Posted on 08/15/2018 9:06:53 AM PDT by fwdude
Yesterday I visited our local bookstore and was struck by the abundance of magazine covers promoting marijuana. Later my wife commented that she’s received two ads this week for cannabis products, something she’s never received before! What’s going on?
In case you haven’t noticed or are simply distracted by the busyness of life, propaganda promoting marijuana and its legalization is bombarding us. Should we be concerned about something that is celebrated as a “harmless recreational” indulgence that progressive people should embrace excitedly?
Recently our state newspaper ran a prominent piece by a young woman calling for weed to be legalized. Coincidentally, she works for a statewide cannabis advocacy group. Reading her arguments and questionable statistics made me wonder if we should begin distributing marijuana freely since she opines it is so harmless and beneficial!
What follows is my pushback to the propaganda. Feel free to “borrow” any and all my counterpoints for op-eds you can submit, exposing the seductive logic.
Let’s Get Serious
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, dxxxxd lies and statistics,” said Mark Twain. He was pointing out the use of statistics to bolster weak or fallacious arguments. The dope supporter whose article appeared in our newspaper, typical of many, deserved a five star Pinocchio award for her misleading stats and misguided presentation.
Recently, I had an in-depth conversation with a police officer formerly on paid leave who has since retired. He was rehabilitating from a serious injury sustained when he confronted a young man about to commit a crime who was stoned on marijuana. He subsequently assaulted the officer, tearing his rotator cuff. He now faces numerous felony offenses plus decades behind bars, in addition to the impounding of his car containing marijuana and drug paraphernalia.
Olympic gold medalist, Michael Phelps, often appears in the news with his lovely wife and two little boys celebrating his success emerging from rehab and his near-death experience. “Not wanting to be alive anymore” at one point, the champion who smoked marijuana, deceived it would not affect his ability to excel, now swears off any drugs as he encourages youth to emulate his example.
Close to where I live, a 33-year-old woman was sentenced to 30 years in prison for her reckless driving which resulted in the death of a teenager helping change his mother’s flat tire. The THP report showed her high on drugs and impaired in her driving ability as she callously fled the scene of the homicide. She’ll now have many decades to ponder her stupidity, recreational drug usage and the devastation it brought her and a grieving family.
With scores of people killed, maimed, or disabled for life from drunk driving, especially by young people, do we really want to compound the problem by adding marijuana to the mix? Teens can think they are invincible and adding a joint can seem innocuous until the tragedy happens, which it does all too frequently.
Contrary to what drug proponents profess, marijuana and other drugs take a toll—eventually, if not immediately. Drugs don’t deliver as advertised. Why do you think they call it “dope?”
Even pot-smoking, poster boy Willie Nelson, battling emphysema and pneumonia four or five times, admits his lungs have gotten “really screwed up.”
In Willie’s own words, “There’s been a lot of talk about marijuana being harmless, but I think it’s a lot more dangerous to the lungs than most dope smokers realize. Especially the strong marijuana that’s around these days. Each year it seems to get a little stronger … your lungs are not really supposed to breath anything but oxygen—pure, fresh air.”
How about the tragic, premature deaths of both Whitney Houston and Amy Winehouse portrayed in recent documentaries? Both got started on the path to their destruction the exact same way, smoking weed, those “harmless” joints.
Research Studies Should Not Be Ignored As Sergeant Joe Friday used to say on the TV program Dragnet, “Just the facts!” so here they are …
The United States Drug Enforcement Agency states: “U.S. drug overdose kills more people than traffic accidents and gun incidents.” The total number cited was 46,471! If we could ask these victims how many started on marijuana or maintained their marijuana usage along with other drugs, I wonder how many would hang their heads in regret wishing they’d never succumbed to the seduction of the Pied Piper’s enticement onto this pernicious path?
My best friend growing up started experimenting with recreational drugs when he started college with me. What started as a fun escape spiraled into his premature death in his mid-20s. I carry an ache in my heart to this day from this experience.
When marijuana proponents glorify drugs and celebrate its “harmless” even “beneficial effect,” they should take heed to the words of an expert, Dr. Ed Gogek, an addiction psychiatrist. He wrote the following in the uber-liberal New York Times: “I’ve spent 25 years as a doctor treating drug abusers and they are con artists…. Marijuana activists are phony scientists. For years they said marijuana is good for glaucoma when it actually worsens it! They said it is not addictive and this is false! They said it doesn’t increase usage among teenagers and all evidence says the opposite…. It is not harmless! Youth do worse in school and have two times the dropout rate while marijuana permanently lowers their IQ.”
Joseph Califano, head of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, declares without qualification that “pot smoking adversely affects motor skills and does serious damage to the brain over the long term.” It is a fact that objective studies repeatedly show that regular users find their IQ dropping and all cognitive functions hindered. Finally, a recent study from Northwestern University established clearly that teen “potheads” had brain abnormalities related to poor short-term memory performance. Healthy individuals who did not use marijuana scored 37 times better on average than users—not just addicts—who had smoked pot in the past. The National Institute of Health makes it clear: “One in six youth who try marijuana before age 18 will either abuse it or will become addicted.” Those are dangerous odds, parents. Is this what we want for our children and grandchildren? What’s Happening in Massachusetts? The state of Massachusetts jumped on the bandwagon to legalize marijuana. After a number of months, a study was done to discover the impact on young people. The results are sobering and startling: currently 1/2 of youth ages 18–25 have smoked marijuana in the past month!
In the classic film The Wizard of Oz, Dorothy finally pulled back the curtain and exposed the deceiving mastermind behind the façade. May we do likewise amid celebrities and other pot promoters who glamorize toking up, some under the ruse of the “medical marijuana” argument (which can have some medicinal benefits but it’s not the only alternative).
A little while ago, in the mall where I daily exercise, a middle-aged mother darted from the coffee shop and stammered these words amidst her tears, “They just found my daughter dead!” She proceeded to tell me about her 27-year-old daughter who met a young fellow who influenced her to start smoking dope. Prior to this encounter, “she had never been involved with any drugs” but this was the gateway to her death and her mother’s devastation.
Here’s the deal: Scripture says, “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools…” (Romans 1:22). People will accuse us of being “fear mongers,” but we must not back down. Let’s winsomely and confidently communicate the truth about this massive deception permeating America today.
New Cartels, same as the old Cartels.
Like I said, I think smoking dope is stupid. I still think it should be legal and I love that video.
BTW, I didn’t touch the stuff until the december after high school, even though my friends did. The reason was that I thought it was bad for you.
In my senior year of high school I did a report on the evils of marijuana. I was shocked to learn that it was all propaganda. That made me ripe to try it a few months later at a party when an extremely hot chick convinced me to do it with her. That was 1972. My last toke was in 1977. I just didn’t like it any more. I only actually bought any once, btw. Two lids. The rest of the time I was just one of the guys it got passed to.
Particularly those with chemically altered minds. For an anthropological view— see ancient Inca kingdom. The ruling kings of Incaland made sure the “sacred” cocaine leaf (and the chemically requisite lime from shells- needed to be ground in a powder and chewed with the raw leaf to release the alkaloid cocaine) was plentifully provided to the working peasant laborers of lower “classes”. Plentiful in addicting quantities for... life. A life of zero to no food (cause the coke took away any natural hunger for food) and worked for the Monarchy rulers until they died. Slave labor, fully supplied with cocaine, no food expense (more food for the Kings/royalty) and worked until they fell dead. Truth. Subject of many anthropologic studies.
I quit smoking cigarettes four years ago. Had a chest xray late last year. Docs congratulated me on how good my lungs looked, and for giving up cigarettes. Never mind that I've been using the other for almost 25 years now.
2.) UK breakthrough research (genomic) has ID’d gene markers inherited in different human population groups— markers that are shown to be altered. In pre-menopausal females with the inherited susceptibility to the environmental triggers, who smoke pot during and through adolescence into young adulthood (defined age)— statistically have significant development of frank schizophrenia. This from the UK (Scotland) and Tel Aviv University published studies (in TAU— Human Molecular Genetics peer reviewed medical journal). The summary phrase from the investigators: “”In other words, young people with a genetic susceptibility to schizophrenia — those who have psychiatric disorders in their families — should bear in mind that they’re playing with fire if they smoke pot during adolescence.” The genomic analysis of the marker regions has extended this definition to way beyond only those with “psychiatric disorders in their families” — to actual identification of the chromosomal regions which are triggered.
As mentioned previously, almost 25 years of use have resulted in zero mental or psychological issues. I am, for the most part, a well adjusted, middle aged, successful white collar manager making decent money, paying taxes, contributing positively to society, including being a donor to FR, all in the face of so-called "research".
I’m thinking Elijah Craig would be a good starting point.
My post was meant to be sarcastic. The swamp has lots of highly paid people working to enforce prohibitions of various things.
We should all be responsible for our own behavior. That is the essence of conservatism. If we drive while under the influence and cause harm, we should be held responsible. It is not the big government’s job to tell us what habits are good and how to live our life.
As further proof of the “ruling class” globalist corporatists— who provide the tax revenues from at the very least, Big Tobacco— being behind yet another means to control the populace with addiction (justified by the oh so desperately needed “gubmint” “services” paid for by the taxes for their vile products):
Here is another thread discussion from a post article from Ganja land. Jamaica. Phillip Morris expanding market share with filter tipped ganja cigarettes. And their buddies (have on excellent authority) at RJ Reynolds are working up the same model and backing this “movement” with their lobbyist moneys (see: John hiccup Boehner).
The silly little (who think they are big) small growers who think they’ll make a mint— soon to be contract owned by Big Tobacco. And ruled by socialist/nihilist g-dmnd demonrats. Enjoy—
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3677641/posts
You have no clue. Zip.
I don’t have time to go through the entire thread. I do not have time to go into all of the details right now, but legalizing pot in Washington State has been a worse nightmare than even I could have imagined.
I concur. I think more harm is caused by alcohol and prescription drugs than any other cause.
No, I was a former drug user certainly, but I specifically mean that I am a former drug addict.
I used many drugs, but I was only addicted to one, Xanax.
I quit that drug on my own too, no one helped me, other than Jesus.
First quit was cold turkey, and it was Hell. Almost died from that. The second two quits were a slow ween administered by myself.
Yes, it took me three times total to quit for good, because I am stupid like that, but such is the nature of addiction.
If you work with drug addicts, then you know first hand that the only one who can defeat the demon is the addict himself, because they are one and the same.
You can try to help them all you want, but until they decide they want to be free and are willing to suffer the pain it will take to be free, they will not be free.
Also, judgmental is fine. I have made many mistakes, and I will speak of them truthfully, because to not be truthful is to deny the lessons I learned and the paths that I walked, and I won’t do that. One of the reasons God put me in the world in this body was to battle the demon that also lives in here with me. It is my darkside, and he is currently imprisoned in the cage I previously built for me.
There's a reason they don't call it "smart".
Lived in WA state since it was legalized and just moved to Florida. Did not notice any harm in WA except occasional drivers driving 10-20 MPH slower than speed limits.
For issues like this - the prohibition of a substance for personal use or commercial sale, for instance - there should be a high threshold that gates Federal involvement. That high threshold for federal involvement should be the conservative position, as conservatives generally ally with individualism over collectivism, and personal freedom over coercive state control.
Although state governments have more latitude in police powers than does the Federal government, the same general principals apply. Conservatives tend toward individualism and personal responsibility to govern behavior; progressives tend toward statism and coercive force to govern behavior.
I've been a pretty habitual pot smoker since 1996 or so. Feel free to ask any questions you want about long-term marijuana use.
You have your own definition of “addiction” which is useful to you... but is incorrect. Addiction withdrawal does not have to result in death to carry the label “addictive”. Though one could stretch that definition to a NY to LA direct flight— in which the nicotine addicts became rather combative as their dose wore down. By way of explanation. The clinical definition is quite different than yours. But, if it gives you comfort and allows you to survive.... fine.
That is your opinion, and that's all it is.
Being for or against the legalization of marijuana isn't inherently a question of political orientation. It rightfully belongs in the area of personal choice.
I'd caution conservatives against choosing this hill to die on. The battle to preserve prohibition has already been lost. Full legalization is coming, because the people no longer support it.
What should we call alcoholics, who are the major portion of my lawyer daughter’s clients to defend them in court?
It’s a troubling drug to be sure.
I want to show my brother this video, but he has not watched it yet. His alcoholism is not as severe as the man in the video, but he has told me that he’s had DT’s before, so it’s pretty bad.
I don’t know why I never became an alcoholic, because my dad was just a total lush, but he was also an illegal drug user too.
My mom, on the other hand, has an averse reaction to alcohol, which I think I got from her, because if I drink too much, which is about 3-4 drinks, I get sick and puke, and I do not like that, so I specifically avoid going too far.
As far as an alcohol buzz goes, I like just the initial onset of it right as it hits, which is about two beers for me, then that’s it, no further.
Why do you think Congress in 1917 realized that they had no authority to prohibit alcohol, and that therefore the Constitution had to be amended to grant them that power, but in 1971 they somehow discerned that they had the authority to prohibit this plant?
I am anti-legalization. I think it's a terrible mistake and that people will suffer needlessly because of it.
I just don't think Congress has any authority over the states on this issue.
No, FRiend you only need to think you know. If you want a clinical debate... you’d lose. Said debates are available in peer reviewed clinical journals— thousands of them. At the NIH and the CDC.
. Clinical definitions are not semantic.
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.