yukichigai
Diamond Member
- Apr 23, 2003
- 6,404
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: Mickey21
Sometimes just watching threads gives me the most pleasure...yukichigai
I come from Nevada; you're lucky I don't charge by the hour.
Originally posted by: Mickey21
Sometimes just watching threads gives me the most pleasure...yukichigai
Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
My point is that there is NO comparison at work here. People simply claim that because they are both drugs and both of their purposes is to mess you up that they should both be legal, simply on the basis that one is legal. This is faulty reasoning. Actually, the logical way to go would be to make both illegal since both cause more harm than good. I am not saying that we should do that. This is actually the reason why the reasoning is faulty...because you can use the same arguement to persuade someone to go either way. You could say that becauase one is legal, both should be legal. Or you could say that since one is legal and the other is illegal, both should be illegal. You get no where. You're right back where you started. That's why it's faulty. Both sides are using the same argument to make 2 completly opposite statements and both are perfectly valid. Fallacies were thought up to prevent this sort of thing because it becomes a huge mess (like we are in now). If you want further clarification, I can try to explain more.
Quite the contrary... I want them ALL to be legal, subject to appropriate regulation, of course.Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
His point is that instead of bitching about why cannabis is illegal, you should bitch that other drugs are legal.Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
XZeroII,
1. You're stupid and should learn to spell and use basic grammar.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
My point is that there is NO comparison at work here. People simply claim that because they are both drugs and both of their purposes is to mess you up that they should both be legal, simply on the basis that one is legal. This is faulty reasoning. Actually, the logical way to go would be to make both illegal since both cause more harm than good. I am not saying that we should do that. This is actually the reason why the reasoning is faulty...because you can use the same arguement to persuade someone to go either way. You could say that becauase one is legal, both should be legal. Or you could say that since one is legal and the other is illegal, both should be illegal. You get no where. You're right back where you started. That's why it's faulty. Both sides are using the same argument to make 2 completly opposite statements and both are perfectly valid. Fallacies were thought up to prevent this sort of thing because it becomes a huge mess (like we are in now). If you want further clarification, I can try to explain more.
Why not? Where does need come into it? Do we need to stamp out the threat of ice cream too? Do you ever get in a car and just take a trip for the sheer pleasure of taking a trip? Should that be illegal too? Should we make every single thing that we don't need illegal? If so, I think you should know that basic human needs are a mud hut to live in, some animal hide to wear, and some gruel to eat. That may be the way you want us to live, but I won't allow that.Originally posted by: XZeroII
I'm sorry, but I was not clear. I am talking about people who are using marijuana to get high. I know that there are medical uses out there, but you are not looking at the context of which I'm speaking. I'm saying that people should not have the right to just "toke up" for the sole purpose of getting high. Those people do not need it. I specifically mentioned smoking it because the medical uses can be given in other forms that does not involve smoking. I'm sorry for the confusion.Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
My point is that there is NO comparison at work here. People simply claim that because they are both drugs and both of their purposes is to mess you up that they should both be legal, simply on the basis that one is legal. This is faulty reasoning. Actually, the logical way to go would be to make both illegal since both cause more harm than good. I am not saying that we should do that. This is actually the reason why the reasoning is faulty...because you can use the same arguement to persuade someone to go either way. You could say that becauase one is legal, both should be legal. Or you could say that since one is legal and the other is illegal, both should be illegal. You get no where. You're right back where you started. That's why it's faulty. Both sides are using the same argument to make 2 completly opposite statements and both are perfectly valid. Fallacies were thought up to prevent this sort of thing because it becomes a huge mess (like we are in now). If you want further clarification, I can try to explain more.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
I'm sorry, but I was not clear. I am talking about people who are using marijuana to get high. I know that there are medical uses out there, but you are not looking at the context of which I'm speaking. I'm saying that people should not have the right to just "toke up" for the sole purpose of getting high. Those people do not need it. I specifically mentioned smoking it because the medical uses can be given in other forms that does not involve smoking. I'm sorry for the confusion.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
I'm sorry, but I was not clear. I am talking about people who are using marijuana to get high. I know that there are medical uses out there, but you are not looking at the context of which I'm speaking. I'm saying that people should not have the right to just "toke up" for the sole purpose of getting high. Those people do not need it. I specifically mentioned smoking it because the medical uses can be given in other forms that does not involve smoking. I'm sorry for the confusion.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
My point is that there is NO comparison at work here. People simply claim that because they are both drugs and both of their purposes is to mess you up that they should both be legal, simply on the basis that one is legal. This is faulty reasoning. Actually, the logical way to go would be to make both illegal since both cause more harm than good. I am not saying that we should do that. This is actually the reason why the reasoning is faulty...because you can use the same arguement to persuade someone to go either way. You could say that becauase one is legal, both should be legal. Or you could say that since one is legal and the other is illegal, both should be illegal. You get no where. You're right back where you started. That's why it's faulty. Both sides are using the same argument to make 2 completly opposite statements and both are perfectly valid. Fallacies were thought up to prevent this sort of thing because it becomes a huge mess (like we are in now). If you want further clarification, I can try to explain more.
