SmarterthanYou
rebel
and you think that the government is the entity to provide that compass?
A Reminder For The Coming New Year
- Thread starter Robo
- Start date
and you think that the government is the entity to provide that compass?
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Nope, that's the absolute last place to look. Speaking of the founders, one of them said the constitution would only work for a moral people, or something to the effect.
Robo
Verified User
The "moral compass" went out with criminalizing dueling. The BIG central government wonk Hamilton was dispatched before he could introduce the welfare state.
Robo
Verified User
You mean like fucking your slaves? The idea was flawed to begin with, huh?
Darth Omar
Russian asset
Right, we're so much better than they were lol.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
there may be hope for you yet. so then, in your estimation, if a portion of the populace has lost their moral compass, does that mean the constitution should no longer apply?
People aren't actually getting illegal drugs. They have to have a prescription. Got it. Empirical data doesn't seem to support your contention
Yes, places that have legalized drugs have not seen spikes in usage. The idea that people will use drugs because the government doesn't stop them is as ridiculous as the idea that they won't use drugs because the government tries to stop them. People use drugs because they want to, they don't use drugs because they don't want to. When we accept that, we will have the basis to finally start creating a rational policy. One that doesn't start with funding organized crime here and destabilizing governments across the globe
Darth Omar
Russian asset
No, it means society will go on a downward spiral and end in lawlessness, with or without the constitution. It was in the founders estimation that the constitution wouldn't prevent it.
It's not like you're trying to prevent it. That States were the check and balance of the Federal government was the strategy they deployed. I actually advocate that, including for things like drug laws and abortion where I actually oppose government mandating my view on the States for that reason. An unchecked Federal government scares me more than getting my way forced on States benefits me. You've lost sight of that
Darth Omar
Russian asset
The irony being that you told me what I thought with zero to go on, but now I'm supposed to know you're against Federal drug laws which you failed to mention in our ongoing discussion on that exact topic
SmarterthanYou
rebel
and the constitution was never meant to stop it. the people that remain on a sound moral compass of freedom and morality would do just that.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
If you read the debate you'd know that in my first post I advocated against jailing addicts. Robo, being the one trick wonder that he is, turned the debate towards constitutionalism. The last time I checked, advocating rehab over jail wasn't a constitutional issue. In fact, it's advocating *against* a government solution in favor of a private sector solution for the drug epidemic.
It's my opinion that hard drugs should remain illegal. Ideally, on the state level; but I'm sufficiently in touch with the real world to know that getting the federal statute changed on powerful artificial opiates like Fentanyl is tilting at the constitutionalist windmill.
Ill let you and Robo die on that hill. How's that?
We are becoming less violent, less sexist and less racists, I know, hard to believe, but true.
I think morally that is a huge improvement.
I still need to know the definition of moral from those who always claim we are less moral, they aren't students of history if they make this claim.
Why would I want to "die on that hill?" I advocated a position. You sure like to tell people what they think for someone who doesn't like being told what you think. But I'd say we probably agree most of the time.