Marijuana

[Harlan Norris]

I think your position can be summed up in three words: Pot is evil! Is that about right? You're entitled to your bias, but please admit it.

Even if use did increase with legalization, which isn't a given (pot can be found anywhere as it is), so what?

Well, you are here in Christian forum aren't you. The issue of good and evil is standard fare in this place. I'm shure that there are those that would argue that drugs are not evil in and of themselves.Just some of the people that use them wrongly.I suppose that it might follow that if one was rightous then drug use for them is also rightous.This is pure nonsense. I wish to God that I had never used any drugs. I also wish that all them that do still use would stop,and that no more would start.Dope is not a requirement for life,nor does it's use create a good life.Like I said you are in Christian forum,and you are bound to read this type of thing whether you like it or not. If one choses to use drugs that has children.They have chosen drugs over the safety of those children.Blaming the law for this,well, that just might be evil.

 

[Harlan Norris]

Actuallly, history shows exactly the opposite.

Marijuanna use, from 1789 to 1939, when it was totally legal in this country, resulted in very low usage of marijuanna.

After 1939, when the first law was passed against it, and when marijuanna became illegal, then its use started to increase. More laws, and tougher laws, such as higher penalties, the 1970 law, and starting a drug war, resulted in increased use.


In the early 1900's, when it was legal, it was hard, or impossible for anyone to even know anybody else who used marijuanna.

Today, when it is illegal most people have tried, or are using it.

So, you are saying that the law against pot is causing use. That since there is a law against pot, the temptation to use it has become overwhelming,and that if the law was removed,that would cause them that use to stop. One word. Nonsense.

 

[k]

So, you are saying that the law against pot is causing use. That since there is a law against pot, the temptation to use it has become overwhelming,and that if the law was removed,that would cause them that use to stop. One word. Nonsense.

Psychology 101. Tell a child not to do/eat something and that child will automatically become intrigued or more intrigued to do so.

It is not that the "poster" is claiming that...it is the FACTS of USAGE that PROVE it.

 

[susanann]

Psychology 101. Tell a child not to do/eat something and that child will automatically become intrigued or more intrigued to do so.

It is not that the "poster" is claiming that...it is the FACTS of USAGE that PROVE it.

It is called, forbidden fruit. Make something unavailable, tell someone what they dont have or cannot have, and then it will make them want it.

"YOu always want what you dont have"


I used this technique with children, and if you allow them to have something, in most cases, they dont want it anymore. (also works with puppies, and cats - take one of their dog toys and then they want it)


Secondly, and specific to marijuanna and durgs. The fact is, that drug usage in this country was extremely uncommon when it was legal. My own family never knew anyone on drugs when it was legal to do so.

Making drugs illegal, makes it expensive, which allows a good profit, which opens up job opportunities as drug pushers. Illegal expensive drugs causes others, the mafia and drug pushers to try to get as many people using/buying thier illegal profitable product - which is why we now have drug pushers in our schools. If drugs were legal and therefore cheap, nobody would have any interest in getting someone else to try or to use drugs, including the mafia.

Nobody would care if someone else used marijuanna, or any other legal cheap product .

So anyone can see that making drugs illegal, naturally causes increased use - and that is exactly what has happened since they were made illegal.

 

[Harlan Norris]

Psychology 101. Tell a child not to do/eat something and that child will automatically become intrigued or more intrigued to do so.

It is not that the "poster" is claiming that...it is the FACTS of USAGE that PROVE it.

Pot had been illegal in the US for about 30 years by the 60s, when I smoked my first joint. I remember it well. It was 1967.At Cherry Creek High where I was in school, at the beginning of that year virtually no one had smoked any pot.Just a few renegades.By the end of the year we all had it seems. Thats how quickly it happened. Our bold move was the direct result of a popular media blitz of the counter culture.Movies, television, music all had outright drug reference or inuendo. Remember Easy Rider. We'd quote from that while gettin loaded.What a great time. We just roared.We had little concern for the possible repercussions. Remember Timothy Leary? Tune in, turn on, drop out. We all thought that was a reasonable plan.So, no, the pot culture of today is not the result of pot being illegal.It is the result of the cultural revolution of the 60s.

 

[nvxplorer]

Well, you are here in Christian forum aren't you. The issue of good and evil is standard fare in this place. I'm shure that there are those that would argue that drugs are not evil in and of themselves.Just some of the people that use them wrongly.I suppose that it might follow that if one was rightous then drug use for them is also rightous.This is pure nonsense.

