Dream...that was his entire post. You quoted the entire post and adamantly stated "EXACTLY" then reiterated it two times for good measure! You can't pretend you weren't totally supporting the false and delusional arguements.
My argument and your argument are separate. They are not co-dependent.
sweet bejeebus! EVERYTHING else he said makes sense! to me!
and damn, you throw around words like ;ddelusional' way too easy...but you throw around a lot of language i think too easily...but that's a WHOLE other topic....and HONEST, i have ZERO interest in EVEr discussing it with you. truly.
i don't know why i bothered....b/c your entire stance to me is ridiculous honestly. you have your sources/rationale/blah/blah/blah. i wasn't getting into the semantics of it all...i agree with conor's general assessment, thus why isaid so! so he made one gaffe....whatever...i hardly consider it 'delsuional'...and if it makes me 'delusional' in YOUR EYES..i am fine with that too.
yeesh. you're right though, our debate is for enitrely different things..so yea....hahaha....what a waste of time, for all of us really.
post of the day right here, and yes i do have a light do you have papers..
and the real irony is i rarely smoke. however, i do know how to indulge my maladaptive nature and disregard my human potential from time to time. haha.
"Researchers have found that THC changes the way in which sensory information gets into and is acted on by the hippocampus. This is a component of the brain’s limbic system that is crucial for learning, memory, and the integration of sensory experiences with emotions and motivations. Investigations have shown that THC suppresses neurons in the information processing system of the hippocampus. In addition, researchers have discovered that learned behaviors, which depend on the hippocampus, also deteriorate."
People use substances and behaviours that cause harmful fallout, as a way of coping, with real effects in crippling one's own inner processes. To me this is abusing one's self, albeit sometimes unknowingly, or because one cannot comprehend what one is actually doing. (due to defense mechanisms of denial and of stunted brain processing) When such behaviours interrupt our ability to integrate our experiences, we remain unconscious of them. We stunt our own emotional issues and our experiences remain paralyzed/frozen in the brain, rather than processed. This includes denying one's self the benefit of gaining insight and understanding of one's life experiences to grow from.(based on information in John Bradshaw's book: "Bradshaw: On the Family") This prevents whole brain integration and emotional intelligence.
"Someone who smokes marijuana regularly may have many of the same respiratory problems that tobacco smokers have. These individuals may have daily cough and phlegm, symptoms of chronic bronchitis, and more frequent chest colds. Continuing to smoke marijuana can lead to abnormal functioning of lung tissue injured or destroyed by marijuana smoke.
Regardless of the THC content, the amount of tar inhaled by marijuana smokers and the level of carbon monoxide absorbed are three to five times greater than among tobacco smokers. This may be due to marijuana users inhaling more deeply and holding the smoke in the lungs."
"Marijuana smoke contains some of the same cancer-causing compounds as tobacco, sometimes in higher concentrations.Studies show that someone who smokes five joints per week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day."
Too bad people think they have to smoke it. I drank 1 cup of tea yesterday and was feeling great all afternoon If I was able to legally purchase a larger supply, I would make the tea more often (which may I add has numorous health benifits). Studies have also shown that even though Marijuana has the same cancer causing agents, smoking Marijuana might actually help to reduce the chances of lung cancer. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729_pf.html
THC is also the most benificial chemical compound found to this day in preventing the brain deteriation that leads to Alzheimers disease. Here is one of many articles on that. Now, seeing as how my family has a history of Alzheimers, shouldn't I be able to legally consume the best drug at stalling it? I feel that is something that I should be able to decide for myself without big brother fucking intruding. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050224111638.htm
Too bad people think they have to smoke it. I drank 1 cup of tea yesterday and was feeling great all afternoon If I was able to legally purchase a larger supply, I would make the tea more often. Studies have also shown that even though Marijuana has the same cancer causing agents, smoking Marijuana might actually help to reduce the chances of lung cancer. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729_pf.html
THC is also the most benificial chemical compound found to this day in preventing the brain deteriation that leads to Alzheimers disease. Here is one of many articles on that. Now, seeing as how my family has a history of Alzheimers, shouldn't I be able to legally consume the best drug at stalling it? I feel that is something that I should be able to decide for myself without big brother fucking intruding. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050224111638.htm
As I mentioned in a recent post--when people can get past the idea of right/wrong, and that we must have win/lose outcomes, all possibilities will be enabled and supported (as long as the choices don't jeopardize others) and we will change from majority rules types of mentalities, with groups and mindsets being marginalized.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
and damn, you throw around words like ;ddelusional' way too easy...
