quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun Auset:

They also probably drank and smoked cigarettes long before they smoked some weed. Why aren't they viewed as 'gateway drugs'?

A kid or young person sipping alcohol and smoking joints is indeed a warning sign that parents and communities must be ever vigilant about.


This is non-responsive about why alcohol and cigarettes aren't labelled gateway drugs and/or why they are legal.

quote:
Also, just becausemost people participated in something that became drug addicts doesn't make it a cause/result senario, that logic is proven to be flawed.

Perhaps not directly causative, but strongly correlated. I'll try to pull the stats, as soon as I get on a different computer. Flawed logic asserts that drug experimentation has no bearing whatsoever on drug addiction, particularly within a feel good all the time, change it with a drug, doped up, here's a pill for that drug-pushing culture like in amerikka.


Pull the stats on cigarettes and alcohol while you are at it, and don't forget perscriptiond drugs. You actually pointed out the general problem, the instant gratification, 'drugs are the answer' society... But that should cause one to be irritated with the inconsistancy of the law... LAWS which actually incarcerate human beings for marijuana, yet allow drug tobacco and alcohol industries to wreak destruction an society...Not go along with the structure 'as is'. CAll me crazy, it distrubs me that peoples FREEDOM to eat, sleep, and walk around is taken from them for weed... yet big brother Pharma is a multi-national pusher.

quote:
Most people who have never become addicts of anything else have taken a puff of of mariguana at some point in their lives too.

Does this mean you believe most people have experimented with marijuana? That is indeed flawed logic.


No, it means what it says, that most people that have used marijuana never become substance abusers... Therefore it's 'gateway' label is illogical. Especially when the 'gateway label' is never given to alcohol and cigarettes, even though their use also proceeds harder drugs in known drug addicts.

quote:
I never called marijuana 'benign' in comparrison to anything, and BTW it isn't a 'chemical'.

In reality Marijuana contains many chemicals, chiefly TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL, from which the name "Cannabis" is derived and also the chemical shortcut name, "THC", used by laboratories. Perhaps there was no intent to compare marijuana with tobacco and alcohol but the exact quote was


Every herb contains 'chemicals'...But these substances are naturally derived from the plants. They are not synthetic and/or processed chemicals like the the heroin and crack you mentioned and made a comparrison with. But you know that... Roll Eyes

quote:
"Since you are against the legalization of marijuana, are you also in favour of making even harder drugs like alcohol and cigarettes illegal? If not, why not?

Does not the descriptor "even harder" regarding tobacco and alcohol render marijuana less so?


Why are you answering a question with a non-responsive question? The comparison has already been PROVEN. Alcohol and cigarettes ARE harder drugs. I was stating a FACT. Now would you like to answer why you think that cigarettes and alcohol are legal while marijuana isn't? Or would you prefer to dodge again?

quote:
I specifically avoided saying that so you wouldn't go of an a rant about that again...Guess that didn't work out to well...

Go off on a rant? Again? Pardon? Those who have repeatedly insisted that the drug Tetrahydrocannabinol is benign have not been characterized as "ranting" but it's a free world *shrug*


When someone repeats what they have already said to a myriad of other posters on a thread to a new poster, even though the new poster made NO MENTION of that subject, and therefore what they are repeating is non-responsive, it can be safely considered 'ranting'.

quote:
My post 'specifically' stated that alcohol and cigarettes are HARDER drugs than marijuana... Which is a FACT.

That is debatable but still makes a comparison...


No, it is stating a comparrison that has already been done. So it is a fact. It also is not labelling marijuana as 'benign'.

quote:
I always wonder why folks that are so vehamently against the legalization of marijuana aren't out protesting about making the HARDER drugs of cigarettes and alcohol 'illegal'.

Perhaps they view the artificial consideration of all other substances when discussing the one as contrived distraction? Are there any indicators that those who "vehemently" Roll Eyes protest are not also vocal about a myriad of things? Funny how the "Yay" position is not characterized as "those who so vehemently want marijuana flowing in the streets" lol


People who don't think people should loose their freedom and be incarcerated while big buisiness makes millions off similar goings on are talking about consistancy and logic in LAW. People who think marijuana should retain a penalty of incarceration while other drugs are widely available for the profit of Big Pharma, Tobacco, and alcohol...Sorry, I just don't understand their stance.

quote:
It would only be logical and consistant to want less drugged out people. But I'm starting to see that logic and consistancy are not necessarily a goal.

Judging by this post one could swear that NS is the one who is promoting 2for1 spliffs at the KwikiMart instead of less drugged up, red eyed, amotivational syndrome having, drug screen failing, can't keep a job people. 19 To borrow a phrase Simply Amazing... The shortsightedness of trying to gauge a messageboard poster's drug prevention efforts and anti drug advocacy within their community is not only illogical, and inconsistent, but also laughable.