It may be nonsense to you. My suggestion: Don't smoke pot.

Dope is not a requirement for life,

Point? Television is not a requirement for life. Would you support incarcerating people who watch soap operas?

nor does it's use create a good life.

Again, this is your opinion. It's not your place to determine what is good or bad for others' lives. It most certainly is not the job of government.

 

[susanann]

Pot had been illegal in the US for about 30 years by the 60s, when I smoked my first joint. I remember it well. It was 1967.At Cherry Creek High where I was in school, at the beginning of that year virtually no one had smoked any pot.Just a few renegades.So, no, the pot culture of today is not the result of pot being illegal.It is the result of the cultural revolution of the 60s.

Not true.

I was around in the 1960's, and it was pretty uncommon despite an invalid law being on the books, esp among adults - I dont know any adults back then who even tried it.

The law passed in 1939 was invalid, so essentially, it was not illegal until 1970.


The 1939 invalid law did cause a few people to want to try it, beatniks, and war protesters, and American troops in vietnam, but it wasnt until 1970 that everyone had a legal incentive to try it, and it wasnt until the valid 1970 law that it became pervasive - among young and old, and in all sects of our society.

1970 also marked the beginning of Nixon's Drug War - another huge incentive to use drugs of any kind.

It was a valid law in 1970, accompanied by the Drug War, that led to increased drug/marijuanna use.

 

[Harlan Norris]

Not true.

I was around in the 1960's, and it was pretty uncommon despite an invalid law being on the books, esp among adults - I dont know any adults back then who even tried it.

The law passed in 1939 was invalid, so essentially, it was not illegal until 1970.


The 1939 invalid law did cause a few people to want to try it, beatniks, and war protesters, and American troops in vietnam, but it wasnt until 1970 that everyone had a legal incentive to try it, and it wasnt until the valid 1970 law that it became pervasive - among young and old, and in all sects of our society.

1970 also marked the beginning of Nixon's Drug War - another huge incentive to use drugs of any kind.

It was a valid law in 1970, accompanied by the Drug War, that led to increased drug/marijuanna use.

When I smoked my first joint you were still crawling. My parents didn't use any drugs either. Of course they aren't the ones that either started the cultural revolution,or participated in it.Of course not all people my age used drugs.Every fad has it's holdouts.By 1970 you were what, four?It doesn't seem likely that even at four you had any real idea of the times.Even 10 years later when you would have been 14,I'd say it's likely that you were still obeying the dictates of your parents,just as most of your friends were.That would have been 1980.So, saying that you didn't know any adults that tried it,is like saying your parents and teachers,had not as far as you knew,tried it.In 1980, I was 29.Virtually everyone I associated with had not only tried it but used it regularly,except,my parents and their friends.My employer didn't use. About half of the employees did. They were all about my age,and they all started about when I did.

 

[susanann]

Quote Originally Posted by: susanann

Not true.

I was around in the 1960's, and it was pretty uncommon despite an invalid law being on the books, esp among adults - I dont know any adults back then who even tried it.
The law passed in 1939 was invalid, so essentially, it was not illegal until 1970.The 1939 invalid law did cause a few people to want to try it, beatniks, and war protesters, and American troops in vietnam, but it wasnt until 1970 that everyone had a legal incentive to try it, and it wasnt until the valid 1970 law that it became pervasive - among young and old, and in all sects of our society.
1970 also marked the beginning of Nixon's Drug War - another huge incentive to use drugs of any kind.
It was a valid law in 1970, accompanied by the Drug War, that led to increased drug/marijuanna use.

When I smoked my first joint you were still crawling. My parents didn't use any drugs either. Of course they aren't the ones that either started the cultural revolution,or participated in it.Of course not all people my age used drugs.Every fad has it's holdouts.By 1970 you were what, four?It doesn't seem likely that even at four you had any real idea of the times.Even 10 years later when you would have been 14,I'd say it's likely that you were still obeying the dictates of your parents,just as most of your friends were.That would have been 1980.So, saying that you didn't know any adults that tried it,is like saying your parents and teachers,had not as far as you knew,tried it.In 1980, I was 29.Virtually everyone I associated with had not only tried it but used it regularly,except,my parents and their friends.My employer didn't use. About half of the employees did. They were all about my age,and they all started about when I did.