delusional:
an act or instance of deluding.
2. the state of being deluded.
3. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur.
4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
As I mentioned in a recent post--when people can get past the idea of right/wrong, and that we must have win/lose outcomes, all possibilities will be enabled and supported (as long as the choices don't jeopardize others) and we will change from majority rules types of mentalities, with groups and mindsets being marginalized.
I completely agree. And I think that a big argument right now is the moral one. People that have not done much research to see that this isn't the "devil's plant" that they grew up learning to fear through propoganda. The pros and cons need to be observed from a non-"right or wrong" standpoint. As it is now, my choices are being jeopardized by this prohibition. I know some of the benifits that would serve me and many people well, but am unable to legally pursue those options. I want to be able to grow marijuana for personal consumption, not for selling, not to give to children, etc. The best way of me effecting that outcome is by me educating people on the benifits of legalizing marijuana. After people know both sides of the argument, then they can form their own opinions, my job is done at that point.
i might add....from firsthand experience...the dutch elevate joint-rolling to a TRUE artform....tis a thing of beuaty to behold.
so all the rest of 'this here'....bah...all a moot point, who cares! give me a person who knows how to relax, enjoy life...an open perspective...and hang and chill together. tis a beautiful thing. the fact that one can light up in the NL in a coffeehouse, out in public...such a degree of social as well as legal acceptance, and it is a non-issue. while i don't partake often at all.....i enjoy the ritual, and yes, the company of those who do indulge...many have a view of life and enjoyment that is quite aligned with how i see life too.
to me, the netherlands is an excellent example of a thriving and healthy culture...and an excellent quality of life and high standard of living, quite *successful*...speaks volumes.
so yes, a joint as art. :cool:
btw - i never knew you could make tea from it. i LOVE tea! hmmmmm. nice! although as mentioned, i do enjoy the social/ritualistic nature of sharing some smoke.
I completely agree. And I think that a big argument right now is the moral one. People that have not done much research to see that this isn't the "devil's plant" that they grew up learning to fear through propoganda. The pros and cons need to be observed from a non-"right or wrong" standpoint. As it is now, my choices are being jeopardized by this prohibition. I know some of the benifits that would serve me and many people well, but am unable to legally pursue those options. I want to be able to grow marijuana for personal consumption, not for selling, not to give to children, etc. The best way of me effecting that outcome is by me educating people on the benifits of legalizing marijuana. After people know both sides of the argument, then they can form their own opinions, my job is done at that point.
excellent post!
i agree...keep your morality or personally held beliefs out of my legaislation. however, we all know full well how that goes for other hot button issues too.
I completely agree. And I think that a big argument right now is the moral one. People that have not done much research to see that this isn't the "devil's plant" that they grew up learning to fear through propoganda. The pros and cons need to be observed from a non-"right or wrong" standpoint. As it is now, my choices are being jeopardized by this prohibition. I know some of the benifits that would serve me and many people well, but am unable to legally pursue those options. I want to be able to grow marijuana for personal consumption, not for selling, not to give to children, etc. The best way of me effecting that outcome is by me educating people on the benifits of legalizing marijuana. After people know both sides of the argument, then they can form their own opinions, my job is done at that point.
