More war on drugs lunacy

Page 2 of 2 First 12

  1. Quote Originally Posted by lutherblsstt View Post
    We were intended to be a representative Republic. A Republic is a system in which certain things will never be up for a vote.

    Only things outlined in the Constitution would be subject to a vote, all others would not. In a Republic, the majority would never be able to vote on an issue such as, should a bar owner be able to allow smoking in his establishment?

    This would never be up for a vote in a Republic, but in a Democracy, everything is on the table.

    If they are going to perpetuate the lie of Democracy, they should at least call it by its rightful name, Mobocracy!

    It should never be possible for a group of people to decide what a property owner can do with his or her property, or what someone can put into their body,no matter how big the group or how good the cause.

    I have noticed signs when driving down the road announcing that there will be a meeting of the people to decide if Wal-Mart should be allowed to build a store on land they legally purchased. I find this absurd! Who the hell should have the right to decide what the property owner can do with his property, except the property owner?
    Or who a business owner should hire? What race they have to be? Or what sort of qualifications allow someone of a particular race into a college?


  2. Quote Originally Posted by lutherblsstt View Post
    We were intended to be a representative Republic. A Republic is a system in which certain things will never be up for a vote.

    Only things outlined in the Constitution would be subject to a vote, all others would not. In a Republic, the majority would never be able to vote on an issue such as, should a bar owner be able to allow smoking in his establishment?

    This would never be up for a vote in a Republic, but in a Democracy, everything is on the table.

    If they are going to perpetuate the lie of Democracy, they should at least call it by its rightful name, Mobocracy!

    It should never be possible for a group of people to decide what a property owner can do with his or her property, or what someone can put into their body,no matter how big the group or how good the cause.

    I have noticed signs when driving down the road announcing that there will be a meeting of the people to decide if Wal-Mart should be allowed to build a store on land they legally purchased. I find this absurd! Who the hell should have the right to decide what the property owner can do with his property, except the property owner?
    I agree with what you are saying, in its application to the Federal government. However, the Constitution spelled out no such limitations to state and local governments. The Constitution was no intended to do anything other than establish the functions and structure of Federal government. For example, the Bill of Rights initially did not apply to anyone other than federal law. The 14th amendment and supreme court decisions changed this later.
    •   
       

  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Drugs
    By vika808 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-25-2010, 10:55 PM
  2. Greetings: Looking for info on PCT drugs
    By GodsHammer in forum Post Cycle Therapy
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-15-2008, 04:51 PM
  3. Spiders on Drugs....
    By RedwolfWV in forum General Chat
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-28-2007, 12:31 PM
  4. Best Cholesterol drugs?
    By asap nutrition in forum OTC Drug
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05-12-2005, 07:28 PM
Log in
Log in