Posted on 08/01/2002 5:16:08 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
Edited on 05/07/2004 8:00:51 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
As we endeavor toward a more lucid and informed discussion of substance abuse, let's deconstruct the mystique of marijuana and recognize it for the dangerous drug that it is.
Marijuana is a substance that's worthy of our concern. It is the most prevalent of all illicit drugs used in the country. The 2000 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reported that 34 percent of Americans have used marijuana in their lifetime and 5 percent are current users.
(Excerpt) Read more at theithacajournal.com ...
This isn't an endorsement of your jab at laredo44, but I laughed when you mentioned "High Times". I actually bought a few copies of that when I was a stoner. Even then it was funny to me that there was actually a magazine which so lovingly regarded marijuana that they had a monthly centerfold of "The Bud of the Month".
Recently I was in a book store and came across a current issue of "High Times". Hadn't seen one (or wanted to) in years. I picked it up out of curiosity. The only thing that had changed was better photography and printing: 4-color images of succulent, juicy buds in a variety of colors, shapes and sizes.
I guess you might call it pot porn.
That's your right and perogative. I personally haven't ever tried "Mormon tea". I'm sure you're familiar with it. What would you say to the idea of the DEA declaring ephedrine a Schedule I substance, that it is a precursor for and a gateway to methamphetamine use, and declare the need for an additional army of agents to eradicate the ephedra plant from our borders, and punish anyone found with it growing on their property?
Another trivia question: Where are opium poppies legally grown in the US? (I beleive there's only one such place)
You both are making personal attacks, at least he is also debating at the same time.
Sorry, nevermind, that would be expecting another pro-doper to be fair.
Lovely, more ad hominem attacks. Second, this is simply astoundingly silly logic. Just because I want marijuana legalized does not make me a pro doper. By your logic, you are a pro-alcoholic (if you think alcohol should remain legal), a pro murdereer (if you think guns should be legal), pro drug abuser (if you think we should still have prescription drugs, etc etc
The WOD is a federal issue because state choice cannot limit the deleterious effects to the state which chooses to legalize. When (if) Nevada votes to legalize marijuana, the voters there can't limit the effects to Nevada -- they overlap other states, including, my main concern, Texas. Does a state have constitutional protection to harbor and abet Islamacist terrorists because that state's voters believe in the Palestinian cause? Not just that state's security is at risk; so is the security of other states. I use these as parallels because they are both (terorism and the flow of illegal drugs) intertwined, mutually supportive, and dedicated to the same end -- the destruction of America. Like the struggle against child-snatching pedophiles, murder, and drunk drivers, the WOD may never end. That's no good reason to surrender; it merely means that we must accept the price of eternal vigilance and do the best we can to pass on a free Republic to the generations that follow.
As for Islamic terrorists, read Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution regarding fleeing from justice to another State after commiting Treason, Felony, or other Crime. That State is required to return the bad guy.
As for a never ending WOD, maybe, maybe not. I'd say the days of the Federal domestic WOD as we know it are numbered.
The States may or may not continue it. Fine with me if they wish to continue, as long as they don't try to step on the Bill of Rights in doing so.
You can't give a rebuttal which is why you aren't bothering. And besides, I'm talking to a pro-alcoholic. After all, you want to keep alcohol legal. Your name is kind of ironic BTW. Look up the definition of the word freedom at dictionary.com or anywhere else and then think of your stance on the drug war.
Seeing as how Texas has dry counties, isn't one counties 'dryness' affected by another counties 'wetness'? So how come the state hasn't stepped in and turned the dry counties wet or the wet counties dry?
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. I'm sure George III would have found my "ravings" those of a lunatic as well. I find your contention no more valid than the Founders did of the King.
You make common cause with tyrannts of all stripe when you seek to prohibit me the free use of my body. They have plans for me, just as you have. They make claims of the burden I place on others and the danger I place on myself just as you do.
Where will you stand when they seek to prevent people from sun bathing -- it is the largest preventable cause of skin cancer. Those cancer costs are shared across society. Their cancer causes considerable suffering among their loved ones. Their loss of work time burdens their fellow workers who must pick up the slack because they undertook and activity that, supposedly had "no victims". How incredibly selfish of them, wouldn't you say? And for what? So they might look better? That reason has to rank even lower than those taking drugs to feel better, wouldn't it? Nope, sun bathers are simply selfish, subjecting the rest of us to picking up the pieces of their failed lives.
But wait, there's more. In Europe they've succeeded in outlawing genetically altered grains and hormone enhanced milk. Never mind there is no law compelling anyone to consume such products. They have prevented anyone from selling the products. Why? Well, maybe they are dangerous. So they get to control you on a maybe. And there are plenty of people in this country who would like to see the same thing happen here.
Then, there's irradiated meat. Can't buy any in this country. Somebody is worried about you. Of course, irradiation would eliminate e-coli which actually does sicken and kill, but what importance does that have when compared to someone's pet cause?
Meantime, no one is even looking at the problems associated with loss of liberty. Look at the Middle East. It's all about who will control who. It is all wrapped up in a struggle for liberty. Arab tyrannts fear the democracy of the Jews. Democracy would end their subjugation of the citizens. Israel represent a threat to their regimes. An Israel? Simply seeking to protect their liberty.
Sorry, but to me, you appear to be raving like the lunatic.
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.