Nothing you are saying applies to me.

I am much older than that.

.... and I am older than you.


Frankly, nobody in my high school even used any drugs while I was there (other than alcohol, caffene, nicotine) even the wild and crazy ones.

In the late 60's, hippies and college students were using it, but most people were not.


By the 1970's, after marijuanna was illegal, and after Nixon started his Drug War, and with all the returning GI's who smoked, and all the war protestors, etc, marijuanna, LSD, other drugs, etc, spread out to others, mostly young people, but adults were also using by then.

1940's, 1950's, early 1960's??? No. Other than the beatniks, NYC coffee shops, movie actors and actresses, illegal luse of drugs were unknown to us.

FYI: YOu dont expect me (or anybody else) to use my real birthdate on the internet do you?

(nobody should ever give out their real birthdate, real maiden name, real social security number, etc on any internet site, or even when ordering purchases from the internet)

 

[Harlan Norris]

It may be nonsense to you. My suggestion: Don't smoke pot.

Point? Television is not a requirement for life. Would you support incarcerating people who watch soap operas?

Again, this is your opinion. It's not your place to determine what is good or bad for others' lives. It most certainly is not the job of government.

Well, if it is OK for one man to Promote drug use here, is it not also Ok for another to discourage it?I've seen kids as young as 13 posting in here.I'd hate to think that something they read in Christian forum contributed to their decision to use drugs.The law is what it is.I seriously doubt it will change.But if it does, there will be at least one that doesn't twist one up to celebrate.

 

[susanann]

I've seen kids as young as 13 posting in here.I'd hate to think that something they read in Christian forum contributed to their decision to use drugs.

I dont think any kid will start because of a christian message forum.

On the other hand, since it is illegal, because it is illegal, there is a huge profit ( $$$$$$$$) in illegal drugs, and there will be lots of drug pushers trying to get as many 13 year olds to take and use drugs as possible.

There are drug pushers everywhere trying to sell a cheap penny weed for dollars ( $$$) - down your street, in the schools, at school activities, hangouts, parties, etc.

If they cant make sales to 13 year olds, they will try at 14, then 15, then 16, ets. as long as there is lots of money to be made.


( illegal drugs = huge profit)

 

[susanann]

[SIZE=+1]Synthetic marijuana drug coming to chemo patients [/SIZE]
cnn ^ | 5/17/06


Seventeen years after it was withdrawn from U.S. markets, a synthetic version of the active ingredient in marijuana is going back on sale as a prescription treatment for the vomiting and nausea that often accompany chemotherapy, the drug's manufacturer said Tuesday.

Valeant Pharmaceuticals International hopes to begin selling Cesamet in the next two to three weeks, company president Wes Wheeler said.

The Costa Mesa, California, company received Food and Drug Administration approval Monday to resume sales of the drug, which it bought from Eli Lilly and Co. in 2004. Valeant currently sells the drug, also called nabilone, in Canada.

Lilly originally received FDA approval for nabilone in 1985 but withdrew it from the market in 1989 for commercial reasons, Wheeler said. Valeant, since purchasing the drug, has revised its label and updated its manufacturing process, he added.
The drug will compete with Marinol, made by Belgium-based Solvay SA. Marinol, another synthetic version of tetrahydrocannabinol, the active ingredient in marijuana that's more commonly known as THC. It also received FDA approval in 1985.

 

[Gracchus]

[SIZE=+1]Synthetic marijuana drug coming to chemo patients [/SIZE]
cnn ^| 5/17/06


Seventeen years after it was withdrawn from U.S. markets, a synthetic version of the active ingredient in marijuana is going back on sale as a prescription treatment for the vomiting and nausea that often accompany chemotherapy, the drug's manufacturer said Tuesday.

Well the doctors, health insurance and drug companies will make money. Of course that makes it all better.

 

[Harlan Norris]

I dont think any kid will start because of a christian message forum.

On the other hand, since it is illegal, because it is illegal, there is a huge profit ( $$$$$$$$) in illegal drugs, and there will be lots of drug pushers trying to get as many 13 year olds to take and use drugs as possible.

There are drug pushers everywhere trying to sell a cheap penny weed for dollars ( $$$) - down your street, in the schools, at school activities, hangouts, parties, etc.

If they cant make sales to 13 year olds, they will try at 14, then 15, then 16, ets. as long as there is lots of money to be made.


