No strawman. I was just making fun of the lack of clarity in your posts. And that lack of clarity included no research on the topic, no studies, not facts, comparisons or data of any kind, except opinion formed by a priori notions. 
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 ...
Quite the contrary, seeing I am a pastor.
Let's take a smoke-less view of the Scripture you mentioned, shall we?
Genesis 1:29
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
"Meat" means food, as in eating. There is no reference to "smoking" a plant in order to get high.
However, AFTER the fall of man, when Adam sinned, the ground became cursed and would now produce weeds and thistles and other plants that resemble good plants (i.e., wheat, tomatoes, etc.), but are of NO REDEEMING VALUE.
Therefore, your wonderful little plant is nothing more than the product of sin, a weed that does nothing but cause harm to its users.
Dare you read it for youself in Genesis chapter 3?
Yes, as we can tell from the bon mots you've spread all over this thread.
Most of the Libertarians on FR, that make references to the Netherlands in their posts, don't.
Oh, if only they would.
But then again, I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemies.
Couldn't agree with you more.
Just as there a those who enjoy a fine wine (or other adult drink), I have, among my friends, those who enjoy their personal favorite livation. I do not hold it against them.
I believe that each of us, within ourselves, is the smallest inority. Liberal/socialists want us to believe that we're just part of the "herd" (they have a "herd mentality". Somehow, the clever thinking of the wildebeest became imbedded in liberals throughout the world.)
The real kicker is that they think that nobody will ever catch on.
I tend to believe in the tenth ammendment which covers it quite well:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
I happen to believe that this nation's smallest and most vulnerable minority is the individual. This kind of thinking is abhorrent to liberals.
I believe you just made that part up, sir. Show me the words that say that part.
The child was let in the car in the heat and was save just in time from dying of the heat.
The parents were arrested in the coffee-shop in which the car was parked in front...
What I am trying to tell to people is that statistics show that Germany and Belgium are doing much better in the drugs-statistics, less youths addicted, less addictions, less people who progress from soft-drugs to hard drugs.
If numbers prove that Germany is doing better, why Libertians aren't lobbying for German drugs-laws when they say they are doing it for the good of everyone?
Oh, I forgot, they don't give a d@mn about anything, just as long as they can either sell or use the stuff.
If they want to get high so bad, why do they have to wreck a country like they did it here in the Neterlands? Let them take off to Pakistan or Afghainstan, where weed grows roadside and heroine costs a buck a shot.
I am glad the Christian Conservatives are in charge here now, Balkenende is a drug-warrior. Maybe he can get a grip on the orginized crime that plagues my country that was able to get a grip thanks to the liberals/socialists.
Instead of lessening crime, the Netherlands are now a leading country in the production and sale of hard-drugs and the relating crimes as murder in the drugs-scene.
A 1988 study in the Archives of Surgery found that among 1,023 trauma victims, marijuana had been used by 34.7 percent, alcohol by 33.5.
THC remains in the body for at least thirty days after use. Alcohol remains in the body for less than 24 hours. The author either did shoddy research or is being intentionally deceptive.
The danger of marijuana can be measured in trends found in hospital emergency rooms. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration reported earlier this year that emergency room admissions where marijuana use preceded injury rose 141 percent between 1994 and 2000.
See above comment. Also, when the hospital emergency rooms began testing for marijuana needs to be accounted for. I suspect that between 1994 and 2000 that there was a steady increase of emergency rooms testing for THC. Thus, of course there would be an increase. The author wants to imply that the increase is due to increased marijuana use and or increased potency but wants to avoid implying that the increase is due to more testing for THC.
Today, by contrast, the Drug Enforcement Administration reports THC concentration in Sinsemilla (the female version of the cannabis plant) as high as 30 percent. This fact alone leads one to question long standing beliefs about marijuana that were formulated a long time ago relative to a much weaker, less concentrated substance.
What long standing beliefs is the author suggesting should be questioned? The author is intentionally ambiguous. All I see is that because the potency is higher pot smokers need to smoke less to get high. Less smoke in the lungs, I would think, is a good thing. BTW, Sinsemilla is not just the female plant it is the female plant that has not been pollinated and thus has no seeds. The normal seed production process being eliminated causes the plant to produce more THC.
There is abundant research that defines a negative impact on the functioning of the brain related to the use of marijuana, especially on tasks like coordination, perception, judgment and memory.
Impaired perception, judgment and memory negatively effects almost all politicians and bureaucrats -- it's how the corrupt system came to be so corrupt. Those negative effects have been spread like a disease well beyond just politicians and bureaucrats and can measured by the number of unconstitutional laws they have created and laws that violate individual life-and-property rights. That negative impact is several magnitudes more harmful/destructive to individuals and society than all drug abuse combined.
One of the most interesting of these studies, published in 1991, involved a group of airline pilots who were given one marijuana cigarette, then tested for their ability to land a plane in a flight simulator.
What study was that? Pilots shouldn't be flying while impaired by any drug -- prescription or non-prescription. I recall reading about an issue wherein female pilots with PMS was called into question. I don't recall what became of it.
What's significant is that the pilots were still demonstrably impaired 24 hours after their use of that marijuana cigarette.
"Demonstrably" means that an effect was demonstrated. What was the effect? It impaired what ability? Did it impair the pilots ability to sleep, such as caffeine does? Did it impair the ability to focus, such as an alcohol hangover does?
Marijuana is fat-soluble (whereas alcohol, cocaine, heroin, and amphetamines are water soluble -- they dissolve easily in water) which means it stays in a person's body much longer than other drugs and its effects are more insidious.
So the author does know that THC remains in the system for several weeks. The author proclaims that the effects of marijuana are more insidious than other drugs. What other drugs? Yes, the negative effects of marijuana are more insidious than aspirin. But it seems clear that the author is implying that the negative effects of marijuana use are more insidious than alcohol, cocaine, heroin, and amphetamines. The author expects the reader to believe that!? Yeah right; and Clinton didn't inhale.
The facts at hand call us to put the mystique of marijuana as a docile substance of no consequence behind us and to take up a better informed conversation in light of the real truth. Marijuana need no longer stay under the radar of serious discussion.
In one breath the author makes the call to, "take up a better informed conversation in light of the real truth" and immediately says that there is no longer a need for "serious discussion". What planet is the author from? ;^)
So much intentional ambiguity and deception by the author is her banner she chooses to identify herself by.
"The national government ... will maintain and defend the foundations on which the power of our nation rests. It will offer strong protection to Christianity as the very basis of our collective morality." - Adolf Hiter, The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872.
"Today Christians ... stand at the head of Germany ... I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit ... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past ... (few) years." - Adolf Hitler. Ibid, pg. 871-872.
This kind of Christian?
Low sperm count, eh? Another reason they're "touchy."
There is hope, afterall, that libertarians may die out before marijuana is legalized.
No strawman. I was just making fun of the lack of clarity in your posts. And that lack of clarity included no research on the topic, no studies, not facts, comparisons or data of any kind, except opinion formed by a priori notions.
Right on! That needed to be repeated.
And BUMP to your entire response. Maybe the drug warriors on this thread will read it(not).
A future libertarian presidential candidate?
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.