I agree with much of your statement. However,The legalizing of a host of addictive substances in the foreseeable future, is beyond the sheeple's ability to process, and beyond the govt's ability to usher in such a policy change. Look at the trouble they are having unwinding cannabis prohibition, It's a three ring circus.
I really don't know and this is only a guess, but whatcha wanna bet there is a law against consuming bleach? Don't really care enough to look it up because I don't need a law telling me not to, but my suspicion says there is.
Doer I like what you are saying in principle. But it sounds like you think we only have laws because they are needed. Couldn't be further from the truth. We have laws because those in charge deem it so, or tyranny of the majority deems it so, neither falls under my definition of self sovereign. If 2 wolves and a sheep vote on lunch, is the sheep exorcizing self rule and is his self sovereign respected?If there is no law against, that makes it OK? Refer to the 9th Amendment?
I have the Gawd given right, not to drink it or be forced to, Fellow Sovereign, as do you.
However in our fluid and alive, Rule of Law, by Self Sovereigns, if it was needed for some reason, (Gawd knows why) then yes, we will have a law against drinking bleach.
I'd say it's not beyond the ability of the apparatus of government, even the shitty one in place now. The whole scheme could be legislatively abandoned, just like it was legislatively imposed, but I agree with you the people that run government aren't likely to give up power over others once they seize it. That's why I try hard to be nice to people and ignore the fuckers in government.
The Fed. is everywhere, I find them impossible to avoid.
You want it more to the right of Rendy Pawlina?
I want them to do more things like this.
The first of UR posts is right on. I've seen ordinances pass that would make UR eyes roll back, Some of which seemed to be designed to do nothing but ensnare people in the court system, civil as well as criminal. The part about a sheep's right to sovereignty..... Mr. Sheep has made a blunder and will most likely atone for his error by being the guest of honor at his next dinning experience. Does he have self rule? You Betcha. Will his "self" be respected. If he is counting on that, I would ask "Where is he getting his drugs? Time to be sovereign was b4 Mr Sheep found himself outnumbered and unarmed amidst a group that he has a difference of opinion with...As Lee J. Cobb as Yang the warlord said to Boggie, a fake priest, who was bargaining for his life, in the great movie The Left Hand of God...."Jimmy it always helps to have some troops.
You are misinformed and bias. If Hillary and Obama were left of Rand on social issues, why haven't they done what Paul has done? Paul is also against a lot of our foreign intervention while Obama keeps drone bombing people.
The Gov. holds no value in individual rights.Citizens are but grist fed to their mill. Look where a tyranny of the minority has gotten the pubtards. Our gov. has adopted the chinese philosophy: The nail that stands up is quickly driven flat.
I agree, I just don't understand your blaming the sheep for putting himself in that situation and instead call for him to have a bigger gang.
Fantastic. I will go with option 1, stomp my feet and call you names. It's much easier.
I understand.
so if rend pawl is against killng without a trial and militarization of police and drone bombs, why would he say this?
