pretext that it be regulated. Somehow though, I believe
that "regulation" would result in government "regulation", something
like alchohol or tobbacco products to ensure safety. Therefore, I
feel a bit hypocritical in arguing for the right to choose to smoke
marajuana as a personnal freedom, but under the direction of Big
Brother. DOes this contradiction make sense? I believe it is partly
libertarian and partly anti-libertarian I suppose.
Thanks for the reply.
--- In [email protected], "Eric Dondero Rittberg"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You're obviously approaching this issue from a mainstream
perspective
> on libertarianism.
>
> Please don't get the impresion that just because you are not fully
on
> board with the full drug legalization side you're not welcome in
the
> libertarian movement.
>
> We have a variety of views on the subject; everything from just
> support of Medical marijuana to extremist Libertarians who want to
> immediately legalize crack cocaine.
>
> You are welcome in the libertarian movement. Glad to have you
aboard!
>
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "wgilbert02" <buckygilbert@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I've noticed that this board has a lot of references to ending
the
> drug
> > war. To be honest, I have yet to determine whether I am for or
> against
> > legalizing currently illegal drugs. I was wondering if anyone
here
> > could offer the arguments either for or against legalizing drugs
and
> > perhaps what form this would take. I'm not trying to get an
> argument
> > started here. This is simply an area in which I am on the fence.
> >
> > Thanks
> > William
> >
>
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
