A. First, a question: *When* does the state (used here in the broad sense of "any government," not just in the sense of "Wisconsin"; "Iowa"; etc. government) "
need" to prohibit/restrict use of a substance? (Circle all that you agree with.)
1. To maintain social order (a/k/a the "police power" to "protect public health and safety."
2. A need for tax revenue.
3. To protect children and others deemed "not legally competent" to make decisions about use.
4. To protect adults against themselves.
5. Other (please specify): ____________________
B. Second, a comment: When does the state
have the power to act? Answer: Effectively, any of the above, given that they have a monopoly over the legal use of force to enforce threats.
C. Third, another question: When is it morally
legitimate for the state to exercise that power in the context of prohibiting/restricting the use of a particular substance?
D. Fourth, discuss.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)