Does this make me lesser of a man? Does this make me an evil man? Does this make me an immoral man? Does this make me a man who belongs in prison? Does it make me a sinner? Does it make God love me any less?
<T>
Does it make you a more moral person than I
Posts: 2752 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. no, because you are quite simply a man, I usually ignore lesser or greater when discussing people 2. no because I don't think anyone is so evil as to merit the title evil man 3. yes if you smoke it around people who get sick from the smoke or the smell, or smoke it irresponsibly in other ways that might hurt people. I generally consider harming people immoral, and there's no higher purpose in the personal gratification of smoking pot to justify it 4.maybe if you take the making people sick with it thing to extremes, or do other things because of smoking pot that harm people 5. no.
posted
Please explain to me why you answere the way you did. No, doesn't give much much insight into why you believe so.
Posts: 2752 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
It certainly makes you a criminal. Frankly, its not up to the individual to decide which laws are just and which are unjust. If it was then we ought replace government with anarchy. Furthermore, you're probably funding murderers by buying your drugs. This money is used soley for the purpose of enriching and encouraging murderers.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
In a democracy, laws are made by the people, so to a certain extent, it IS up to the people to decide which laws are just and which are unjust. And not all drug sellers are murderers, nor do all drug users have to buy it, they could just grow their own.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would say none of the above. I do not think that marijuana is any worse then alcohol, When either are used in moderation, I see it as being ok. It is a potentially irresponsible thing to do though. For example, if you have a family that is relying on you for money, and you get put in jail for marijuana, you are hurting your family.
I have a sort of unique perspective on this. If you really want to know about it you can IM me.
Posts: 1015 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
1) Yes 2) no 3) Yes, on this issue 4) No 5) Up to god if he exists to decide 6) Up to god if he exists to decide. 7) On this issue, yes
Posts: 4112 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Let me rephrase, its not up to the people to decide which laws should be followed and which should not be. Unless Thor's growing it himself (which makes him guilty of an even greater crime) he's buying it from someone. That person may or may not be growing it him or herself and its likely that the money Thor uses to buy his marijuana is at some point being used to fund murderers.
Posts: 3446 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Does this make me lesser of a man? No more than drinking alcohol or smoking does. And thats not at all.
Does this make me an evil man? Again no more than smoking or drinking alcohol. If you were to harm someone else while under its influence than it'd be up for debate.
Does this make me an immoral man?' Same as above.
Does this make me a man who belongs in prison? According to me? No. According to the american government? Yes, but then the government is stupid like that on a lot of things.
Does it make me a sinner? I wouldn't know, I'm atheist.
Does it make God love me any less? Again, wouldn't know I'm athiest.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In response to NFL, how is growing it himself an even greater crime than using it? In what sense? A moral one or a legalistic one?
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
nfl-a quotation from Gandhi "Civil disobedience becomes a sacred duty when the state has become lawless or corrupt. And a citizen who barters with such a state shares in its corruption and lawlessness."
Now while I would not apply this to marijuana, it certainly ought to be the place of a person to decide which laws to obey and which not to, if the laws are harming people.
Posts: 3493 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Law isn't harming anyone, its preventing people from harming themselves and from spreading that harm to others. If you say its up to individuals to decide which laws to follow then why have any laws? Who are we to draw the line between harming oneself and harming others?
quote: Law isn't harming anyone, its preventing people from harming themselves and from spreading that harm to others. If you say its up to individuals to decide which laws to follow then why have any laws? Who are we to draw the line between harming oneself and harming others?
What bothers me about these sets of laws, is that marajuana is illegal, when alcohol and smoking are not. If that is truely the intent of the law, to protect one from harming oneself, and from harming others, then why are alcohol and smoking legal? There are far more deaths from drunk driving accidents and drunken murders then I think there have ever been from marajuana. Indeed this might be a function of a certain lack of avalibility of marajuana, but I think we can agree that alcohol is at least as harmful to its users and anyone else in the vicinity.
Becuase alcohol is legal and marajuana is illegal, it leads me to suspect that there is far more to the law than simply protecting someone from oneself and protecting others.
Also, it is not really the governments job to prevent us from harming ourselves. That is our own decision, and well with in our rights as citizens. It is its job to protect us from harming each other and trampling on each others rights. So the question is really, do marajuana (or alcohol) cross that line of cause enough harm to those other than those choosing to use it to merit its being outlawed?
Edit: that last paragraph is my opinion on how the government should be, and how the constitution intended it to be.
posted
It doesn't matter whether or not government should create laws designed to prevent people from harming themselves, it only matters whether or not they do create those laws. Since they do, everyone should follow them. Now I never said that you shouldn't work to repeal those laws, but since they haven't people ought to follow them. As far as alcohol and tobacco are concerned I would agree that they are somewhat hypocritical, which is a reason why you should encourage your representatives to change the laws, or vote for the Green Party. I would personally be all the happier if they were both illegal, but there are two problems. The first, is that alcohol is used in religious ceremonies by Catholics and Jews. The second is that since they have been legal it is extremely difficult to make them illegal because of their popularity. You may say that's unfair, I say its reality so either abide by the law and deal with it, or try to change it, don't become a criminal.
posted
Jutsa: He is allowed to change his mind. If he was having a hard time quitting would you beating him up about it help? No.
Posts: 1015 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: It doesn't matter whether or not government should create laws designed to prevent people from harming themselves, it only matters whether or not they do create those laws. Since they do, everyone should follow them. Now I never said that you shouldn't work to repeal those laws, but since they haven't people ought to follow them. As far as alcohol and tobacco are concerned I would agree that they are somewhat hypocritical, which is a reason why you should encourage your representatives to change the laws, or vote for the Green Party. I would personally be all the happier if they were both illegal, but there are two problems. The first, is that alcohol is used in religious ceremonies by Catholics and Jews. The second is that since they have been legal it is extremely difficult to make them illegal because of their popularity. You may say that's unfair, I say its reality so either abide by the law and deal with it, or try to change it, don't become a criminal.
Well yes, I agree with you that we should work to change such laws, but that illegalizing alcohol would be dificult... and personally I'm actually more in favor of going the other way and legalizing marijuana. But on the issue of changing it: it is unfortunate, but it often takes civil disobedience to change laws. It often takes people showing they have no respect for a law, and bluntly breaking it to get it changed. Personally I would do none of these drugs, never have. But I think its in a persons right, if they do it responsibly and don't harm others, to do them.
posted
I would say that if you have something that controls your life as much as I'm guessing marijuana does, it's time to take back that control. Furthermore, I have a major objection to legalizing marijuana, for the simple fact that I think the majority of people who want that smoke the stuff and I have a hard time accepting the idea of having what is legal or not being determined by people who take advantage of mind-altering chemicals (Whatever it is in marijuana that makes you mellow or stoned or whatever is ultimately a chemical that causes a chemical reaction) There, that's my 2 cents.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and on the alcohol thing, I'm for making the stuff illegal, but it's been tried before, and didn't work because there was too much of our country already addicted to the stuff, some physically, some only psychologically (The guy who just drinks "casually" is considered psychologically addicted, because he can't wind his day down without that glass of wine or two. Take that away for a few days and he's fine, unlike the physical addiction which can take much longer and I think has major side effects)
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Its not a matter of who wants it legal, its a matter of whether or not the rest of us who don't care to do it can take away the right of the people who want to do to do it. And that sentense is really long and complex, but its the best I can do this time of night.
Posts: 3295 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Its not a matter of who wants it legal, its a matter of whether or not the rest of us who don't care to do it can take away the right of the people who want to do to do it.
Honestly, I think the people who are capable of seeing the full consequences of an action have full right to ban that action if they determine it to be unsafe. Whether or not that ban sticks depends on the number of people who don't care, or disagree. That's called a democracy.
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
if it is what you want to do and you are responsible and respectful I see no reason why you shouldn't do it. Marijuna doesn't bother me. Now heroine, speed, crack. That bothers me.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not everyone who smokes marijuana is consumed by it. I know teachers, doctors, bankers, that smoke occasionally, and who are fully capable of fufilling all of their obligations.
Posts: 1015 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Because you resolved a while back that pot was ripping away your ambition and clouding your mind, getting in the way of what you wanted to do, and resolved to quit.