Uhhhm, OK... When a poster on a forum totally dismisses and avoids responding to questions about cigarettes and alcohol...yet keeps harping on marijuana... The only LOGICAL conclusion is that the inconsistancy in law and what is deamed 'harmful' is not an issue they want to deal with.

quote:
What do personal preference have to do with the establishment of societal law?

[quote]Uhh...that's what the thread was about, initially, the personal preferences of the majority of Zogby pollees being translated into public policy aka "democracy".


Yes, and your personal preference didn't match the numbers...So once again, what does your(or my BTW) personal preference of 'usage' have to do with the establishment of democratic law that leads to incarceration?

quote:
I'm not sure why peep are responding as if i've said alcohol and tobacco are wonderful and passing out cognac and a stogi? Confused


It may be your refusal to deal with/adress/respond to the inconsistancy in the law...The law that people are incarcerated for[b/](sorry,that's a big deal to me) while industry makes millions pushing similar societal ills?


quote:
[b]The Amerikkkan culture promotes individualistic 'feel good' consumption and the pursuit of physical pleasure at large. This includes smoking and drinking. So I wonder why(I'm being sarcastic) those very harmful drugs aren't being pushed by folks to become 'illegal'.

A fair question I suppose but I'm more concerned about the high rates of addiction, which contributes to joblessness and incarceration for black people. I agree that the culture promotes hedonism.
We right there ----><----


Yes, you I, and Kalliqua all see rye to eye on that. What disturbs me is that not only is incarceration NOT the solution to preventing drug or substance abuse or availability... Such punishment isn't fairly or logically distributed for equally harmful substances. That is the 'reason' I think marijuana actually being 'illegal' is assisinine. This 'feel good' society has at it's origin a lot more and far beyond the legality of certain substances. So I don't think that pushers/users of one substance should be stripped of their basic human freedoms while other pushers, who have the power of industry should be multi-national, while the greater society get's their 'fix' off of their dope.

quote:
[quote]Alcohol and cigarettes also get you 'high'.

Nicotine is addictive and also toxic, I'm not sure that it has the same mood altering properties of tetrahydrocannabinol/THC/Marijuana though. A great google prompt....


Nicoyine is actully more addictive than crack...and the other chemicals in cigarettes lead to cancer, which has already been discussed on this thread...and ignored.

quote:
Does it not disturb you that these MORE HARMFUL drugs are legal then?

there you go, NOT COMPARING again Wink


There you go dodging the question again.

quote:
A few reasons people give. Pleasure, Escapism, state altering for ritualistic/shamanistic purposes. I'm not endorsing or negating any of the above, just stating them.

The ritualistic/shamanistic purposes are about the only legitimate ones I see here, along with the chemo brownies for cancer patients.


Well, these legitamate usage that you have acknowledged puts folks in jail. There is also appetite stimulant and pain supressor for AIDS patients. There is also industrial hemp usage that is hampered because of the illegality of marijuana(even though it contains 0% THC)...This is devastating the lives of many a Native Amerikkkan agricultural industry...
quote:
Uhhhm, OK... When a poster on a forum totally dismisses and avoids responding to questions about cigarettes and alcohol...yet keeps harping on marijuana... The only LOGICAL conclusion is that the inconsistancy in law and what is deamed 'harmful' is not an issue they want to deal with.



Copy and paste where this has been done.
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Uhhhm, OK... When a poster on a forum totally dismisses and avoids responding to questions about cigarettes and alcohol...yet keeps harping on marijuana... The only LOGICAL conclusion is that the inconsistancy in law and what is deamed 'harmful' is not an issue they want to deal with.


Copy and paste where this has been done.


No problem...

This is what you said previous to my post...

Here is your harp on marijuana...

DECRIMINALIZTION of marijuana? 17

I think "the top 10" list is a good list of desirable qualities with the exception of decriminalizing the chronic.

Well shux,

why decry hiphop, gangsta rap, and other such imagery with marijuana insignia, drug references, pimping, ass and joblessness? Why jail drug dealers? Why not harbour our own personal drug dealer in the basement? Why not keep continuing to encourage young black people to be drugged up, nonmotivated, reefer smoking clodheads with red rimmed eyes? Why not just make commercials promoting chemical escapism? Why have any rules, parameters, or responsibilities at all? Let's just fall for everything and believe in nothing? Let's elect Snoop Dog for president!

Here, have a big ole spliff...*roll roll lick, roll roll lick*

I suppose i really just can't understand why "the majority" would want to legalize the chronic, but hey, it's a democracy. Would people no longer be randomly tested for drugs in "drugfree workplaces"? Does the majority understand that today's marijuana isn't the same thing uncle jimmy used to stash in grandmama's linen closet in 1973? Does the majority understand that usage of marijuana which is considered a "gateway" drug increases the likelihood of moving on to harder substances?

