Legalized Pot

[Ole Cowboy]

And don't we have a contradiction going on:

The govt's WAR on smoking and the govt's support of smoking... pot in my world that is non-sequitur:



"The association between smoking marijuana and lung cancer remains unclear. Marijuana smoke contains about 50% more benzopyrene and nearly 75% more benzanthracene, both known carcinogens, than a comparable quantity of unfiltered tobacco smoke (Tashkin, 2013). Moreover, the deeper inhalations and longer breath-holding of marijuana smokers result in greater exposure of the lung to the tar and carcinogens in the smoke. Lung biopsies from habitual marijuana-only users have revealed widespread alterations to the tissue, some of which are recognized as precursors to the subsequent development of cancer (Tashkin, 2013)." - See more at: Learn About Marijuana: Factsheets: Respiratory Effects of Marijuana

 

[jordanmills]

No but they fund those who do. (Unless they grow their own)

So does the united states government. Which we all fund.

 

[jrbfishn]

I do not smoke pot. Tried it when I wasa teen in '71 or so, just made me sleepy. Waste of time and money for something that would happen anyway. Seldom drink. Don't hold with those that do either to excess. Waste of money. If I need either to feel better about myself or my world or help me cope, then I need more than they will give me.
But I do agree, the war on drugs has failed, miserably. And did so long ago. Now it is more a way to justify a larger government and more law enforcement. Without acomplishing much in the process.

 

[Charlie]

I do not smoke pot. Tried it when I wasa teen in '71 or so, just made me sleepy. Waste of time and money for something that would happen anyway. Seldom drink. Don't hold with those that do either to excess. Waste of money. If I need either to feel better about myself or my world or help me cope, then I need more than they will give me.
But I do agree, the war on drugs has failed, miserably. And did so long ago. Now it is more a way to justify a larger government and more law enforcement. Without acomplishing much in the process.

Epic!

 

[breakingcontact]

Yes.

Do you believe Animal Farm or 1984 do not show the dangers of totalitarianism or the paths that lead there?

Even George Orwell, a man who was a long standing member of the socialist party, saw the dangers of letting government dictate our daily lives. Why can't the freedom loving members of this site see it?

They are interesting books but like Ayn Rands books they are overly simplistic views of their ideas of utopia/dystopia.

"Why cant freedom loving members of this site see it?" Id argue thats because we love freedom, not chaos.

When in our nations history did we have this ideal libertarian government? What country on Earth has a libertarian government? This really comes down to a fundamental question and that is a religious one. Is man, unrestrained, drawn towards good or evil? Are we moral creatures or merely ethical ones?

I am happy to see some federalism emerging...too bad its about "blowing spliffs and smoking weed everyday" and not on any real freedom.

This big pot push is just giving the masses the bread and circuses they are clamoring over.

 

[BRD@66]

2 more worms to add to the can. Effects of alcohol vs amount in the body can be measured easily because of predictable burn-off rate of EtOH; pot not so much because of residual amount in the body after effects are gone. Difficult to legalize it if we can't put empirical numbers on how much it takes to affect (for instance) driving. Also, there's a lot of well-employed Americans would have to find renewed employment justification if they weren't chasing weed.

 

[jordanmills]

2 more worms to add to the can. Effects of alcohol vs amount in the body can be measured easily because of predictable burn-off rate of EtOH; pot not so much because of residual amount in the body after effects are gone. Difficult to legalize it if we can't put empirical numbers on how much it takes to affect (for instance) driving. Also, there's a lot of well-employed Americans would have to find renewed employment justification if they weren't chasing weed.

So do an actual test of apparent faculties, like they do for alcohol. A field sobriety test doesn't magically not work because weed.

Second one is their own problem.

 

[Younggun]

They are interesting books but like Ayn Rands books they are overly simplistic views of their ideas of utopia/dystopia.

"Why cant freedom loving members of this site see it?" Id argue thats because we love freedom, not chaos.

When in our nations history did we have this ideal libertarian government? What country on Earth has a libertarian government? This really comes down to a fundamental question and that is a religious one. Is man, unrestrained, drawn towards good or evil? Are we moral creatures or merely ethical ones?

I am happy to see some federalism emerging...too bad its about "blowing spliffs and smoking weed everyday" and not on any real freedom.

This big pot push is just giving the masses the bread and circuses they are clamoring over.

So it's either your brand of "freedom", or chaos. Interesting way to look at things.

It's not the libertarian types looking for a utopia, it's the libertarians who realize that utopia is a pipe dream. Meanwhile, conservatives are preaching small gov whole trying to legislate morality in to society.

Are we a moral society? "Moral" is subjective. That question can't be answered because the definition of the word is dependent on the person using it. Liberals will say it's immoral not to provide universal health care. Some will say it's immoral to drink alcohol no matter how little is consumed.

So how many decisions should the gov make for us? A certain politician decided obesity was bad for the community so he felt it would be better to limit how large a fountain drink could be, since the people weren't making the right choice on their own.

Is one right more important than another?

Are we more willing to let the gov control our bodies than our speech?

What is "real freedom"? How much freedom is it necessary to give up in order to achieve "real freedom".

 

[Younggun]

I would say no, we are not a moral society. Our laws are not based on what is moral, and shouldn't be.

 

[breakingcontact]

Youre discussing ethics. Not morals.

 

[Younggun]

No, I'm not.

 

[breakingcontact]

No, I'm not.

Yes...you...are.

Yes...we...can!

Oh....no...you di'int!

 

[Younggun]

Excellent points.


/sarcasm

 

[breakingcontact]

<sarcasm>

Excellent points.


</sarcasm>

 

[jordanmills]

<sarcasm>

lol again

 

[hellishhorses]

My "breed" of church says I shouldn't dance or drink — but I do anyway. Their ethics didn't match my morals even though I'm part of them. They don't lock me away in the tower when I disobey. Each person's moral compass is different, regardless of what a greater body says is allowed/disallowed.

 

[breakingcontact]

Have to acknowledge the source of ethics vs morals.

 

[Younggun]

Then do it.

 

[breakingcontact]

Then do it.

Have to acknowledge the difference first. Do that.

 

[Younggun]

No.

If you believe you have an argument to what I have said, then post it.

I won't be party to the childish game you are trying to play.