If you are backsliding, don't try to cast it as some noble blow against the Man; just admit you're weaker than you thought.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes yes, and people can also drop their marijuana habit any time they like. But actually, that's not what I meant : My point was that, while you believe in a set of religious doctrines, they have a major influence on your life. Now, you may believe that is a good thing, and marijuana's control of someone's life is a bad thing, and it's not a totally indefensible belief. But you cannot condemn something, as Boris was doing, merely for having control over your life. You have to look at whether it is a control for good or for bad.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: people can also drop their marijuana habit any time they like
Religion doesn't cause a chemical reaction that causes your body to need Religion in order to maintain homeostasis. Please stop making a comparison that doesn't exist.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Here we go. I've also read a study in New Scientist showing that strongly religious people show the same patterns of dopamine changes and brain activities as those addicted to gambling. Unfortunately, the cheap bastards won't let me search their print archives without signing up for a subscription, so I can't link that one. Which makes it rather useless as a source; I'm just trying to explain where my assertion in the previous post came from.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Indeed that is true. I note that marijuana has no physical withdrawal symptoms. I think, then, that comparison to religion (or, as you say, porn) is entirely justified.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
1. Yes. Real men do alcohol and nicotine. 2. Drugs are bad, mmmkay? 3. See #2. 4. Marijuana is a vicious racket with its arms around your children. Think of the children! 5. Which religion? Mr. Anslinger's? DuPont Chemicals? Bob Marley's? 6. God hates you. 7. Marijuana is an evil weed. It lowers ambition. Sorry buddy, but in this nation our god is gold, not green, because money can buy happiness in the form of prescription drugs. A plant that anyone can grow with minimal investment is bad for the economy.
Seriously though, it is easier to deal with the crap of straightedgers (or alcoholics, tweakers, junkies, smokers of nicotine, etc.) if you just smile, agree that it is a horrible thing that ruins the lives of everyone who uses it, and cheerfully continue using anyway whenever you feel like it.
What made you pick it back up?
Posts: 281 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
Only in the sense that, when you are using it you voluntarily give up part of your self-control. And after having used it, you have destroyed brain cells, which affects your overall ability to think, reason, and police yourself long-term.
Does this make me an evil man?
Only in the sense that you are causing yourself damage, which is an evil act.
Does this make me an immoral man?
Only in the sense that you are breaking the law, and you are causing yourself damage, both of which are immoral acts to some extent.
Does this make me a man who belongs in prison?
Not in my opinion. Alcoholics damage themselves at least as much, sometimes more.
Does it make me a sinner?
Yes. God says "Thou Shalt Not Kill," and you are killing yourself by using this substance.
Does it make God love me any less?
No. He loves you the same, no matter what. He doesn't give us commandments so He can hate us when we don't keep them. He gives us commandments, because things will go so much better for us if we keep them.
Posts: 524 | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
The law is irrelevant to questions of morality and/or ethics. It is immoral to smoke marijuana around minors if you are more than a year or two older than they. It is immoral to smoke anything inside someone's house without their permission. It is immoral to smoke around anyone unable to understand (or at least repeat prohibition propaganda) the effects of secondhand cannabis smoke. If you have dependents, it is as wrong to put marijuana before them as it is to put most other things before them. There is nothing wrong with disobeying the law.
Tyranny of the majority (who may or may not be able to see the full consequences of their actions) is still tyranny. The concept of a crime to which all parties concerned gave informed consent is absurd.
Gandhi was wrong. The only duty everyone has in this case is the duty they always have, which is to not initiate force against anyone. In other words, if you actively and intentionally support laws against marijuana (or any other drug barring antibiotics), you are committing an immoral act. While defying immoral laws might be a noble act, it is not wrong to stand aside. Nor is "civil" disobedience any more or less noble than uncivil disobedience, although one or the other may be more effective in a given situation.
If you honestly believe that being put in prison for cannabis is less harmful than smoking it... well, pot never gave anyone AIDS, but prison rape certainly does. The state has no right to keep people from harming themselves anyway.
There is a difference between a lie and an incorrect assumption. That said, if one made a claim they no longer intend to fill, the claim should be retracted via the same medium if reasonably possible.
"manipulate people with it"? How so? Last I heard, no one holds a gun to the head of the people buying it or any other drug... if you want to take someone's money by force, why give them anything in return? That does not make economic sense. Selling an accurately labeled product to adults is not wrong. While I suppose it is possible to trick someone into unwittingly and/or unintentionally consuming cannabis, why?
Why is being addicted to something (necessarily) a bad thing? Everyone alive is physiologically dependent on food, water, and oxygen, all of which are capable of altering one's mental processes when used as directed. Psychological addiction is a scary way of saying that people would rather do things they enjoy.
