Protesting is so good for the soul.....

There is not always a cost to society of any individual getting buzzed etc. That is silly. Or anyone having a drink on the weekend for pleasure is some risk, but of course that's silly. But there IS always a risk with readily availability (of alcohol lets say) that SOME PERCENTAGE of the population will not be able to handle it and will be susceptible to abuse (saying drinking and driving) and/or addiction and/or other risks. But prohibition doesn't seem to do all that much to change that and adds problems of it's own.

I'm in agreement with Alan and Jane. If someone wants to make himself stupid and unhealthy with drugs, he should be free to do so. If they are decriminalized, that would at least take some of the profit out of it, and reduce some portion of drug-related crime. People committing crimes to obtain the wherewithal to purchase drugs should receive the same sentence as more lucid criminals. Recognizing the disease aspects of addiction and offering rehab programs for those willing to undergo them should be in addition to rather than in lieu of prison terms. Alan makes an important point about individual responsibility.

I'm fine with someone choosing not "working themselves to death for our corporate masters". I believe in the YMOYL concept of achieving independence as a small-scale capitalist. A productive and meaningful life can take many forms; perhaps some I myself might view as ridiculous or parasitic. I'm not fine with paying to support their choice, although I recognize that some people need help through no choice or fault of their own.

[QUOTE=razz;268725]There is always a cost to society if people get addled and buzzed etc., on whatever the drug Someone has to clean up the mess, legal, medical or a combo. If I come across someone who had OD's, I have to decide to intervene or not, call 911 or walk away, use the antidote if available or not. Drugs are very self-centred weapons against society and I mean weapons. There is always a cost. Abuse has a cost. How it is handled is a very different issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaneV2.0

I agree with Alan re drugs. Get as buzzed, addled, high as you like--just don't let your decision adversely affect me--or society--and we'll do fine.
I'd love dabble in DMT if it were legal. Ditto psilyocybin and others.

---

I don't agree--if I choose to get tipsy on my occasional glass of brandy at home, what is the cost? If I choose to try to medicate my joimt pain with CBD, I suppose I "cheat" Pharma out of whatever their exorbitant drugs cost. I'd be willing to bet the costs of prescribed opioids and other medications--initial and subsequent--are sky-high, though, so I take your point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaneV2.0

It just seems like playground bullying to me, and not in the least entertaining, or an "interesting dynamic." Unless the "mean girls" is an interesting dynamic.

---

Interesting viewpoint, Jane. What I am about to post may be off topic a bit, please forgive me, you'all, but your Mean Girls reference? This brought back to mind for me my first season cocktailing and bartending at the El Tovar Hotel at the South Rim of the Grand Canyon back in 2004. I had a gay roommate in the employee housing who idolized Regina George, the witchy character of the Mean Girls and the leader of the pack. Turns out IRL he did everything he could to emulate this character's behavior, too. Overall a nasty personality suffering from low self esteem.

I personally believe those who very vocally disagree with pretty much anything I post? With one exception I believe they mean what they post and are not in it for the snark. Call me naive (?), but I can cut them a little slack as overall I do believe they are not male equivalents of Regina George. (With one exception I won't name.....but there's always one in every barrell, no? Why should this board be any different?) Rob

I've always felt that relentlessly hypercritical individuals were sad, sorry little people. I've known a few. It's hard to feel charitable toward them, but I try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chicken lady

Not a test, simply curious.........
i just picked a point that falls near the center and often demonstrates logical inconsistency and wondered what your stance was.........

---

I'm suddenly remembering an old Sesame Street song, "One of these things is not like the other"

Seems as though I am not understanding the difference between being what some call 'addled' vs "no longer able to be responsible for using whatever the drug of choice". Recreational use is one thing that one can start and stop whenever but 'addled' to me means more like loss of control over one's actions and ability to choose. Obviously others see it differently.;)

MacBook dictionary:
1 unable to think clearly; confused: this might just be my addled brain playing tricks | [in combination] : his persona as a drug-addled hell-raiser.

I imagine one could be addled by whatever licit or illicit substance from time to time without adversely affecting society at large. Heaven knows I was drunk more than a couple of times in my long-ago youth. Worst-case scenario, I made an ass of myself.

A test to me implies that my intent was to evaluate your response.

while I admit to interest in both what it would be and wether your reasons would be logically consistent or logically inconsistent, I had no intention of passing judgement on any of that. More a getting to know you than evaluating you.

if you mean "test" in the sense that one would test a substance in an attempt to determine It's properties, than yes, it was a test. I can make both logically consistent and logically inconsistent arguments for or against those freedoms based on a variety of belief systems I do not consider extreme, so it seemed like a non confrontational question. Although I didn't work very hard to make the language of the question neutral, so it tells a bit about me as wel I suppose, which seems fair.

as does the fact that I chose drugs - I would see abortion as another "test" of logical approach, but generally far more extreme on the role of government spectrum,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chicken lady

as does the fact that I chose drugs - I would see abortion as another "test" of logical approach, but generally far more extreme on the role of government spectrum,

---

The difficulty with "logic", of course, is that you can have a flawlessly consistent chain of reasoning, but if your initial premises are flawed, your conclusion may not be all that useful.