Originally posted by: Vic
Quite the contrary... I want them ALL to be legal, subject to appropriate regulation, of course.Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
His point is that instead of bitching about why cannabis is illegal, you should bitch that other drugs are legal.Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
XZeroII, apology accepted. However:
1. I see no logical fallacy in pointing out that one dangerous drug is legal while another similar but much less dangerous drug is illegal. I see no "logical fallacy" in pointing out that our laws contain hyprocrisy.
2. I have witnessed firsthand the benefit of medical marijuana use with a friend of mine who died from terminal cancer (non-Hodkins lymphoma). Do not tell me it has no benefits. I have seen, have you? OTOH, why are benefits required? What business is it of yours to decide what is beneficial to other people and what is not? What made you believe that you have that right and power? You don't.
3. Neither marijuana nor its effects kill anyone. No one has ever OD'ed, and there is no proof that it has ever even cause lung cancer in anyone from long term use. The possibility is there, I won't deny that, but the harm (if any) is something that the user does only to himself. Why you think that's a big deal, I have no idea. Ice cream is unhealthy too, and I don't see you rallying to have that outlawed. And pointing that out is not a "logical fallacy." I don't think you know what that phrase means...
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
I'm sorry, but I was not clear. I am talking about people who are using marijuana to get high. I know that there are medical uses out there, but you are not looking at the context of which I'm speaking. I'm saying that people should not have the right to just "toke up" for the sole purpose of getting high. Those people do not need it. I specifically mentioned smoking it because the medical uses can be given in other forms that does not involve smoking. I'm sorry for the confusion.
The societal benefit is a government which doesn't play mommy. It is responsible adults being able to make decisions on their own without the government making those decisions for them. It is responsible adults accepting and facing the consequences of the decisions they make instead of just assuming the government should always hold their hands.I don't see the societal benefits to legalizing it. No one has ever given a societal benefit. They all give crappy whinny arguments.
You're not the only one. As I said when Nik made the same lament - we disagree on what exactly constitutes a better world. A world where everything that could potentially be dangerous is illegal because we failed to instill the government we created with a sense of trust in us is outside my definition of a better world.I dream of a better world for all of us. I guess I'm the only one.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Originally posted by: Vic
Quite the contrary... I want them ALL to be legal, subject to appropriate regulation, of course.Originally posted by: FFMCobalt
His point is that instead of bitching about why cannabis is illegal, you should bitch that other drugs are legal.Originally posted by: Eli
XZeroII: WTF? I've always thought you had half a brain.
Where do you come off spouting your sh!t? Logical fallacy? Huh? Where is the fallacy in comparing alcohol to cannabis? They're both drugs. They both serve no purpose other than to fsck you up... ?????? Explain yourself.
XZeroII, apology accepted. However:
1. I see no logical fallacy in pointing out that one dangerous drug is legal while another similar but much less dangerous drug is illegal. I see no "logical fallacy" in pointing out that our laws contain hyprocrisy.
2. I have witnessed firsthand the benefit of medical marijuana use with a friend of mine who died from terminal cancer (non-Hodkins lymphoma). Do not tell me it has no benefits. I have seen, have you? OTOH, why are benefits required? What business is it of yours to decide what is beneficial to other people and what is not? What made you believe that you have that right and power? You don't.
