Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Talisker
And though they grew it for rope, you only separate the name and female plants to cultivate it for smoking, and Washington recorded doing just that.

And how do you know this is the only reason for separating male and female plants? Just because it is the only MODERN reason, does not mean it was a valid reason back in 1790.

I suspect if any of them had smoked it, we would certainly have heard about it. We know Washington distilled Whiskey, but we have nothing regarding any weed he toked.

In any event, the point is that alcohol is far more dangerous than marijuana, and that is clearly born out by statistics

And which is completely irrelevant to the topic BECAUSE ONE BAD THING DOES NOT JUSTIFY ANOTHER.

Should we have Bestiality because we allow Homosexuality? Do we have to be fair to the other bad things because we tolerate one of them?

How you can argue that weed is dangerous for adults because it negatively affects childhood development, while simultaneously protecting, of all things, alcohol, is beyond me.

I see that it is. For some reason you seem to believe that if we put up with 85,000 deaths per year from Alcohol, then why should we complain about deaths and disasters caused by marijuana?

Again, it's like saying "Because they are doing something bad, *I* ought to be allowed to do something bad too!"

A fallacious child's argument, but one which Libertarians cannot help themselves from advancing.

No. We have no moral obligation to be "fair" to weed because we tolerate the misery and death caused by alcohol. (and that caused by Tobacco.)

231 posted on 02/16/2015 4:20:34 PM PST by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]


To: DiogenesLamp
No. We have no moral obligation to be "fair" to weed because we tolerate the misery and death caused by alcohol. (and that caused by Tobacco.)

This seems to be the crux of what you are calling your argument. You reject the vast, documented difference in harm between weed and alcohol (ie virtually nothing, versus massive), and reject calls for fairness in assessing legalization based on harm as childish.

Of course, if you're not assessing based on harm, then what are your laws going to be based on - your personal morality? We happen to have a Constitution based on personal freedom. Does that piss you off?

Because if you're going to throw out harm as the evaluative variable, and then protect extremely harmful things, while throwing people in jail for doing demonstrably harmless things, what's all that going to be based on? What? Your determination to kill those who disagree, simply because you say so? You think you're the big daddy what's gonna whoop some ass when anyone asks too many questions - and that's it? That's all you've got?

If so, you don't deserve this country. In fact, you don't even understand what this country is about. But on the other hand, there's a billion Muslims who like the way you think - a lot.

241 posted on 02/16/2015 4:45:35 PM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson