POT LACKS PURPOSE

It would be nice to hear the government admit that it over-regulates,
that it needs to mellow out and give citizens a little more control
over their own lives.

But must the first steps on the road to recovering freedoms from the
fount of Constitutional federalism make legalizing marijuana a
salient point?

The subject merits an open debate, particularly on economic grounds.
In fact, a purely secular argument for the legalization of marijuana
is entirely valid. But for much of America -- especially red states
- -- the marijuana money trail isn't the issue.

Arguments about unjustified societal intolerance of different
lifestyles aren't pertinent either. Economic or social progress mark
fatuous successes if these are not attained in the pursuit of a
greater purpose.

America is a purposed nation. America serves God. The practical
consequence arising from this belief is that means are not justified
by ends. Rights do not exist in a vacuum. Progress measures success
only after the method by which it is attained is subjected to the
scrutiny of an independent moral code.

In modern times this traditional view is regularly challenged.
Secular scales measure the greatness of America's identity -- annual
national growth, Dow Jones Index, national scholastic test scores,
but at least the preceding markers indirectly measure morality:
growth is largely a function of work ethic and disciplined minds.

Other markers give no indication of the state of morality. One such
category is the "right to." America prides itself on how many "right
to's" it can accumulate -- right to self-expression, right to
privacy, right to abortion, right to inhale mind-altering substances.
The more "right to's" there are, the better America supposedly is.

The problem lies in that these type of "rights" do not build up a
foundation for the country. These "rights" aren't meant to further a
Godly end. Often these rights are beyond the judgments of good and
evil. They are deemed "good" because they foster Man's own ability to
live as he pleases. Their ultimate purpose is the service of Man.

This is a dangerous credo, one that in its fullest meaning resounded
ahead of Communist Russia as it marched to perdition in the past century.

Of course legalizing pot wouldn't make America communist, but it
would be one step toward a world where rights are justified not by
their adherence to morality but because they further Man's own ends.
This political epistemology is antithetical to the American vision.

The fountainhead of constitutional federalism springs waters meant to
strengthen this country's citizens for a pursuit greater than any
individual's capricious desires.

Individual rights are given meaning by the purpose they enable man to
strive for. It is by this meaning that these rights ought to be
judged worthy.

The legalization of pot would, at best, be self-gratification. This
right would not serve the interests of God. The legalization of pot
would tempt this country to stray from its moral heritage. It would
be a jumping point for a new era in American politics in which the
ends justify the means.

The legalization of pot would be an immoral act, but America can at
least handle those. However, to legalize pot would pose deeper
troubles. It would signal to America a fundamental shift in politics:
from service of morality to service of Man's interests.