Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Research helps dispel marijuana myths
Sober Talk ^ | Thursday, August 1, 2002 | By BECKY CLARK, MSW, CSW

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 ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: New York
KEYWORDS: cannibus; justsaynoelle; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 841-849 next last
To: AppyPappy
"Chronic" is the street name for marijuana.

Oh, that's so 1993.

41 posted on 08/01/2002 6:14:57 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
Nothing worong with saying it is bad. I don't somke the stuff because it is expensive, and illegal. The point i am making is WE MUST TAKE THE PROFIT OUT OF THE DRUG TRADE. This would make it not so cool to do drugs. Now for example, there are people who get drunk until they cannot walk, after legalizing drugs, I am sure there will be drug heads who are so smashed that they cannot see straight? But at least we can save thousands of black kids who grow up on the trade, and reduce the crime associated with dealers turf protection war.
42 posted on 08/01/2002 6:15:27 AM PDT by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
By doing research instead of just making stuff up. You should try it sometime.

If by "research" you mean getting stoned to the point that you are worthless to your family, friends, and employers, then I'm not interested.

And your "research" is documented where?

43 posted on 08/01/2002 6:18:25 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: steve-b
Trust me. There are far more pro pot people than anti pot people in Ithaca.

I still find it interesting that the pro pot crowd here is so unwilling to accept or employ standard conservative/libertarian argument that notes the safety of the substance should generally be irrelevant to our right to consume same. Instead, they have a nervous breakdown and claim it's "lies all lies."

You don't see too many conservatives or libertarians trying to argue that tobacco isn't bad for you when the advocate for its continued use. You don't see a lot of posters trying to claim that fatty food is GOOD for you. Or that booze isn't addictive. Instead, they fall back on the perfectly legitimate notion that even if its bad for them it's "their body, their choice" so to speak.

To be candid, I find this unwillingness disturbing. It is almost a tacit admission that, if something IS bad for you, it should be banned.
44 posted on 08/01/2002 6:20:10 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
In contrast to this article, here are THE FACTS
45 posted on 08/01/2002 6:20:49 AM PDT by KDD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
Bad cut and paste. Meant to post column and source name.

Well, hell - that would have saved me some time. If the IJ is agin it, I'm fer it ;)

46 posted on 08/01/2002 6:20:51 AM PDT by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: A2J; steve-b; sawsalimb
If you would READ the article you would find that it mentions the fact that marijuana today is far more powerful than it was in your "high school drug classes in the 70's."

Its not af act, its pure myth:

Self-Serving Comparisons: Marijuana Potency

47 posted on 08/01/2002 6:20:59 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
What are marijuana advocates so afraid of?

Using a plant that grows wild all over the Earth, and placed here by God for the use of mankind, to destroy freedoms previously protected by the Constitution, spread corruption in the form of booty among the law enforcement offices and terrorize and suborn innocent and productive Americans.

Every point in the article you posted is either a blatant or contrived lie. If the effect of the plant's use are so obvious and well documented, why lie? What are the anti-cannabis people afraid of?

48 posted on 08/01/2002 6:22:27 AM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
If there is anything there you do not understand, just ask.
49 posted on 08/01/2002 6:22:32 AM PDT by KDD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines; Kevin Curry; Cultural Jihad; Texasforever; billbears
So much for the theory that pot use makes people more mellow.

It's amazing how those who claim that libertarians represent more than anti-drug law idiots can't see that their own integrity goes up in smoke when their golden calf of marijuana is ridiculed.

50 posted on 08/01/2002 6:22:45 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123
The point i am making is WE MUST TAKE THE PROFIT OUT OF THE DRUG TRADE. This would make it not so cool to do drugs.

I can respect your argument.

The thing I find disturbing is that so few of the pro pot people posting here can concede that you can make it legal but make the dangers of the substance clear (ie, make it not so cool).

Its almost as if they not only want it legalized but they don't want it criticized.

To be blunt (no pun intended), some of their behavior IS starting to look like the behavior of addicts: "There's no problem...it isn't addictive...I use all the time with no problem..." etc., all with an incredible indignation and anger at anyone who even SUGGESTS its a problem.

51 posted on 08/01/2002 6:24:42 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
"if something IS bad for you, it should be banned."

does that mean they'll be coming for my chocolate soon?!?! I tend to spend too much time on FR and it's not too good on my eyes... . OH MY!

52 posted on 08/01/2002 6:25:40 AM PDT by sweet_diane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
Using a plant that grows wild all over the Earth, and placed here by God for the use of mankind,

Please don't implicate God in your crimes.

Using your logic, which apparently has been affected by the "plant," then God is guilty of being an accomplice in every rape that happens for placing sex on earth "for the use of mankind."

53 posted on 08/01/2002 6:26:10 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell
Every point in the article you posted is either a blatant or contrived lie.

And your evidence to the contrary is...

54 posted on 08/01/2002 6:27:06 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: TightSqueeze
Pass the bong

C'mon, Squeezy . . . I've been holding the bong out in your direction for about an hour now . . . My arm's gettin' kinda tired !!! ;-))

55 posted on 08/01/2002 6:27:38 AM PDT by GeekDejure
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
To be blunt (no pun intended), some of their behavior IS starting to look like the behavior of addicts: "There's no problem...it isn't addictive...I use all the time with no problem..." etc., all with an incredible indignation and anger at anyone who even SUGGESTS its a problem.

To the pro-potties, "DENIAL" is just a river in Egypt.

56 posted on 08/01/2002 6:29:04 AM PDT by A2J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: A2J
It's amazing how those who claim that libertarians represent more than anti-drug law idiots can't see that their own integrity goes up in smoke when their golden calf of marijuana is ridiculed.

Alluding to your #36, judging by the caliber of your sentence construction, it's obvious you've been soaking in gin for the last 12 hours.

57 posted on 08/01/2002 6:29:51 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: A2J
Again, how would you know?

Well, for one thing, it policy of the courts for use the prison/treatment option when one is found in possession of as small a quanty as 3 grams, and suprise!, the great majority of people opt for "treatment". This is a matter of public record. How is it you don't know; don't you ever venture out to actually do research on your position in an issue?

58 posted on 08/01/2002 6:32:12 AM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: sweet_diane
"if something IS bad for you, it should be banned... does that mean they'll be coming for my chocolate soon?!?!"

That's sort of my point. Conservatives or libertarians don't try to argue, for example, that "the statisics showing that people who eat too much choclate get fat and have zits are LIES LIES." They argue that, despite certain conceded potentially unhealthy aspects of chocolate that it shouldn't be banned because people have the FREEDOM to use it.

When its marijuana, however, they don't allow themselves to make the concession. They cling stubbornly to the concept that marijuana is the greatest thing on god's green leafy earth.

Once the "freedom" theory is abandoned for pot in favor of the "aint bad for ya" theory it opens to the door to the logical and rhetorical position that we should abandon the "freedom" theory in other areas and look solely at whether or not its bad for you.

And that opens the door to the exact place the socialists, liberal, etc., want us to go.

In other words I think we may have found FR's own "useful idiots." ;-)

59 posted on 08/01/2002 6:32:14 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Behind Liberal Lines
toi
60 posted on 08/01/2002 6:33:09 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 841-849 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson