Skip to comments.
Developing Brains: Alcohol Worse than Marijuana
PhysOrg.com ^
| March 26th, 2009
| Miranda Marquit
Posted on 03/30/2009 9:13:47 PM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 next last
To: Westlander
Oops!
![Photobucket](http://i216.photobucket.com/albums/cc201/tpmunro/bunny-pot.jpg)
21
posted on
03/31/2009 7:13:06 AM PDT
by
I Buried My Guns
(I just hope CW2 comes before my creaky knees give out completely!)
To: tacticalogic
Think of the person who would not put taking Ecstasy and riding a horse on the same level.
22
posted on
03/31/2009 8:33:30 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: philman_36
Must have been high when he wrote that.
23
posted on
03/31/2009 8:35:34 AM PDT
by
Travis T. OJustice
(Want to make a conservative angry? Lie to him. Want to make a liberal angry? Tell him the truth)
To: count-your-change
Think of the person who would not put taking Ecstasy and riding a horse on the same level.I'm not familiar enough with the risks and injury statistics involved in either one to know whether that's a valid comparison or not.
24
posted on
03/31/2009 8:42:37 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: Travis T. OJustice
Must have been high when he wrote that.
If I hadn't corrected my error the same thing could've been said of me.
It was explained in reply #12.
25
posted on
03/31/2009 8:43:56 AM PDT
by
philman_36
(Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
To: tacticalogic
Apart from the question of whether a person would more likely end up dead or injured from one than the other is the question of how one could morally equate the riding of a horse with taking a drug like Ecstasy.
A moral danger is not something to be overlooked.
26
posted on
03/31/2009 9:34:37 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
Can you quantify “moral danger”, or is it just something that you allocate every possible significance to?
27
posted on
03/31/2009 10:04:53 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: philman_36; iowamark
I saw that explanation, I was just teasing Iowamark a little bit.
28
posted on
03/31/2009 10:17:25 AM PDT
by
Travis T. OJustice
(Want to make a conservative angry? Lie to him. Want to make a liberal angry? Tell him the truth)
To: tacticalogic
Drug use is not moral behavior. Period.
29
posted on
03/31/2009 11:28:42 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
And any discussion of the actual risk involved is over with.
30
posted on
03/31/2009 11:32:50 AM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: tacticalogic
Thanks for what you were able to contribute.
31
posted on
03/31/2009 12:26:14 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
It was but a simple demonstation of the futility of applying reason to dogma.
32
posted on
03/31/2009 12:32:34 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: count-your-change
Drug use is not moral behavior. Period. Interesting, then, that Jesus' first miracle was turning water into wine.
Was Jesus immoral ?
33
posted on
03/31/2009 12:43:08 PM PDT
by
jimt
To: jimt
Do you equate drinking of wine at a wedding with drug use?
Were the disciples getting high at the last supper? Please!
34
posted on
03/31/2009 1:21:48 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: tacticalogic
What reasoning, what dogma?
35
posted on
03/31/2009 1:33:45 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
Reasoning - observation and comparison of the relative risk factors of different activities.
Dogma - any finding of "moral hazard" renders any discussion of physical risk factor irrelevant.
36
posted on
03/31/2009 1:50:12 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: tacticalogic
Recognition of moral hazard is one way to prevent physical harm. Not engaging in homosexual behavior need not be based upon fear of physical harm since often often the physical harm from a certain behavior isn’t obvious immediately and may not occur in a dramatic way but the homosexual behavior is still immoral.
Falsely reasoning might say comparing the risks of two behaviors is possible by only addressing physical risk but that’s like saying someone is good driver solely on the basis of whether they’ve been involved in an accident or not.
Simply put, immorality is physically risky and the physical harm done by it is becoming ever clearer.
37
posted on
03/31/2009 2:18:53 PM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: count-your-change
Drug use is not moral behavior. Period.
But there are many definitions of morality. For example, Mormons believe drinking coffee is immoral. Muslims believe drinking alcohol is immoral. Some evangelical Christians believe taking vaccines is immoral.
How do you reconclice these difference in a large society? Normally, if you were wise, you would only deal with those behaviors that harm others. Unfortunately, we are not wise, so we have the whole Drug War thing going on.
To: count-your-change
Okay. In any given risk assesment, “moral hazard” will be the first consideration. If there is any, it will be the only necessary consideration. Comparison of activites based on actual physical risk will be considererd only when any potential of moral hazard has been eliminated.
39
posted on
03/31/2009 2:40:28 PM PDT
by
tacticalogic
("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
To: neverdem
I wonder if it’s illegal to breathe second hand pot smoke — I love the way it smells...best I remember. It’s been years...when I lived in Houston.
40
posted on
03/31/2009 2:46:40 PM PDT
by
lonestar
(Obama is turning Bush's "mess" into a catastrophe.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41 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