Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Ron Paul for President
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Griffin" data-source="post: 1687482" data-attributes="member: 18194"><p>I have no idea how this thread went off on a drug tangent but it is clear pettiness is starting to become prevalent.</p><p></p><p>Everyone will agree that all drugs whether legal or illegal affect ones physiology both positively and negatively, that is after all the entire reason we use drugs/medication. The proper use of all drugs/medication is vital for good health, with the improper use resulting in adverse health.</p><p></p><p>This is not being disputed; it is something that everyone agrees on. </p><p></p><p>The question is not should people use drugs, but does the Federal Government have the lawful jurisdiction to control what citizens do to affect their personal health?</p><p></p><p>Bear in mind this is a yes or no question and no shades of moderation exist between the two answers.</p><p></p><p>If you do believe that such a right exists, the only issue is who controls that authority, which I suppose is why we have the huge animosity between parties.</p><p></p><p>If you step back and look at both parties in their current state the differences just melt away, both roads lead to complete totalitarianism, all thats left to decide is who gets there first. And that decision for the majority is only based on what home-team you religiously root for. That is why we have the Anyone but Obama message, why we are told to compromise and just vote for the Lesser of Two Evils.</p><p></p><p>With little shift in platform Obama could easily become the poster boy for the Republican Party and all the republicans would gladly cheer, the same is true with nearly any prominent Republican, it would be so easy for them to effortlessly transition into the Democrat Party.</p><p></p><p>This hypocrisy is not exclusive to politicians; it widespread throughout the people of the United States. No one man can make much impact as President, Ron Paul is as much as a messiah as Obama was, the difference is that Ron Paul embodies many of the principles on which our nation was forged.</p><p></p><p>We all must remember that our country was framed by a moral people for a moral people, until we exist again as self-governed moral individuals tyranny will be rampant. If you truly want to restore the United States start with your own life, transition that to your family, and then to the County, State, and finally Federal Government. No external top-down force can transform our country, reform and decay comes from within.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Griffin, post: 1687482, member: 18194"] I have no idea how this thread went off on a drug tangent but it is clear pettiness is starting to become prevalent. Everyone will agree that all drugs whether legal or illegal affect ones physiology both positively and negatively, that is after all the entire reason we use drugs/medication. The proper use of all drugs/medication is vital for good health, with the improper use resulting in adverse health. This is not being disputed; it is something that everyone agrees on. The question is not should people use drugs, but does the Federal Government have the lawful jurisdiction to control what citizens do to affect their personal health? Bear in mind this is a yes or no question and no shades of moderation exist between the two answers. If you do believe that such a right exists, the only issue is who controls that authority, which I suppose is why we have the huge animosity between parties. If you step back and look at both parties in their current state the differences just melt away, both roads lead to complete totalitarianism, all thats left to decide is who gets there first. And that decision for the majority is only based on what home-team you religiously root for. That is why we have the Anyone but Obama message, why we are told to compromise and just vote for the Lesser of Two Evils. With little shift in platform Obama could easily become the poster boy for the Republican Party and all the republicans would gladly cheer, the same is true with nearly any prominent Republican, it would be so easy for them to effortlessly transition into the Democrat Party. This hypocrisy is not exclusive to politicians; it widespread throughout the people of the United States. No one man can make much impact as President, Ron Paul is as much as a messiah as Obama was, the difference is that Ron Paul embodies many of the principles on which our nation was forged. We all must remember that our country was framed by a moral people for a moral people, until we exist again as self-governed moral individuals tyranny will be rampant. If you truly want to restore the United States start with your own life, transition that to your family, and then to the County, State, and finally Federal Government. No external top-down force can transform our country, reform and decay comes from within. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Ron Paul for President
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom