[MAWG]

ALSO: If he does not advocate the use of drugs then why did he twice mention an authoritative source, the BIBLE, that indicated drugs were natural and placed on this earth for us? That's not advocacy? If you are truly against the use of drugs then why would you EVER quote the BIBLE saying they, drugs, are "natural" meaning O.K..

[Savage Beast]

Don't you think that drugs and pharmacoactive natural substances are on earth for us to use--to use wisely? The problem is not the drugs themselves but the misuse of them.

Aspirin is useful and rather safe, but it can be fatal if abused. Curare was a poison but has found valuable uses in anaesthesia, tetanus therapy, et al. Heroin is certainly dangerous and horrifying when abused, but for incurable and intractable pain it could be a godsend.

I think you agree with this, Fatima; don't you?

[Principled]

If he does not advocate the use of drugs then why did he twice mention an authoritative source, the BIBLE, that indicated drugs were natural...

When did you begin thinking that saying something is "natural" means that you advocate its use?

THere is no connection there. The only thing connecting the two is in your head. Natural => advocacy ???? Not.

Getting back to the original discussion, I do believe that it serves better to be straightforward. By being deceptive, you only do a disservice to our cause. JMHO.