I agree--getting the subject matter out is the key and the way we all learn. I'm very happy when people are able to maintain their perspective and put it forth on an even playing field of reason, past the emotional debates. I only see from my perspective, and I'm willing to listen to other perspectives when there is a case being presented.
A key point is that emotional intelligence is very pertinent on any topic when it's integrated with reason and handled in a healthy way. When emotions spill out in unhealthy ways it complicates and undermines one's purposes.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
"coincidental; unexpected" is one of the listings for meaning.
I hate to be an ass but:
Usage Note: The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply "coincidental" or "improbable," in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly.
That quote is from the same page you linked me. :-)
If you use Dictionary.com definitions enough, you'll find it's not a terribly good reference.
In any case, it's cool to have someone nearby posting here. We've probably crossed paths. :-)
Again, you are not talking about my stance. You are talking about what you think my stance is.
how is it not your stance? you say marijuana should not be legalized and should remain illegal. as support, you point to its various harmful effects. i have repeatedly asked you why you feel these harmful effects merit the harsher stance towards pot from a legal standpoint than other harmful substances. you still have no answer. and if im only talking about what i think your stance is, why don't you correct me and tell me what your stance really is? because i see only a few possibilities here and it seems to me you're afraid to own your views. either pot is worse (and i'd like you to tell me why you think so) and does deserve harsher sanctions. or pot is the same, in which case i am curious why you feel it nonetheless deserves harsher sanctions. both of these have to do very intimately with the debate at hand... why is pot so bad it must remain illegal?
It sounds like you've got some issues with the going knowledge on co-dependency and substance abuse. I'll let you work out your own issues.
I'm fully aware that I have issues I am unconscious of that will unfold as my life progresses. It's you (and apparently Drowned Out) who have elevated me to the position of arrogance or "perfection" with your personal and erroneous judgments. It's always valid for me to share my point of view, and to present information I have learned through experience, or have found through research--it's called being *me*. When you don't get how balanced and fair that is, it shows me your imbalanced perspective.
so it is not arrogant or condescending for you to decide from a few posts than i have issues, am ignorant of current knowledge, and am imbalanced? come on now...
it is valid for you to share your point of view, which is why i keep asking for more information about your point of view and the reasons for it... yet you keep dodging the answers.
Completely fair with us "dictionary types who are known to focus in on minutiae.
That quote is from the same page you linked me. :-)
If you use Dictionary.com definitions enough, you'll find it's not a terribly good reference.
In any case, it's cool to have someone nearby posting here. We've probably crossed paths. :-)
To me, in this context, irony represents the odd twists and turns in life that are unusual, identifying reality from what is linear and orderly and how it "should" be, so I still see it as ironic.
I actually like dictionary.com and do use it a lot because they cite numerous other dictionary sources.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
so it is not arrogant or condescending for you to decide from a few posts than i have issues, am ignorant of current knowledge, and am imbalanced? come on now...
it is valid for you to share your point of view, which is why i keep asking for more information about your point of view and the reasons for it... yet you keep dodging the answers.
You decided to tell us you have issues by acting them out with accusations and undermining behaviour.
The codependent behaviour of people not seeing where my arguments end and where their's begin are spread throughout this thread.
The minute anyone steps off the even playing field by degrading others, or by exalting others, they demonstrate their imbalance for all to see.
When you willfully choose to act degrading, insulting and undermining, there is no way in the world I'm helping you out. You then represent exactly what I'm working for the antithesis of. I'm focused on the solution to codependent problems. I do not support the dis-eased dynamics that take place by in any way condoning such behaviour. You make it very clear that you are willfully choosing, and are not looking to act any other way. Therefore the consequences to your actions fall squarely on you.
The world is in chaos because people project their baggage on others and give themselves licence to blindly treat others any way they want. I don't accept it; it's completely on those who do so.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Ok...after reading angelica's reply to soulsinging, I HAD to get back into this...not only because of your (angelica) refusal to answer a direct question, but because I noticed that you are Canadian, which makes the dialogue below so much more exasperating to me....this is typical of how this entire thread has played out:
angelica:
Bottom line: You can do whatever you want. However, if you seek to change the laws, you need the cooperation of many--millions..
