Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Elphaba
I agree, Bear, that the IC clause was wrong the first time it was used (a farmer's personal wheat crop), and every single time it has been used since to overrule an intrastate activity.
|
Did you know that many of the rulings based on the IC clause, the ones that the Right-wing classically and vehemently opposes, were repealments of Jim Crow legislation passed by various states? Or that if the government had no right to impose agricultural regulations such as you oppose above it would bankrupt every family farmer in the country and distrupt the availability of food?
The question at hand is whether the federal goverment has the ability to regulate the specific dosage of a drug which it has already approved for use: morphine. I, as it seems almost everyone here, do not think it does. Clearly though, it's not an issue that was forseen in 1787. So ultimately it's left to interpretation of those appointed to the court who are in turn a reflection of the people elected over the past 25 years. It's kind of scary in that light to consider the superficial issues which cause most people to vote one way or another: boys kissing boys, regional accents, hairstyles, particulars of weapon availability, and flashy media displays.