I am not getting huffy with you, EP, I did indeed exaggerate my response because it seems ludicrous to me to say well cigs and alcohol is dangerous so lets also have another mind altering substance legal as well. my point is....Where does it stop? If you legalize marijuana, seriously, why not crack? why not crystal meth? We could use the hypocrisy argument there as well...

There are some things that just shouldn't be done for the sake of the common good. Buy 1 get 1 free spliffs and blunts at the KwikiMart is one of them.

Marijuana is not harmless

At what age should we start allowing our children to puff and pass?


Here is where you dismiss and avoid the inconsistancies in law when it comes to alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana...

Marijuana should be legal because Alcohol and tobacco are legal.

Crack should be legal because Alcohol and tobacco are legal.

Crystal meth should be legal because alcohol and tobacco are legal.

Ecstasy should be legal because alcohol and tobacco are legal.

Heroin should be legal because alcohol and tobacco are legal.

How democratic...

The argument being provided is that it is not moral to ban marijuana if alcohol and tobacco are not also banned. Using this logic, it is also immoral to ban any other mind altering substance since it is immoral to ban marijuana.

Public outcry? some aging hippies and wanna be hip liberals answering a poll questionnaire do not a public outcry make.

Third, marijuana is far less damaging in all ways than either alcohol or tobacco.

Why perpetuate this lie? Go back and read the link and see the HARM CAUSED BY MARIJUANA which is today more potent than ever.

all smugness aside, your asserting that marijuana is benign is quite shocking in an otherwise astute individual...

u a puff and passer?


Here are is some of your 'benign' ranting previous to my post...

That's purposefully totally inaccurate

with every post the word "benign" is associated with the drug.

Benign does = NO HARM doesn't it?

Since you continue to misrepresent marijuana as a BENIGN SUBSTANCE, you're right, there's nothing left to discuss.


Then you mention the 'benign thing' in response to a post I made that said nothing about it being 'benign'...and you can read my last post(and yours) about how many times you dodged the questions I posed about the inequalities in deaming what is legal and illegal. I shouldn't have to copy and paste that since it is on this same page...
*twilight zone music*

ranters harping about the so-called rants of others?
Ranters adamantly stating falsehoods as FACT?
Ranters creating arguments for others and insisting that others adopt and argue artificially created arguments?

What next?

A "righteous" campaign to convince the masses that marijuana is good and anti-marijuana sentiment is bad? A publicly funded education campaign to spread the good news about weed?

I'm just waiting for someone to assert that an anti-drug, anti-marijuana stance is somehow a pro white supremacist stance...

that's what all this self-righteous toned hoopla is leading to right?
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:

If marijuana should not be legalized, then by the same morality, tobacco and alcohol should be made illegal since they kill millions of people a year by lung cancer (from both first and second-hand smoke), cirrhosis of the liver, driving accidents caused by intoxication, domestic abuse fueled by liquor, etc.



and thus it was discovered who introduced "morality" into the equation...
quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
quote:
Originally posted by Empty Purnata:

If marijuana should not be legalized, then by the same morality, tobacco and alcohol should be made illegal since they kill millions of people a year by lung cancer (from both first and second-hand smoke), cirrhosis of the liver, driving accidents caused by intoxication, domestic abuse fueled by liquor, etc.



and thus it was discovered who introduced "morality" into the equation...


Well, stuff like this sounds pretty moralistic:

quote:
Originally posted by negrospiritual:
why decry hiphop, gangsta rap, and other such imagery with marijuana insignia, drug references, pimping, ass and joblessness? Why jail drug dealers? Why not harbour our own personal drug dealer in the basement? Why not keep continuing to encourage young black people to be drugged up, nonmotivated, reefer smoking clodheads with red rimmed eyes? Why not just make commercials promoting chemical escapism? Why have any rules, parameters, or responsibilities at all? Let's just fall for everything and believe in nothing? Let's elect Snoop Dog for president!



Even if you aren't basing your argument on morality, what is the difference between alcohol/tobacco and marijuana? Can you at least explain that?
hello EP,

Long time no talk to...all has been well here...just been busy although I have been reading the threads behind the scenes. The argument about marijuana versus cigarettes is a no brainer? here in cally prop 215 was passed that allows medicinal use. now what use does tobacco have? mary jane is used for glaucoma, arthritis and to stimulate appetites in those on HIV and other medications that tend to kill the urge to eat. Then, after all of that I will ask how many people die from it compared to cigarettes or alcohol? I am surprised that some do not seem to get the fact that the laws are based on the value systems of some and the economic interests of others...never anything based rational or objective analysis that is in the best interest of the majority....or this conversation would be non-existent.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×