Drowned Out:
What I'm saying is that, depending on which sources you cite, the majority does support decriminalization, and I feel that if they hadn't been subjected to 30+ years of intense propaganda, they would probably support legalization instead.
angelica:
You want your purposes, which is to have marijuana legalized. I want my purposes--to decriminalize marijuana or leave it as is (like the seeming majority of people). We have two different views. They both stand. You see things one way; I see them another. We have a disagreement. What happens is that as Saturnal says,we have a majority rule. That's the way it works.
angelica:
I'm talking about reality of the majority. I'm talking about who people are now, including their currently existing perspectives. And despite any "what if" scenarios, the true and real majority does not support legalization
angelica (AFTER I POSTED THE CDN POLL RESULTS):
You obviously have not given up your purposes. The majority does not support yours and therefore it is not the norm or law.
Drowned Out:
What about when the majority does support my purpose, as it does in Canada? How do you react to this?
angelica:
It's obvious there is major non-communication happening. I've explained all my points. They are in this thread to reread should any point not be clear. It's obvious to me that we're on a different wavelength. So be it.
Ok...after reading angelica's reply to soulsinging, I HAD to get back into this...not only because of your (angelica) refusal to answer a direct question, but because I noticed that you are Canadian, which makes the dialogue below so much more exasperating to me....
What direct question are you referring to?
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I dare you....both of you...to find one place in this thread--or any thread on this board, for that matter--where I have personally said marijuana is more dangerous than any other substance.
i dont think that you did. but you DID say marijuana should be illegal and i asked why you feel that way given that you seem to agree that marijuana is not more dangerous than other substances... why, then, does it deserve harsher sanctions?
Oh, that's right soulsinging and dream....you CAN'T find where I've personally said marijuana is worse than any other vice, because I've NOT said it. Ever.
nor do i claim you did. what i have repeatedly asked is why you DID say marijuana should be illegal, since you here seem to freely admit that it is no more dangerous than other legal substances. i have been consistently asking you to resolve this disconnect. you cannot or will not do it.
To me this is certainly suggests that you agree with soulsinging, when he was falsely and delusionally disputing an argument I did not make.
When you jump on that bandwagon, you also "suggest" by your behaviour and adamant support, that you are falsely and delusionally disputing an argument that I did not make.
seems to me you're the one reading arguments that are not there. i have been quite clear about what i am discussing. nor have i ever accused you of saying pot is worse. from the beginning (ill pose it for the 3rd time, maybe one of these will be in language you can understand), i have been asking why you feel marijuana should be illegal when you freely admit it is no more dangerous that other, legal substances that produce the same effects by which you are so concerned (maladaptive addictive behaviors).
No, I didn't miss your point. I read it over and over in this thread along with the similar ones. I merely support a different view. Both views stand.
clearly. you support the view that marijuana should be illegal. i keep asking you to explain your stance. is this not what the moving train is about? the reasons you have given support your view, i am merely asking why those reasons only apply to marijuana and not other substances that produce the same problems. there must be something different about marijuana, no? and i am wondering what you think it is.
That's because that is not my argument. I'm not trying to prove why it should be legal. That's not at all my style. That's what you and soulsinging keep erroneously assuming despite all of my protestations to the contrary.
you're calling me delusional? i'm well aware you're not trying to prove it should be legal. i've never once thought, assumed, considered, perceived, etc this to be the case. the exact opposite. you've been arguing it should be ILlegal. i've been asking why? repeatedly. you still have not answered.
I agree--getting the subject matter out is the key and the way we all learn. I'm very happy when people are able to maintain their perspective and put it forth on an even playing field of reason, past the emotional debates. I only see from my perspective, and I'm willing to listen to other perspectives when there is a case being presented.
