Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DouglasKC
There are virtually NO reputable doctors that would argue that the benefit that comes from smoking a plant substance offsets the danger.

The Institute of Medicine said they very well might for terminal patients. How's that crow taste?

But I expect you'll stop arguing for smoking pot as a medicine when this Dronabinol inhaler comes on the market?

I'll argue that those who can afford the latter should certainly consider it first.

If just one person claims that smoking marijuana is better than taking any legally available, studied, metered and dosed medicine does that mean we HAVE to consider marijuana a medicine?

It means the decision should be left to patient and doctor.

If Rush is claiming that "affecting someone else" is the test for justifying government force, he's no longer a conservative. The true test, of course, is whether rights are violated ... which they are not by drug sale and use.

You're going to have a tough time convincing anyone that Rush isn't a conservative.

Conservative is as conservative does. Conservatism existed long before Rush and is not defined by him.

Rights, as defined by the constitution, are inalienable rights granted by God to the people he created. God certainly didn't intend that people smoke dope or other drugs.

Where's the evidence that He intended people to imprison other people for it?

A person using drugs affects wives, kids, loved ones and society in ways to numerous to mention.

Also true of the drug alcohol. Shall we re-ban that drug?

Let me get this straight, your argument is that we should allow any harmful substance because some people abuse alcohol?

No, my argument is that if you believed the principle you're proclaiming you'd support banning alcohol ... yet you don't.

That's because that line of argument is a leftist ploy designed to minimize drug use. It's no worse than eating junk food or not getting enough sleep.

That's not the argument.

That's not the argument

Then don't drag that straw man into this exchange.

Kids, drugs are for idiots.

Misrepresenting one's opponent's argument is for idiots.

Equating drug use with attending Harvard, eating junk food and sleep is an idiotic line of argument.

I didn't make that line of argument. Leave your straw men at the door.

217 posted on 07/03/2006 9:22:19 AM PDT by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies ]


To: Know your rights
The Institute of Medicine said they very well might for terminal patients. How's that crow taste?

There's no danger if you're going to die soon, is there? From the "Institute of Medicine" report:

Smoking marijuana is not recommended. The long-term harm caused by smoking marijuana makes it a poor drug delivery system, particularly for patients with chronic illnesses.
Terminal cancer patients pose different issues. For those patients the medical harm associated with smoking is of little consequence. For terminal patients suffering debilitating pain or nausea and for whom all indicated medications have failed to provide relief, the medical benefits of smoked marijuana might outweigh the harm.

If this is the "best" you guys have for experts recommending smoking marijuana, then you're on very shaky ground.

Note how very narrow and limited this ONE agency says smoked marijuana MIGHT be helpful. MIGHT.

To listen to the leftist propagandist one would think that smoking marijuana is the cure for every type of illness known to man.

But I expect you'll stop arguing for smoking pot as a medicine when this Dronabinol inhaler comes on the market?
I'll argue that those who can afford the latter should certainly consider it first.

Why am I not surprised. And if an inhaler were cheaper than buying pot would you THEN come out and condemn smoking marijuana as an effective medicine?

If just one person claims that smoking marijuana is better than taking any legally available, studied, metered and dosed medicine does that mean we HAVE to consider marijuana a medicine? It means the decision should be left to patient and doctor.

Let me guess....you're all for "assisted suicide" too, aren't you?

Rights, as defined by the constitution, are inalienable rights granted by God to the people he created. God certainly didn't intend that people smoke dope or other drugs.
Where's the evidence that He intended people to imprison other people for it?

Actually the penalty was death.

No, my argument is that if you believed the principle you're proclaiming you'd support banning alcohol ... yet you don't.

Of course I don't. Alcohol is biblically and legally sanctioned, although drunkneness is not.

That's because that line of argument is a leftist ploy designed to minimize drug use. It's no worse than eating junk food or not getting enough sleep. Then don't drag that straw man into this exchange. Kids, drugs are for idiots. Equating drug use with attending Harvard, eating junk food and sleep is an idiotic line of argument.

Hey, I'm not the one that compared drug use to:

A. Eating junk food.
B. Sleeping.
C. Attending Harvard.
D. Reading the New York Times.

If you don't want these comparisons to be called idiotic then don't make them.

218 posted on 07/03/2006 11:24:54 PM PDT by DouglasKC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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