3. Neither marijuana nor its effects kill anyone. No one has ever OD'ed, and there is no proof that it has ever even cause lung cancer in anyone from long term use. The possibility is there, I won't deny that, but the harm (if any) is something that the user does only to himself. Why you think that's a big deal, I have no idea. Ice cream is unhealthy too, and I don't see you rallying to have that outlawed. And pointing that out is not a "logical fallacy." I don't think you know what that phrase means...
1. I agree. Our laws makes no logical sense, however it doesn't make sense to make all drugs legal rather than illegal.
2. I tried to explain my resoning in the post below yours (the one I'm quoting now). I hope that clears things up.
3. Ice cream doesn't affect your mental state like marijuana does. The whole reason people want to legalize it is because of how it messes you up. This is dangerous. I though we were trying to create a cleaner, healthier tomorrow, not a more messed up tomorrow. I don't see the societal benefits to legalizing it. No one has ever given a societal benefit. They all give crappy whinny arguments. That was what I was trying to point out in my list. I want an actual benefit to letting people get high whenever they want (I'm not talking about medical use). If someone can tell me how that can help our society, then I will gladly change my views. However, I can't think of any. I wouldn't want someone to be toking up next to me on the freeway. I wouldn't want a doctor to take a long hit before operating on me. I see no benefits at all. All I see is car accidents and bi-polar (my dad has it and it's not fun at all) and kids sneaking into their parents "pot closet" to get high. Why plague the world with this stuff??? The world is a crappy enough place w/o police having to ask how many joints you've had or worrying how much the guy in the car behind you has been smoking. It's bad enough with alcohol. I don't want to have to listen to commericals on TV about Marijuana users anonymous or whatever. I guess I just have a different view of the world than most of you. I want to see a responsible world without disease and without worry and without problems. Legalizing marijuana is a step back. This is all just my oppinion and my point of view. I dream of a better world for all of us. I guess I'm the only one.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
I'm sorry, but I was not clear. I am talking about people who are using marijuana to get high. I know that there are medical uses out there, but you are not looking at the context of which I'm speaking. I'm saying that people should not have the right to just "toke up" for the sole purpose of getting high. Those people do not need it. I specifically mentioned smoking it because the medical uses can be given in other forms that does not involve smoking. I'm sorry for the confusion.
Originally posted by: XZeroII
I want an actual benefit to letting people get high whenever they want (I'm not talking about medical use). If someone can tell me how that can help our society, then I will gladly change my views.
dude you are so narrow minded i wanna barf on myself[/quote]Originally posted by: Mickey21
Originally posted by: bittersweet81
Originally posted by: XZeroII
Actually a reputable doctor will tell you that marijuana has been proven to reduce fluid pressure in the eyes. (This is why stoners always have bloodshot eyes) For people who have glaucoma -- which is caused by swelling of the eyes -- marijuana helps immensely. On top of that is it about the best substance to counteract nausea out there. (This is why potheads get the munchies) Ask anybody who's ever gone through Chemotherapy how fun it is to throw up for about 12 hours straight.
I'm sorry, but I was not clear. I am talking about people who are using marijuana to get high. I know that there are medical uses out there, but you are not looking at the context of which I'm speaking. I'm saying that people should not have the right to just "toke up" for the sole purpose of getting high. Those people do not need it. I specifically mentioned smoking it because the medical uses can be given in other forms that does not involve smoking. I'm sorry for the confusion.
First of all I would like to express how excited I am that I started a post that has gotten this long. There have been some great arguments. (and also some really stupid ones). It's been fun to read. Thanks.
Second off. XZeroll, your statement above makes no sense at all. Why shouldn't people have the right to smoke just to toke up. It is obvious that the majority of the people in the US and the World for that matter enjoy an altered state of mind from time to time. That is exactly why prohibition did not work. America is supposed to be a free country where the laws represent the wishes of the people. Yes they also stand to protect ourselves but you cannot make the argument that marijuana is dangerous to yourself or others. I could easily go get enough over the counter drugs to kill myself. (Alcohol would do the trick by itself) But there is no possible way I could OD on Pot. It's just not possible. The amount of THC required is way to high. There are a lot of things in the world that people "don't need" but that doesn't mean that we should be denied all of our wants. That would make a pretty boring world don't you think?
Thanks again for all the great posts guys. If we dont' talk about it then nothing is going to change.