Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mike P. who wrote (103)	6/29/1998 4:10:00 PM
From: MeDroogies	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13060

Well, I have never seen any indication of the social impact to which you refer... If you are talking about families that are destroyed by drug use - it takes 2 to tango....the wife/husband can take the kids and leave. If both parents are abusers...I don't think anyone here would have a problem with the children being put in foster homes. At any rate, the parent(s) still have a right to destroy themselves, should they choose to do so. Other than that, I am hard pressed to find anything explosive from a social standpoint. Any other crimes committed (murder, robbery, assault) as a result of being on drugs, or to buy drugs, would be fully prosecuted, naturally. Other than that, live and let live. I notice you ignored the part of "pursuit of happiness"...seems to me that was one of the three tenets of the Declaration of Independence. Also, you didn't comment on the fact that by outlawing "dangerous chemicals" cigarettes and alcohol should be outlawed...Do you have views on that? If you support the legality of cigarettes and alcohol despite their dangerous nature, how do you define dangerous? Or would you like to return to the Prohibition?