A key point is that emotional intelligence is very pertinent on any topic when it's integrated with reason and handled in a healthy way. When emotions spill out in unhealthy ways it complicates and undermines one's purposes.
how come every debate with ahnimus turns into a free will debate, and every debate with you turns into an emotional intelligence debate?
the one outlined in the 5-6 posts directly above this one, and the last half dozen i have made over the last few pages. the one about why marijuana is so distinctive from other substances that can cause the same maladaptive behaviors you are concerned about that it deserves to be outlawed while the others do not.
soulsinging, kindly show me where I said marijuana should be illegal.
If I'm correct, I believe that I said I don't support legalizing it. That's very different than saying it should be illegal. Number one, it's different because I'm talking about my personal view and what I will or will not support. Objectively, I don't care if it becomes legal. There is a big difference between my opinion, and what I believe should be imposed on others. I'm talking about my own choice and that I cannot make a choice to condone something that I don't condone--therefore I cannot personally support legalization. And therefore, given you now know the details, you can see how the whole alcohol argument doesn't apply to me. What I am specifically against--and which I've said over and over--is supporting other people doing damage to themselves. I'm concerned with my personal decision and what that means to me. I'm not concerned with laws, and legislature--only that I do not condone something I cannot condone for ethical purposes.
I don't necessarily think it should be illegal. That's the problem with putting words in people's mouths. I'm very concise about what I do say. The minute you turn it around and put it in a different context, your argument becomes about what you've misconstrued, rather than what I've said.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
soulsinging, kindly show me where I said marijuana should be illegal.
If I'm correct, I believe that I said I don't support legalizing it. That's very different than saying it should be illegal. Number one, it's different because I'm talking about my personal view and what I will or will not support. Objectively, I don't care if it becomes legal. There is a big difference between my opinion, and what I believe should be imposed on others. I'm talking about my own choice and that I cannot make a choice to condone something that I don't condone--therefore I cannot personally support legalization. And therefore, given you now know the details, you can see how the whole alcohol argument doesn't apply to me. What I am specifically against--and which I've said over and over--is supporting other people doing damage to themselves. I'm concerned with my personal decision and what that means to me. I'm not concerned with laws, and legislature--only that I do not condone something I cannot condone for ethical purposes.
I don't necessarily think it should be illegal. That's the problem with putting words in people's mouths. I'm very concise about what I do say. The minute you turn it around and put it in a different context, your argument becomes about what you've misconstrued, rather than what I've said.
i completely understand what you mean. it happens to me a lot here.
This isn't the land of opportunity, it's the land of competition.
Comments
sweet bejeebus! EVERYTHING else he said makes sense! to me!
and damn, you throw around words like ;ddelusional' way too easy...but you throw around a lot of language i think too easily...but that's a WHOLE other topic....and HONEST, i have ZERO interest in EVEr discussing it with you.
i don't know why i bothered....b/c your entire stance to me is ridiculous honestly. you have your sources/rationale/blah/blah/blah. i wasn't getting into the semantics of it all...i agree with conor's general assessment, thus why isaid so! so he made one gaffe....whatever...i hardly consider it 'delsuional'...and if it makes me 'delusional' in YOUR EYES..i am fine with that too.
yeesh. you're right though, our debate is for enitrely different things..so yea....hahaha....what a waste of time, for all of us really.
now i am ALL about this train of thought here:
and the real irony is i rarely smoke.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729_pf.html
THC is also the most benificial chemical compound found to this day in preventing the brain deteriation that leads to Alzheimers disease. Here is one of many articles on that. Now, seeing as how my family has a history of Alzheimers, shouldn't I be able to legally consume the best drug at stalling it? I feel that is something that I should be able to decide for myself without big brother fucking intruding.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/02/050224111638.htm
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Wait.
are you my boss?
really, I'm working. multitasking
delusional:
an act or instance of deluding.
