posted by Scyman
Its odd how in the city of Denver one can posses an ounce of MJ. Yet the state that same bill didn’t pass . . I guess one might say Denver is a bit
more liberal then the rest of the state?
American states are said to have "inherent" power, to some extent based on the British monarchy upon which the 13 original colonies depended for
their law. Frankly, it is unlimited power. Each state has its own constitution to put limits on its government, but if you need a power, it is there
in the states. That concept relates back to England’s King James I (a/k/a James VI of Scotland). James regarded himself as a ‘Divine Right’
monarch. That is, he ruled on the authority of God, above the people. That concept did not sit well in Protestant England and James’ son, Charles I,
The Federal government OTOH, is a “delegated power” because it was a creation of the Founding Fathers, and not a legal descendant of the British
Crown. When you “create” something, you have the power to define its limits.
Cities are creations of the state legislatures. They are more like the Federal government, that is, they have only delegated power, not inherent
power. I know very little about Colorado, only what I read in the paper or hear on the tv. I believe several western states have tried to
“de-criminalize” possession of small quantities of marijuana. MJ. 28 grams equals 1 ounce, Av. Avoirdupois. I’ve never had the pleasure of
smoking MJ, alcohol being my drug of choice, but I know it is a fact no one has ever died from an OD of MJ. Something you cannot say about alcohol.
Cities usually are more “liberal” than rural areas. Sociologically speaking it has to be that way. You cannot get as “close” to people when
you are living in such compact space. It’s a defense mechanism. That means in the city, you stick more to your own business, whereas in the rural
environment, you are more receptive to collaboration or association with others, often fewer in number.
From the US Constitution, I’ve selected some parts that may ultimately let us “get over” this gay rights issue. We know it is religion being
expressed in the political arena, which violates the basic concept of separation of church and state.
Preamble: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the
common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
US Con. Article IV
Section 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state.
Section 2. The citizens of each state shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the
state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
I believe anti-gay laws violate the “Establishment clause” because the anti gay movement is religion, pure and simple, at its worst.
[edit on 11/8/2006 by donwhite]