The Forgotten Men Blog
- Thursday, 21 March 2013 15:41
- Written by Joshua Lyons
Part 1 of this 2 part series can be found HERE.
We’ve now recognized our long-held addiction to government and have hopefully agreed to take the steps to break that dependency. That, along with a bit of luck, can maybe help us approach the common hyper-emotional arguments that dominate the marijuana debate with clarity.
But before we do, I think it’s appropriate to raise the fact that alcohol is a legal intoxicant. It has other useful purposes like fuel, medicinal (limited), etc. Now, marijuana is an illegal intoxicant. It too has other useful purposes like materials such as clothing, medicinal, etc.
However, mainstream society equates alcohol with having a good time while it associates marijuana with good for nothing slackers. All the while, we seem to forget that anything can be abused. For example, that legal intoxicant we just talked about? It’s what is used to feed alcoholism, which is rampant in the US (and abroad).
The situation that we have is one where people have decided to trust their fellow citizens with all sorts of decisions like whether or not to own a firearm, driving a vehicle, and drink alcohol. But, we simply do not trust our fellow citizens to make the decision on whether or not to use marijuana (to treat migraines, menstrual challenges, or to just relax).
With that out of the way, let’s explore the common hyper-emotional arguments:
- Thursday, 21 March 2013 14:58
- Written by Joshua Lyons
It’s very telling when the people who scream the loudest to get government out of their lives, are the same people who throw up their hands in astonishment when the topic of legalizing marijuana is brought up (medicinal or otherwise).
How can a person make the very reasonable argument that we can trust citizens to bear firearms, have access to alcohol, and drive a vehicle, but somehow that very same person makes the case that we can’t trust our fellow citizens to have access to medicinal or recreational marijuana?
Let’s be honest… "these conservatives” want the government to control what we do just as much as “those liberals” do. The only real difference between the two sides is that they just want a different type government control.
It’s time that we look in the mirror and admit that we have an addiction. Say it with me, “hi, I’m ______ and I’m a government-aholic.”
- Sunday, 17 March 2013 12:29
- Written by Joshua Lyons
1.) The Federal government was created by the States, as an agent of the States (it was not created "by the people"). This is clearly articulated in Article VII of the US Constitution as well as Ratification Conventions/Resolutions of the various States.
2.) The Federal government has only been delegated a very limited set of powers by the States; these powers are defined within the US Constitution.
3.) The Federal Bill of Rights was ratified to further restrict the Federal government, not the State governments (the 14th Amendment did not Constitutionally change this relationship). This purpose is very clear and can be found in the Preamble of the Federal Bill of Rights.
4.) The Federal government was not empowered to be the sole/final arbiter of the US Constitution. This would empower the agent of the States the ability to define the extent of its own power.
5.) The 17th Amendment did subtract a vital State check of Federal legislation, however it did not change the fact that the States play a vital role in governance and still serve as a check on the Federal government.
6.) States are not subservient to the Federal government except on matters where the Federal government has been delegated authority (again, this authority is very limited in size and scope).
7.) The only powers that the Federal government was delegated are defined in the US Constitution. Any powers they currently "enjoy" that are not defined in the US Constitution, have been usurped from the States or the people. This usurpation is in DIRECT violation of the US Constitution and what the States ratified in the 1780's (i.e. what they consented to).
8.) Each State has a Constitution where the citizens of that State have delegated powers to the State government. Most States also have a Bill of Rights or a Declaration of Rights that further restrict the State governments power and specifically document what powers the State government does not have. The only time a State Constitution is not supreme, are in powers that are delegated to the Federal government and documented in the US Constitution; this is a very short list (most can be found in Article 1 Section 8 of the US Constitution).
9.) When "the general [Federal] government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force" and it is the duty of the State governments to defend the sovereign/supreme power of the State government and/or citizen that is under attack by the Federal usurper.
These are the facts...it's imperative that our activism is based on these basic fundamentals.
If you appreciate the system of Federalism, please share this far and wide!