First topic in this thread: Society/government having a say in how you raise your kids.
Wrathwilde, all I was trying to show is how government does and should have a say. I brought up a few extreme cases, and it seems that we agree.
A very small say, but a say none the less.
I believe in the 2 roles of government, defend the constitution and protect the citizens. These examples all fall under the 2nd half of that premise. Those children are citizens and should be protected from people, genetically related to them or not.
If you disagree with this, please make the arguement that children living in a meth house are better off than in foster care.
Second topic in this thread: Controlled substances.
Launcelot is correct, there is no such thing as an 'illegal drug', only controlled substances category one. These are things that have no medical value. Heroin has no medical value. Cocaine has medical value and it is legal (in certain dose forms). So in these dose forms, cocaine is a controlled substance category two. Along with percocet, hydromorphone, fentanyl, methylphenidate, and so on. This goes all the way down to codine which is in the 5th category. Sorry for the redundancy for those who didn't need that background.
There are some drugs that should never be taken due to the idea of 'social harm'. (Again with the protect the citizens idea.) And there are some that should be allowed to be sold like tobacco and alcohol are now. My opinion.
Third, Why am I the damned moderate in this?! What the hell? Life is shades of gray, never black and white. 3 people say absolutely no society/government involvement in our lives, and 2 people that say every drug should be legal. I am the only one that says that I agree with those ideas, but not 100%?
Launcelot said:
In addition the largest proponents of firmer drug laws are the large pharmaceutical companies. Why? because it would be harder to sell you more new dope if the good old stuff was easily available.
Reference please.