( illegal drugs = huge profit)

You seem to know an awful lot about dope for someone that doesn't use or know anyone that does.Do you work for social services? Or just read a lot.I know of a divorced couple.Both are dopers. She uses it all, he just smokes pot.They have three children together. She's drunken,stoned and abusive to the kids,and on several occasions he's had to go rescue them.She's into realestate he's a computer programer.Both make a fairly good living.He wants to get the kids from her but is afraid she'll turn him in for drug use. Last week after a blow up that had the kids hiding out in the bushes,he finally turned her in.Social services placed them in his home. He was right. She did turn him in.Luckily, he's been in the hospital for the last couple of months with cancer of the bladder,and has not been able to smoke.By the way, the cancer he had,88% of those with that type have a pot habbit.So, you see he chose dope over the safety of his children.If he hadn't had cancer they'd be in foster care right now. That's the dope scene man.Decriminalisation will just bring more of the same.

 

[susanann]

You seem to know an awful lot about dope for someone that doesn't use or know anyone that does.Do you work for social services? Or just read a lot.I know of a divorced couple.Both are dopers. She uses it all, he just smokes pot.They have three children together. She's drunken,stoned and abusive to the kids,and on several occasions he's had to go rescue them.She's into realestate he's a computer programer.Both make a fairly good living.He wants to get the kids from her but is afraid she'll turn him in for drug use. Last week after a blow up that had the kids hiding out in the bushes,he finally turned her in.Social services placed them in his home. He was right. She did turn him in.Luckily, he's been in the hospital for the last couple of months with cancer of the bladder,and has not been able to smoke.By the way, the cancer he had,88% of those with that type have a pot habbit.So, you see he chose dope over the safety of his children.If he hadn't had cancer they'd be in foster care right now. That's the dope scene man.Decriminalisation will just bring more of the same.

No.

By your own admission, it was the criminalization of pot, and other drugs, that led to this situation.

The type of example that you give, is not at all uncommon in a society that has made such drugs illegal - it happens all the time.

On the other hand, at the turn of the century, my father never heard of anything resembling your story when all drugs were legal.

 

[susanann]

Well the doctors, health insurance and drug companies will make money. Of course that makes it all better.

Nobody can make lots of money by legalizing a weed.

 

[susanann]

You seem to know an awful lot about dope for someone that doesn't use or know anyone that does.Do you work for social services? Or just read a lot.

I was in the medical profession, I have seen everything.

I also read a lot.

I also am old enough, that every adult that I knew when I was growing up, grew up in a time when marijuanna was totally legal.


The fact is, when pot was legal, it was not a problem.


Why dont you ask your own grandparents, how their lives, were, or were not, messed up from legal marijuanna.

 

[AmariJah]

What in the hell is going on around here?
Dont worry mon eeht is merely a time warp zone!
what? what in god's name are you talkin about?

Well actually to be perfectly honest with you folks- I am actually a government agent who is on the Dept. of Treasury payroll. /and thanks to YOUR TaXES I am being paid good money I MEAN REALLY GOOD MONEY!!! and just for spying on all of you pathetic little vermin- Yes!!!! I do mean ALL of you! What do you think that your government is doing with all of the trillions of dollars they are draining from you besides all of the outrageous extraterrestrial higher technologies we do spend a great deal of cash to follow everyone and watch their every move. To do this kind of super advanced technologies which monitor a persons every move costs us a Great Deal of MONEY! So here is a great example of theGreat American Way triumphing over the little guy once again

 

[nvxplorer]

Well, if it is OK for one man to Promote drug use here, is it not also Ok for another to discourage it?I've seen kids as young as 13 posting in here.I'd hate to think that something they read in Christian forum contributed to their decision to use drugs.The law is what it is.I seriously doubt it will change.But if it does, there will be at least one that doesn't twist one up to celebrate.

You are free to discourage anything you want. That isn't my point. My point is that your personal experience, which seems to form the basis for your argument, does not apply to everyone. Some of your points are irrelevant, such as pot not being required for life. American life is filled with things "not required." It's called leisure time. What one does with his leisure time is no one's business but his own.

My argument is neither encouragement nor discouragement. My position is that people should be free to make this decision for themselves, without the threat of incarceration.

 

[Gracchus]

Nobody can make lots of money by legalizing a weed.

So why should it ever happen? (Hint: That was my point.)