2. the state of being deluded.
3. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur.
4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
"coincidental; unexpected" is one of the listings for meaning.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
so all the rest of 'this here'....bah...all a moot point, who cares! give me a person who knows how to relax, enjoy life...an open perspective...and hang and chill together. tis a beautiful thing. the fact that one can light up in the NL in a coffeehouse, out in public...such a degree of social as well as legal acceptance, and it is a non-issue. while i don't partake often at all.....i enjoy the ritual, and yes, the company of those who do indulge...many have a view of life and enjoyment that is quite aligned with how i see life too.
to me, the netherlands is an excellent example of a thriving and healthy culture...and an excellent quality of life and high standard of living, quite *successful*...speaks volumes.
so yes, a joint as art. :cool:
btw - i never knew you could make tea from it. i LOVE tea! hmmmmm. nice! although as mentioned, i do enjoy the social/ritualistic nature of sharing some smoke.
excellent post!
i agree...keep your morality or personally held beliefs out of my legaislation. however, we all know full well how that goes for other hot button issues too.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
A key point is that emotional intelligence is very pertinent on any topic when it's integrated with reason and handled in a healthy way. When emotions spill out in unhealthy ways it complicates and undermines one's purposes.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I hate to be an ass but:
That quote is from the same page you linked me. :-)
If you use Dictionary.com definitions enough, you'll find it's not a terribly good reference.
In any case, it's cool to have someone nearby posting here. We've probably crossed paths. :-)
how is it not your stance? you say marijuana should not be legalized and should remain illegal. as support, you point to its various harmful effects. i have repeatedly asked you why you feel these harmful effects merit the harsher stance towards pot from a legal standpoint than other harmful substances. you still have no answer. and if im only talking about what i think your stance is, why don't you correct me and tell me what your stance really is? because i see only a few possibilities here and it seems to me you're afraid to own your views. either pot is worse (and i'd like you to tell me why you think so) and does deserve harsher sanctions. or pot is the same, in which case i am curious why you feel it nonetheless deserves harsher sanctions. both of these have to do very intimately with the debate at hand... why is pot so bad it must remain illegal?
so it is not arrogant or condescending for you to decide from a few posts than i have issues, am ignorant of current knowledge, and am imbalanced? come on now...
it is valid for you to share your point of view, which is why i keep asking for more information about your point of view and the reasons for it... yet you keep dodging the answers.
To me, in this context, irony represents the odd twists and turns in life that are unusual, identifying reality from what is linear and orderly and how it "should" be, so I still see it as ironic.
I actually like dictionary.com and do use it a lot because they cite numerous other dictionary sources.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
The codependent behaviour of people not seeing where my arguments end and where their's begin are spread throughout this thread.
The minute anyone steps off the even playing field by degrading others, or by exalting others, they demonstrate their imbalance for all to see.
When you willfully choose to act degrading, insulting and undermining, there is no way in the world I'm helping you out. You then represent exactly what I'm working for the antithesis of. I'm focused on the solution to codependent problems. I do not support the dis-eased dynamics that take place by in any way condoning such behaviour. You make it very clear that you are willfully choosing, and are not looking to act any other way. Therefore the consequences to your actions fall squarely on you.
The world is in chaos because people project their baggage on others and give themselves licence to blindly treat others any way they want. I don't accept it; it's completely on those who do so.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
angelica:
Bottom line: You can do whatever you want. However, if you seek to change the laws, you need the cooperation of many--millions..
