Posted on 01/28/2014 4:11:40 AM PST by Kaslin
I understand the arguments for the legalization of marijuana: It can generate tax revenue. It can reduce illegal supply and demand. It can strip power from cartels and lessen crime across and at our borders. And it isn't so dangerous as other illegal drugs or alcohol.
President Barack Obama even claimed one of those arguments when he recently told New Yorker Editor David Remnick, "As has been well-documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life."
Obama explained, "(Smoking marijuana is) not something I encourage, and I've told my daughters I think it's a bad idea, a waste of time, not very healthy." But then he added, "I don't think it is more dangerous than alcohol."
With the president entering the cannabis conversation ring, debate has intensified around the nation. But what's the truth in the alcohol-vs.-marijuana dispute?
CNN recently reported on some extensive studies and evidence surrounding the topic, especially in comparing use, addiction, withdrawal and the effects on using motorized vehicles. Let me summarize those and cite some others. (Next week, I will discuss in greater detail how alcohol and marijuana compare in their effects on our minds, bodies and relationships.)
According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, alcohol remains the leading addictive substance consumed in the U.S. But according to the Drug Enforcement Administration, marijuana is categorized as a Schedule I substance -- in the same classification as heroin, LSD and Ecstasy. The National Institute on Drug Abuse points out that 9 percent of marijuana users will become addicted to it. (By comparison, about 20 percent of cocaine users become addicted.) More than 4 million people abused pot or had an addiction problem with it in 2011, according to Fox News.
Alcoholics can suffer from the following withdrawal symptoms: depression, anxiety, insomnia, headaches, fever, nausea and even seizures. And CNN's chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, explained, "There is clear evidence that in some people, marijuana use can lead to withdrawal symptoms, including insomnia, anxiety and nausea." The National Institute on Drug Abuse added that the drug is linked to "school failure" and that high doses "can cause psychosis or panic when you're high," according to Fox News.
Of course, we know the dangers of drinking alcohol and driving. Similarly, a recent study published in the British Medical Journal showed that marijuana users who drove within three hours of smoking nearly doubled their chances of causing a crash compared with sober drivers. And the American Society of Addiction Medicine just released a statement saying the drug "impairs memory, motor function and respiratory health when smoked -- and can be addictive."
To say marijuana isn't so dangerous as alcohol is like saying a plain doughnut isn't so bad for us as a glazed one. The point is what? Wouldn't it simply be better to ditch the doughnuts from our diets and try whole-wheat toast with organic peanut butter and sliced bananas as a more nutritious way to start our days?
It suffices to say here that justifying the use of one drug because it's not so dangerous as another drug is weak reasoning in any book and bad grounds for justifying usage of either of them. And such a statement coming from a sitting president of the United States is simply reckless leadership run amok.
As far as why the president gave his pro-marijuana comments to The New Yorker, I think Donald Moorse, a Portland, Ore., medical marijuana dispensary owner, hit the cannabis nail right on the head: The president's views "will influence people throughout the country. I think that's why he made the comments."
And how does the president justify his pro-marijuana stance? He believes that if marijuana is legalized, fewer young blacks and Latinos will be imprisoned.
Obama said about the legalization of pot in Washington and Colorado: "It's important for it to go forward because it's important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished."
And he explained who those "select few" are when he said: "Middle-class kids don't get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do. And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties."
Fox News summarized that "the president echoed the argument that pro-legalization advocates often make, stressing the cost to society of locking up minor drug offenders."
So let me get this straight: If pot is legalized, we pay less to incarcerate minor drug offenders by unleashing and increasing major pot smokers and smoking in every stratum of society as if there will be no price to pay -- personal, monetary or otherwise -- in doing so?
No wonder the Drug Free America Foundation said on its website this past week about Obama: "His laissez-faire attitude about legalization has drug policy and prevention experts scratching their heads in confusion as to why the President will not give clear guidance on this important issue."
The foundation went on to say, "President Obama is surrounded by ... myriad ... experts who have voiced serious concerns about the harms of marijuana and rejected legalization, so either he is seriously ill-informed about the issue or is completely ignoring warnings from his highly-esteemed advisers."
Fox News also noted that Obama's own Office of National Drug Control Policy "lists a range of negative health and mental consequences from the drug, including schizophrenia, lower IQ ('as much as an 8 point drop') and higher risk of heart attack."
More double talk and more double standards from the White House. How shocking.
Remember the days when presidents modeled and espoused healthy living, beginning by denouncing drug use rather than justifying it?
