And I said differently where? You appear to not understand the difference between something being allowed versus something being protected. I hate the smell of someone that doesn't read or understand what they're accusing people of.
But interstate commerce and regulation of foreign trade are a bit of a bugaboo to your overall tactic.
I suggest you stick with the argument that the federal government cannot regulate the manufacture, sale, or use of drugs which occur solely within the confines of a single state.
But, like so many self-professed limited government conservatives, you say you want limited government - as long as the concept does not limit what you want government to do.
Is this where I'm supposed to cry? Give me a break. I want the people of any given state to be able to decide whether a certain substance (pot, C4 explosives, or plutonium) requires regulation for the purpose of public health. What of weapons? Interestingly, weapons were singled out by the framers and those who ratified the Constitution as so necessary as to be protected.
If all substances were to be protected, why were weapons singled out?
I'm all for more liberty, and I'll entertain arguments to legalize some substances that are currently prohibited, but I won't entertain the notion that getting high is a Constitutionally protected right.
'We the people' can infringe on the right to keep explosives for health reasons? -- Neat new argument, -- for the Brady types.
What of weapons? Interestingly, weapons were singled out by the framers and those who ratified the Constitution as so necessary as to be protected.
If all substances were to be protected, why were weapons singled out?
Arms [including explosives] were 'singled out' because the King tried to infringe on our rights to keep them. We specifically enumerated that right for good effect, not wanting any level of our new gov'ts to have the power to infringe upon it; - fat chance.
I'm all for more liberty, and I'll entertain arguments to legalize some substances that are currently prohibited, but I won't entertain the notion that getting high is a Constitutionally protected right.
Prohibitionists believe that a moral majority rules in a democracy. -- We have a Republic.
"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God?" --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia, 1782.
GOD MADE HERB
GOD SAW THAT IT WAS GOOD
GOD GAVE IT TO MAN
Genesis 1:11
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth"; and it was so.
Genesis 1:12
And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:29
And God said, "See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.
Some seem to believe that an herb given by God to man and beast alike at the beginning of time and which has grown freely almost everywhere, including here long before our nation was formed, is permissibly eradicable or controllable by the federal government through powers granted by the interstate commerce clause of the Constitution. It is an impossible task to devise a logical explanation of how the commerce clause can prohibit the personal growth and consumption of an herb gifted by God. In light of the rest of the Constitution any such perceived mandate dissolves and exposes the government as deluded by its grandeur.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their
Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness."
Preamble: ...secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity...
Amendment V: nor shall (anyone) be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the PEOPLE.
Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the PEOPLE.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
Nowhere in the Constitution is it enumerated what one may put into ones body. Therefore, that right is reserved for the states or the people. However,
since God has already specified in the Bible what one may consume, it is, in fact, the People’s God given right.