Drowned Out:
What I'm saying is that, depending on which sources you cite, the majority does support decriminalization, and I feel that if they hadn't been subjected to 30+ years of intense propaganda, they would probably support legalization instead.
angelica:
You want your purposes, which is to have marijuana legalized. I want my purposes--to decriminalize marijuana or leave it as is (like the seeming majority of people). We have two different views. They both stand. You see things one way; I see them another. We have a disagreement. What happens is that as Saturnal says,we have a majority rule. That's the way it works.
angelica:
I'm talking about reality of the majority. I'm talking about who people are now, including their currently existing perspectives. And despite any "what if" scenarios, the true and real majority does not support legalization
Drowned Out:
http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/16300
http://frankdiscussion.netfirms.com/info_statistics.html
In Canada (my home country), LEGALIZATION (not decrim) IS ALREADY SUPPORTED BY THE MAJORITY. (THIS SHOULD HAVE READ, "OUR COUNTRY" )
...... Under the current system, you are not giving up your purposes, but I am...how is that not a double standard?
angelica (AFTER I POSTED THE CDN POLL RESULTS):
You obviously have not given up your purposes. The majority does not support yours and therefore it is not the norm or law.
Drowned Out:
What about when the majority does support my purpose, as it does in Canada? How do you react to this?
angelica:
It's obvious there is major non-communication happening. I've explained all my points. They are in this thread to reread should any point not be clear. It's obvious to me that we're on a different wavelength. So be it.
I work in the office building behind the soccer fields, and work out in the Columbia Street Good Life. But I live way on the north east side.
And I'm a pretty regular customer of Ming's Chinese Food.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
i dont think that you did. but you DID say marijuana should be illegal and i asked why you feel that way given that you seem to agree that marijuana is not more dangerous than other substances... why, then, does it deserve harsher sanctions?
nor do i claim you did. what i have repeatedly asked is why you DID say marijuana should be illegal, since you here seem to freely admit that it is no more dangerous than other legal substances. i have been consistently asking you to resolve this disconnect. you cannot or will not do it.
seems to me you're the one reading arguments that are not there. i have been quite clear about what i am discussing. nor have i ever accused you of saying pot is worse. from the beginning (ill pose it for the 3rd time, maybe one of these will be in language you can understand), i have been asking why you feel marijuana should be illegal when you freely admit it is no more dangerous that other, legal substances that produce the same effects by which you are so concerned (maladaptive addictive behaviors).
clearly. you support the view that marijuana should be illegal. i keep asking you to explain your stance. is this not what the moving train is about? the reasons you have given support your view, i am merely asking why those reasons only apply to marijuana and not other substances that produce the same problems. there must be something different about marijuana, no? and i am wondering what you think it is.
you're calling me delusional? i'm well aware you're not trying to prove it should be legal. i've never once thought, assumed, considered, perceived, etc this to be the case. the exact opposite. you've been arguing it should be ILlegal. i've been asking why? repeatedly. you still have not answered.
how come every debate with ahnimus turns into a free will debate, and every debate with you turns into an emotional intelligence debate?
the one outlined in the 5-6 posts directly above this one, and the last half dozen i have made over the last few pages. the one about why marijuana is so distinctive from other substances that can cause the same maladaptive behaviors you are concerned about that it deserves to be outlawed while the others do not.
:-)
"Dude you said something, then a few posts later, I said something and then, like, you got any chips?"
If I'm correct, I believe that I said I don't support legalizing it. That's very different than saying it should be illegal. Number one, it's different because I'm talking about my personal view and what I will or will not support. Objectively, I don't care if it becomes legal. There is a big difference between my opinion, and what I believe should be imposed on others. I'm talking about my own choice and that I cannot make a choice to condone something that I don't condone--therefore I cannot personally support legalization. And therefore, given you now know the details, you can see how the whole alcohol argument doesn't apply to me. What I am specifically against--and which I've said over and over--is supporting other people doing damage to themselves. I'm concerned with my personal decision and what that means to me. I'm not concerned with laws, and legislature--only that I do not condone something I cannot condone for ethical purposes.
I don't necessarily think it should be illegal. That's the problem with putting words in people's mouths. I'm very concise about what I do say. The minute you turn it around and put it in a different context, your argument becomes about what you've misconstrued, rather than what I've said.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!