Maybe it's time we fight all addictive drugs instead of making excuses for using them. Maybe it's time we teach and model for young people that life can be good enough on its own merit without altering reality by drug use.
I'm not here making a case for or against the medicinal use of marijuana. However, it's very difficult for me to believe that America, average healthy Americans and particularly our younger generations are going to be better off with pot's legalization.
I'm all for freedom, but when liberty turns into licentiousness, it's time to reconsider why we're doing what we're doing. Just because we can doesn't mean we should. And if that's the case, what other illicit passion is going to be next in the lineup of legalization?
“Will it improve lives of adults and children?
Will it be neutral in its effects?
Will it be harmful?”
None of which is the business of the government
Thank you... I particularly like the first question. The big excitement by a bunch of dopers to have every one join in is beyond pathetic. I have yet to see a documented case where Marinol is not effective for the medical user. I do not care what one thinks they know about marijuana providers, one cannot guarantee dosage or effectiveness.
Because some doofus wants to get high is not a reason to make it available. Plus the argument that it is no worse than alcohol is really bogus.
Indeed. There is no enumerated power that authorizes the federal government to legalize marijuana.
I think it is interesting that the same people that want to ban smoking want to legalize pot, Hmmmm!
“Other than toasting in celebration and partaking of the Eucharist, if you are Catholic, what other reasons are there to consume alcohol? How many drinkers do you know who take a few sips from a glass a few times a year?”
If I go to a Knights of Columbus event, it's quite likely that there will be beer, and perhaps wine. Many folks won't drink any of it, but many will have a beer. Or two. Or even three or four over the course of a long day. Or a few glasses of wine.
Nearly everyone I know drinks. And everyone I know who drinks does so socially and responsibly. In my own house, we typically have between a half-case and a case of wine in at any one time. We cook with some of it, but we drink the rest. A glass (or sometimes two) with dinner. Fairly ordinary for us. I have scotch, bourbon, rum and other hard liquors in the house. We drink those less often, but nonetheless, they get consumed over time.
My parents taught us to drink alcohol from an early age. I was four when I'd sip my father's nightly beer with dinner. Yup - four years old. I was little older at my introduction to scotch. I've just never had a problem drinking. I raised my own children similarly. My son goes to college on a campus where binge drinking is a notorious problem. He's the fellow who helps the more drunken ones back to their dorm rooms after they've puked their guts up.
The attitude toward alcohol that is prevalent in American society is purely insane. Don't drink a drop of alcohol till you're 21!!! Then, magically, the beer fairy will tap you on your head and you will be “ready” to drink! But not really! You'd be better off without the evil vice! But don't worry - if you just wait until you're 21, you'll do fine!
Drinking alcohol is ultimately a behavior that requires adult supervision and adult judgment. But learning those behaviors and judgment don't come at the blink of an eye at midnight on one’s 21st birthday. Ideally, children should be taught to drink moderately and responsibly. They should be explicitly taught when it is acceptable to drink and when it is not. How much is acceptable, how much is not. When to avoid alcohol, when to indulge. How to drink, how not to drink. The dangers of alcohol, the pleasures of it. How to select a good wine, a decent wine, an enjoyable beer, a fine liquor.
If parents teach their children what to do with this stuff when their children are young, their children will know what to do, will know how to behave as adults, and how to supervise themselves as adults when they turn 21.
My parents raised four children by this rule. We're a motley crew. Between us, there are three divorces, four failed marriages, mental illness, homelessness at times, financial problems, you name it. But none of us has ever had a problem with alcohol. Except my older brother, who died, we're all light, social drinkers. Yet, none of us were ever forbidden to drink by our parents, only that we learn to drink moderately and appropriately.
Sorry, I just don't know what in the world you're talking about. Lots of folks drink regularly or semi-regularly, with meals, in the context of social events, without overimbibing.
sitetest
Finally! Someone who references Miranol for medicinal uses.
Here’s my story: I was born with epilepsy. By the age of five or six I was having multiple seizures a week. They put my on a whole slew of drugs, some of which helped reduce the frequency of my seizures significantly, although I have to say that the side effects with sythetic drugs are really, really brutal in terms of mood swings and completely killing your libido.
Fast forward to my 20s, I start using cannabis. Seizures stop entirely. I stop using the sythetic drugs and starting just smoking pot to control my seizures. Where drugs like Depokate were able to get my seizures down to one every couple of months, cannabis cleared them up 100%.
Talked to my neurologist about it, and he said that it’s known that pot prevents seizures, but that it can damage your lungs from the smoke. Compared to the other manmade drugs that damange your liver and your kidneys. I asked him, “well, what if I use a vaporizer so my lungs don’t get hammered?” and he told me to do what works for me.
