Skip to comments.
State-Sanctioned Chemical Dependency
Townhall.com ^
| December 27, 2020
| Jeff Davidson
Posted on 12/27/2020 6:43:25 AM PST by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
1
posted on
12/27/2020 6:43:25 AM PST
by
Kaslin
To: Kaslin
Soma nations are slave nations.
2
posted on
12/27/2020 6:46:20 AM PST
by
fishtank
(The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism. )
To: fishtank
Yes, it’s “soma”, not “some”.
3
posted on
12/27/2020 6:46:57 AM PST
by
fishtank
(The denial of original sin is the root of liberalism. )
To: Kaslin
4
posted on
12/27/2020 6:48:06 AM PST
by
The_Media_never_lie
(I do not regret my decision to cut all ties with Fox News. )
To: Kaslin
Do most heavy pot smokers have the funds to maintain their habit? How many are deep in debt?They could grow their own product. Unfortunately, Long-term use of marijuana has been found to impact the quality of life of some users, who suffer from poor judgment . . . low ambition
5
posted on
12/27/2020 6:49:32 AM PST
by
Jeff Chandler
(We flattened the heck out of that curve, didn’t we?)
To: Kaslin
Dumb and numb, an inebriated society is a docile society. Between the rot in the education system and the legalized drugs their dependent masses are achieved
6
posted on
12/27/2020 6:51:28 AM PST
by
ronnie raygun
( Massive mistakes are made by arrogant fools; massive evils are committed by evil people.")
To: Kaslin
Marijuana does not create a physiological chemical dependency like alcohol. It can form psychological dependency quickly, but there’s no withdrawal from marijuana like there is from alcohol.
7
posted on
12/27/2020 6:52:11 AM PST
by
rarestia
(Repeal the 17th Amendment and ratify Article the First to give the power back to the people!)
To: ronnie raygun
Yes. Most dictatorships, now and in the past, allowed the populace to partake in mind altering drugs. It makes life under tyranny just a tad more tolerable. Case in point: north Korea.
8
posted on
12/27/2020 6:53:30 AM PST
by
rarestia
(Repeal the 17th Amendment and ratify Article the First to give the power back to the people!)
To: Kaslin
In the old days I smoked at a cost of $200 per month, now with vape about $80.
9
posted on
12/27/2020 6:53:51 AM PST
by
Jolla
To: The_Media_never_lie
What's with the writer? He bashes pot...and alcohol...and tobacco. Why not corn flakes and ice cream, too? After all, anything used beyond moderation can be damaging.
Is he aware that Prohibition failed? Or, better yet, if it required a Constitutional Amendment to ban booze, why are we letting Leviathan ban marijuana without such an Amendment? Where in the Constitution is there an enumerated power granted to the Legislature to ban the sale of any good?
Just what is the writer's point?
10
posted on
12/27/2020 6:58:56 AM PST
by
DoodleBob
(Gravity's waiting period is about 9.8 m/s^2)
To: fishtank
Soma: “the body as distinct from the soul, mind, or psyche”
To: Kaslin
Smoking tobacco is chemical dependency as well.
When does personal choice enter in?
12
posted on
12/27/2020 7:23:36 AM PST
by
marktwain
(President Trump and his supporters are the Resistance. His opponents are the Reactionaries. )
To: marktwain
Dependency and choice are in conflict. Throw in denial and rationalization, and addicts are a mess.
13
posted on
12/27/2020 7:37:29 AM PST
by
gundog
( Hail to the Chief, bitches!)
To: Kaslin
“Worse, marijuana use can impair driving...”
Yeah, like when you find you are going 25mph in a 40mph zone.
14
posted on
12/27/2020 7:45:19 AM PST
by
Mister Da
(The mark of a wise man is not what he knows, but what he knows he doesn't know!)
To: Mister Da
I’ve had turd-head idiots fly past me when riding my motorcycle, that had the stink of weed wafting from their car. I go at least 60-65. Pisses me off in a bad way.
15
posted on
12/27/2020 7:53:33 AM PST
by
vpintheak
(Live free, or die!)
To: gundog
“Dependency and choice are in conflict.”
Not all use leads to dependency.
16
posted on
12/27/2020 8:21:05 AM PST
by
NobleFree
("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
To: DoodleBob
“Just what is the writer’s point?”
I couldn’t tell either. With his detailed discussion of alcohol abuse, perhaps the implied point is that any rational discussion of intoxicant policy must look at the spectrum of widely used intoxicants?
17
posted on
12/27/2020 8:49:59 AM PST
by
NobleFree
("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
To: NobleFree
18
posted on
12/27/2020 9:29:16 AM PST
by
gundog
( Hail to the Chief, bitches!)
To: Kaslin
Snore
Edibles rule.
Cannibis has been with man as long as ethanol
Wine 🍷 is in the Bible. Numerous times
If it ain’t your thing. Great. but ,
DONT LECTURE US WITH YOUR CONDESCENDING GARBAGE 🗑
19
posted on
12/27/2020 11:03:33 AM PST
by
Truthoverpower
(The guv-mint you get is the Trump winning express ! Yea haw ! Trump Pence II! Save America again )
To: fishtank
“When a company, let alone an entire industry, reaps huge profits from repeat, high-volume users, it’s exceedingly tempting to not [sic] turn those users away, or, at the least, encourage them to indulge a bit less.”
Ignore that puzzling “not” and I think the author’s point is revealed.
I’m open to hearing proposals on how excessive users can be curbed without burdening moderate users ... but no workable scheme leaps to mind.
20
posted on
12/27/2020 12:47:51 PM PST
by
NobleFree
("law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson