U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-27-2010, 06:26 PM
 
Location: Pasadena
7,412 posts, read 8,203,326 times
Reputation: 1802

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Sure you did! Dontcha know that the guvmint, includi9g the courts, knows what's best for you and your family? I thought everyone knew that. In fact, Santa Clara County just declared war on Happy Meals making it unlawful to include toys with menu items that have too many calories in them according to their reckoning. See, parents are off the hook. Guvmint will tell them what they can and cannot feed their children depending upon toys. Parents don't need to think and guide their children anymore.

Why, California is so superior that the guvmint is even telling another state what they can and cannot do when it comes to securing their borders. San Francisco and Los Angeles want to boycott Arizona and The President pro Tem of the State Senate wants to recall all contracts between AZ and CA unless AZ mends its ways. Tomorrow the country. Next day the world!
With all due respect but this thread isn't about toys in "happy meals" or immigrant policies in Arizona, Curmudgeon. Both are worth separate threads however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-27-2010, 06:32 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,605 posts, read 31,374,464 times
Reputation: 29064
Quote:
Originally Posted by californio sur View Post
With all due respect but this thread isn't about toys in "happy meals" or immigrant policies in Arizona, Curmudgeon. Both are worth separate threads however.
Oh, I know. But it was leaning towards a philosophical discussion of government interference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-27-2010, 10:38 PM
 
Location: Minneapolis
146 posts, read 192,446 times
Reputation: 117
Certainly not a partisan issue, being for or against prohibition is more about education of related information and honesty about our populace being human.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 12:25 AM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,561,515 times
Reputation: 5919
Quote:
Originally Posted by keroppininja View Post
Certainly not a partisan issue, being for or against prohibition is more about education of related information and honesty about our populace being human.
Since marijuana, and marijuana "culture" are such very different experiences than say, alcohol, it's not unlikely that it might be linked to some other things, like different values or politics.

I also agree there's a possibility that it might not be, but it does seem kinda curious now why some folks (apparently liberal), clearly seem to have such an emotional investment in insisting that it isn't.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 12:40 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,422 posts, read 25,314,196 times
Reputation: 8857
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
Since marijuana, and marijuana "culture" are such very different experiences than say, alcohol, it's not unlikely that it might be linked to some other things, like different values or politics.

I also agree there's a possibility that it might not be, but it does seem kinda curious now why some folks (apparently liberal), clearly seem to have such an emotional investment in insisting that it isn't[/b].
What emotional investment? It's called an opinion.

Are you basing all of this off this one thread? Go around and talk to people, read the comments on stories published on news sites. Plenty of people who don't smoke support legalization and plenty of republicans support it too. I would say support is stronger on the left of course but this issue really does cross party lines, at least among regular people as opposed to elected officials.

Quote:
To put it another way, are there any Liberals/Dems who don't support and/or use marijuana
Barack Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 01:06 AM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,561,515 times
Reputation: 5919
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
What emotional investment? It's called an opinion.

Are you basing all of this off this one thread? Go around and talk to people, read the comments on stories published on news sites. Plenty of people who don't smoke support legalization and plenty of republicans support it too. I would say support is stronger on the left of course but this issue really does cross party lines, at least among regular people as opposed to elected officials.

Barack Obama.
You (and some others) also seem a bit "sensitive" about the very idea that there might be a stronger political connection. How come?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 01:12 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
15,422 posts, read 25,314,196 times
Reputation: 8857
Quote:
Originally Posted by mateo45 View Post
You (and some others) also seem a bit "sensitive" about the very idea that there might be a stronger political connection. How come?
I'm not denying there is a stronger political connection with mj legalization and democrats/liberals. I'm just saying it's not a cut and dry partisan issue, I think there is significant support for this among libertarian minded conservatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 01:28 AM
 
Location: On the "Left Coast", somewhere in "the Land of Fruits & Nuts"
8,367 posts, read 8,561,515 times
Reputation: 5919
Quote:
Originally Posted by sav858 View Post
I'm not denying there is a stronger political connection with mj legalization and democrats/liberals. I'm just saying it's not a cut and dry partisan issue, I think there is significant support for this among libertarian minded conservatives.
Thanks, and by saying "Liberals vs Conservatives", I'm not trying to suggest it's a cut & dried, strictly partisan issue either. Only that those are the closest convenient descriptions that capture the (oftentimes) opposing sets of cultural values, that may underly folks ideas re: this fairly unique intoxicant... culturally, psychologically and physically-speaking.

But even if it were basically a "partisan" thing, it's hard to see why that notion would bother anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 09:56 AM
 
Location: San Jose
1,044 posts, read 2,367,550 times
Reputation: 947
One high-profile conservative who favored legalization, or at least decriminalization, of marijuana was William F. Buckley, founder of the conservative National Review. See, e.g., this article:

William F. Buckley Jr. on Marijuana on National Review Online (http://old.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley200406291207.asp - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2010, 11:46 AM
 
Location: Living on the Coast in Oxnard CA
15,691 posts, read 26,663,721 times
Reputation: 20267
I am a conservative Republican. As one my beliefe system is towards less government intervention in my life and the life of those I love. I wouldn't blink an eye or think it wrong if those in Sacramento or Washington did nothing in the way of creating more laws. I would see it as a good thing. If you want to toke on something that is your choice. I for one have made my choice and the choice for the kids in my household. What that means is when they are in my home they will not partake. I can't controll my kids when they are at school or someplace else. I would hope that I would have taught them that some substances just are not good for you. At some point though they will have to decide for themselves how they will want to live.

If you want to partake or not partake that is a personal decision that the Government does not need to be involved in. The only decision that needs to be made is when someones choices affects others. For example if someone is driving or operating equipment while under the influence of a substance of anykind then I see the need for some intervention. That is a safety issue though and not a life choice issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:19 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top