Marijuana, DMT, psilocybin mushrooms (4-HO-DMT, its phosphate ester, and other related chemicals), and lysergic acids in the form of morning glory seeds are all used as sacraments by various religions. They are illegal. Peyote and DPT are also sacraments, but are legal only for members of those religions. They tried hard to prevent that from happening. Salvia is yet another sacrament, and those bastards at the DEA are trying to get that made illegal too. Oh wait, only your religion gets its drugs. I see.
Marijuana is just marijuana, more so now than in earlier decades. A dealer who laced his cannabis with something else would not be able to make a profit at normal prices.
Damage is relative. People who donate a kidney to a loved one are damaging themselves. Sometimes, the trade-off is worth it. Marijuana is one of the safest drugs known to man. Smoking it (as opposed to eating or vaporizing it) might possibly give one lung cancer. Luckily THC itself helps to prevent cancer. If death was avoidable, it might make sense to avoid all pleasurable activities that take a few seconds, minutes, weeks, months, or even years off the end. It is not. People die in car crashes every year.
All you anti-drug people have fun driving your car, swilling down your aspartame, processed sugar, caffeine, fat, and sodium, while talking on your cell phones.
Posts: 281 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I think, then, that comparison to religion (or, as you say, porn) is entirely justified.
Religion is too broad a category. It's like saying all drugs are the same. "Religion" is not a specific behavior - it could mean anything from nightly Mass to morning prayers to church twice a year to a dance in the moonlight once a month.
On the other hand, smoking marijuana is a very specific act. Your original statement was wrong (and rude, by the way) because it was way, way too broad.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Does this make me lesser of a man? Only when you are using it. A man who has artificially altered his personality and judgement is, at that moment, less than his true self. Does this make me an evil man? No, I don't believe in evil men. Does this make me an immoral man? Yes, it is immoral to impair your good judgement. It might lead you to do other immoral things, when you are not yourself. Does this make me a man who belongs in prison? Yes, under my understanding of the law. . Does it make me a sinner? Probably. That's up to God. Does it make God love me any less? No. Nothing can make God love you less.
posted
Drugs alter perspectives, emotions, and priorities. Not judgement (except as expressed via priorities), and not personalities... well, not without a conscious effort on the part of the user. They do tend to accelerate already present trends, but the potential is within the person, not the drug. They might reveal aspects of the user's mind to them and/or others. With new knowledge comes a reevaluation of previous estimations, often leading to different results.
You are always yourself on drugs. Always. Anyone who claims otherwise is making excuses for someone. Often they try to excuse their own actions. Other times they want a scapegoat, because that is easier than admitting someone they loved, admired, emulated, or believed had it in them to do such a horrible thing. Sorry, but your or their heart is as black as anyone else's.
Less than your true self? Sometimes. Just as often drugs make you more than your true self... Windows is the default operating system for home and office PCs. It is not necessarily the best.
Posts: 281 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
If we're going to be compared to operating systems, taking drugs is not like installing linux on your home machine, it's like screwing with the hardware on your computer, or maybe just deleting system memory.
posted
To someone only familiar with Windows, Linux from a command line would be cumbersome. It is also less useful as a gaming platform. (I am not trying to imply that sobriety is an inferior state of mind for everyone. If it works for you, great. It is not a superior platform for everyone.)
If you wish to make a hardware analogy, drugs are similar to overclocking the computer, or adding a TV tuner. Useful for recreation as well as "important" tasks, but the possibility to break something is there. The more you read about it and ask questions of those more experienced, the greater the likelihood of having a computer better suited to your needs.
posted
katharina, would you like me to compare the negative aspects of a specific religion to the specific drug marijuana? You can pick the religion. KoM seems to be pretty intelligent; too intelligent to single out the religion of the original "control your life" poster.
How about the other way around? Comparing "drugs" to "religion"?
Claiming that a person's drug of choice has control over their life is just as rude as claiming that their faith does.
Posts: 281 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, pick a specific activity that's addicting. A meeting, prayers, knocking on doors, meditation, reading the scriptures, handing out flyers - those are specific activities.
In your analogy, religion:drugs::praying:smoking marijuana.
If you want legitimacy for your analogy at all, be specific.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Taunt]](graemlins/taunt.gif)
