizes, what a reasonable and sensitive judgment must, that certain interests require particularly careful scrutiny of the state needs asserted to justify their abridgment."
Poe v. Ullman, supra, 367 U.S. at 543, 81 S.Ct., at 1777
Thanks for demolishing your own argument.
You base yours on long subverted US codes, which in any case, you fail to post, nor do you argue to your point.
Thus, - you merely assert that the statist quo in the WOD's, or being for our rapid slide into socialist government, - is just fine with you, & constitutional.
So be it. You are branded by your own position.
Thanks again. 21 USCS Section 801 clearly and explicitly states its purposes.
21 USCS Section 801 (1996)
Section 801. Findings and declarations
The Congress makes the following findings and declarations:
(1) Many of the drugs included within this title have a useful and legitimate medical purpose and are necessary to maintain the health and general welfare of the American people.
(2) The illegal importation, manufacture, distribution, and possession and improper use of controlled substances have a substantial and detrimental effect on the health and general welfare of the American people.
(3) A major portion of the traffic in controlled substances flows through interstate and foreign commerce. Incidents of the traffic which are not an integral part of the interstate or foreign flow, such as manufacture, local distribution, and possession, nonetheless have a substantial and direct effect upon interstate commerce because--
(A) after manufacture, many controlled substances are transported in interstate commerce,
(B) controlled substances distributed locally usually have been transported in interstate commerce immediately before their distribution, and
(C) controlled substances possessed commonly flow through interstate commerce immediately prior to such possession.
(4) Local distribution and possession of controlled substances contribute to swelling the interstate traffic in such substances.
(5) Controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate cannot be differentiated from controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate. Thus, it is not feasible to distinguish, in terms of controls, between controlled substances manufactured and distributed interstate and controlled substances manufactured and distributed intrastate.
(6) Federal control of the intrastate incidents of the traffic in controlled substances is essential to the effective control of the interstate incidents of such traffic.
(7) The United States is a party to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, and other international conventions designed to establish effective control over international and domestic traffic in controlled substances.
You support their agenda.
Try again.
Call me when you regain some rationality.
And you Woddies have both of them in spades.
Curious notion of what constitutes "perfection."
The commerce clause was never intended to extend the police power of the federal government, something the USSC finally got around to clearing up in 1995 in US vs. Lopez. The ICC has also been used to justify gun control legislation since the 1934 NFA.
Gee, poor little Roscoe gets his virgin eyes violated, soils his panties and cries to a moderator. I guess the Woddies like you are definitely the real moral cowards and bullies, faced with any opposition you run to authority to squash dissent, under the rubric of "profanity."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.