I’m glad that you said Merinol. I haven’t tried it but I’ve heard about it. Although I’d be willing to see if it worked for me, I’m naturally a little skeptical about using man made synthetic drugs instead of a plant that’s naturally occurring.
“Will it improve lives of adults and children?
Will it be neutral in its effects?
Will it be harmful?”
None of which is the business of the government
Well that brought back some old memories! Dad would send me to frig to bring him a beer and I always got that first cold sip, dad called it the cream off the top!
So is the writer in favor of Alcohol Prohibition? If not, why not? He makes an excellent case that while pot is horrible and worthy of prohibition, alcohol is at least equally bad.
How DID that whole alcohol prohibition thingie work out for us? I do remember from my history class that we have had that experiment.
WTF dude (author of the article). Can’t you learn from history?
In your never so humble opinion, which has nothing to do with anyone else, and the question was NOT regarding kiddie porn. It’s about intoxicants, of which you seem to be partaking of large quantities.
I'm not a Catholic, so please forgive my intrusion. I was just reading why Matt Drudge might have tweeted "Have an Exit Plan" after having read about the weakening and soon collapse of our Earth's magnetic field and the radiological and societal chaos to follow, so my thoughts are in the post-SHTF frequency range at the moment thinking about food and clean water.
The fermented drinks, from almost no alcohol kombucha through progressively higher content wines, beers and ales, are full of things that are good for you and the alcohol kills off the bad. (Nice combo. Thank you, Father.)
Regarding drinking alcohol, I think it depends upon your intent and remember that "all things in moderation" is a good place to stay.
Best not to give Jesus a rival or Satan an opening.
Most have seen or know what "too much" looks or feels like. Many know the disgust, some the heartache, and a few know the horrors, of cleaning it up.
Those are but a few of the not-so-fine print warnings about misuse and abuse, written on the label of life by the Creator Himself, meaning that you really don't want to be, be around or have your kids grow up around alcoholism.
You do it your way, and I’ll do it mine. I’ve talked to my son about alcohol, and I’ve advised him to not touch it until he’s college age. Early exposure to alcohol is the nearly universal experience in alcoholics that I’ve talked to, and I’ve talked to a lot. Young brains (pre-teen and teen) are are wiring themselves for the future, and early exposure to alcohol can wire them for an affinity to it. Your anecdotal success doesn’t dissuade me. I’m comfortable keeping an alcohol free house, and doing all in my power to prevent my children from consuming it.
Except that every one of those yutes will be in violation for schmoking under the age of 18/21.
We called it “taxes,” LOL!
Then they definitely should reconsider the 0.08BAC DWI laws (that are being pushed downward to 0.03BAC). MADD and trial lawyers and making good bank on them (so are ever vigilant legislators seeking re-election). Then again, if you no hablo engles, you may be cut loose to kill later. It's about revenue, not public safety.
If someone shows up for work stoned, it's just as bad as showing up drunk. If someone drives under the influence of anything, that's their own bad choice.
Some say that drinkers don't drink to get wasted, while there's no reason for smoking pot EXCEPT to get stoned. I disagree... I think teenagers do drink (or smoke pot) to get wasted... and some adults do as well. I also know many responsible adults who do smoke pot... in their off time, in order to simply relax... no different than having an after-dinner drink.
Regardless of the substance, there are responsible people and there are irresponsible people, and it should come down to personal responsibility for one's choices in life.
Kiddie porn is NOT between consenting adults. There are victims there. That makes it the government’s business.
There is no enumerated power that authorizes the federal government to legalize marijuana.
<><><><><
LOL.
You are a bit too subtle for many here, I believe.
Forgive my skepticism toward, “Young brains (pre-teen and teen) are are wiring themselves for the future, and early exposure to alcohol can wire them for an affinity to it.”
I've also been told by “experts” that pre-adolescent and adolescent brain development preclude the ability to learn algebra much before the age of 13 or 14 and calculus before one is 17.
What may be true statistically in some sense may not have much to bear on individual experience.
I've also read that nearly everyone who got into serious drug problems drank milk as a child.
Nonetheless, parents should do those things with which they're comfortable. I was just pointing out that your initial post, “Other than toasting in celebration and partaking of the Eucharist, if you are Catholic, what other reasons are there to consume alcohol? How many drinkers do you know who take a few sips from a glass a few times a year?” flies in the face of the experience of many (most?) folks. There are plenty of folks who are light to moderate social drinkers.
sitetest
Never said it was. It is the business of the individual to ask and answer those questions for themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.