The right to self medicate, and endulge in intoxicants...
Offline Looking for opinions here It's a tricky one to define and reason exactly where you stand and why. I know and respect people who are of other opinions than mine and acknowledge the sense in some of their reasoning.
The question is where do you stand on where the line should be drawn between a person's right to self medicate or indulge in intoxicants, and when it becomes a legal matter and the business of others. Where should the line be drawn when it comes to allocating time and resources, how much do you sacrifice from say hospital needs, to fund the cops who fight the illegal drug trade and why? The 2 parts too it A)-self medicating B)-indulging have some blurred lines. Someone who is in pain all day, could be taking fairly regularly a prescribed pill containing some of the same stuff found in coke and can’t make it out of bed without it, and that is usually considered ok because it was prescribed by a doctor for a real problem. But what if that person decides the pill is too strong and makes him sick, and chooses to use street cocaine in a controlled way and finds that suppresses the pain much better with less side effects. Well we call that person a drug addict, so... But for the most part I consider self-medicating an individual using a drug he feels helps with his condition, and indulging someone just doing it for fun.
I think we can weed out positions on the extremes like heavy heroin or body crippling crystal meth abuse and the like where I've found most agree is going to far, although even still some are of the mind this is still a personal choice and argue you can't define a solid line between indulging every other weekend, and abusing all day everyday, when along the progression from one to another does one become the other? And that could also be interesting but for the most part I'd like to focus on the more grey parts of this issue where people seem to be all over the damb place. I think or at least hope I guess most here for the most part anyways are of the mind that very light, even beneficial intoxicants like marijuana shouldn't be illegal, especially given the fact alcohol isn't and is incredibly more destructive or that most at least see the massive hierocracy and flaw in the rules their. But where do you stand on things like light cocaine use, maybe some E or some shroom tea on a camping trip...whatever, and even prescribed medication (which can be abused worst of all sometimes) as a personal choice to partake in. It's funny people seem to have a bias towards illegal drugs as if theirs some special difference than some prescribed medication...lol Some of those legal meds have all kinds of powerful stuff in them found in cocaine and heroin and are very strong and easy to get a hold of. When I broke my hand last year I was given these little pills called tremecet which they keep a tight grip on and only give out to people they deem unlikely to be drug addict types, and it's good they do. It's a subsitute for T'3's which suck ass and make many people stomach sick. I was in incredible pain with my bone sticking out of my hand for 9 days till surgery, and after poppin 2 of those pills and 1 a couples hours later I was like "hhhhhholly shit, laalaalaa". It was probably the highest I've ever been in my life, like a full body shivers all around floating in the air high, it felt like (i would imagine having experimented lightly with cocaine) doing way way way too much coke. I was a high as a kite all week and felt no pain atall even though my injury was causing a crap load of it, I felt amazing, what a great week lying around the house high on powerful drugs on doctors orders lol. I thought this stuff would be extremely addictive, and its many times stronger and longer lasting than doing a couple lines of cocaine. I felt like if I took a couple more of those pills too early,my heart would explode.
What about tobacco cigarettes, the most deadly and destructive product man has ever created, more destructive than the a-bomb, which kills so many a year, that all the others fatalities of substance abusers from alcoholics to crack heads and everything in between combined don't even make a mark on the scale next to tobacco smoker fatalities. So where's your line, how would you, let's say hypothetically... if you ran your own country and made the laws the way you truly believed would be the most rational and well reasoned to benefit the people, structure the rules when it comes to the right to indulge in intoxicants.
My position: A little grey... but for the most part I have a hard time reasoning to myself that any personal choice like this, that doesn't directly harm others is anyone’s business but the individuals. The same way I feel getting your body covered in tattoos or piercings, or taking steroids till your biceps pops out of your arm, isn’t really any of my business. It can surely be argued that the few who abuse intoxicants are indirectly harming others by sucking up hospital time and resources, and bringing uninvited problems into the lives of those around them. But even thinking that way I would have a hard time defining the line between what should be considered really causing substantial harm to others as a result of your choice to indulge, we are all causing a little harm to each other all the time with the innumerable choices we make all day. And then you would have to continue with the reasoning and say people who eat unhealthy indirectly harm others by hogging up hospital time and resources and putting stress on those in their lives who worry and feel responsible to help...and so it should then also be the governments business how healthy you eat and how in shape you are, and so on down the slippery slope... I think if you stick to some basic rules of thumb when it comes to indulging in intoxicants which most people do in general very few make it a problem, you'll be just fine and won't cause any harm in your life or to those around you.
Basic ground rules:
1)-And most importantly, you must be very self aware and honest, and not delusional about what you are doing and the possible threat to your health and well being, you are not special, addiction can snag the very best of em... and you must be knowledgeable about the intoxicant you are partaking in and the effect on your body, the entire process and it's dangers.
2)-It can never affect your personal life and relationships (you can never choose to be with your high over a person important in your life)
3)-It can never affect your professional life/career
4)-It can never affect your financial responsibilities (you can never choose your high over food/bills/gas etc...)
5)-It can never seriously affect your health
I think stick to those as best you can, and you can't really get in too much trouble with your "fun time" of choice, sticking to these guides by default will keep the indulgence in moderation and under control for most people. Unless of course you are a super richy rich kid left millions from your late parents, who does nothing with himself, has no friends or family, then you'd have to make some new rules. lol
Now over to you... The following thread is proof that atheists don’t agree on much other than god claims!
- Login to post comments
It's stupid that alcohol is legal and weed isn't.
I think all intoxicants or poisons should be legal. It is your own personal choice up until you decide to get behind the wheel of a car or some other equivalent where you pose a real potential of harm to others. The "war on drugs" is complete bullshit and kills far more people than it saves. Heroine is a terrible drug that causes terrible damage to the person who uses it and anyone who cares about them, but a bullet kills instantly. Cops running around arresting people with addictions and making the purchase of the product extremely dangerous does nothing to help addicts.
Rather than criminalizing addicts we should provide help to them when they are ready and we should accept that some people never will. Whether it is alcohol, heroine, meth or cigarettes we should let people indulge whatever addictions they want. The day they say "hey I want to change my life" we should help. Until then, let them do whatever they want with their lives as long as they don't get behind the wheel.
Which brings me to another issue. Why the fuck can't you get alcohol delivered? If someone is drunk in their house the last thing you want is them deciding to go on a beer run. Think of how many lives would be saved simply by passing a law allowing Joe Shmoes Convenience to deliver a case of beer or a handle of rum.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
When it comes to self-medication, I have experience in every category from every angle, except for prescription drugs. I never liked them much but have many friends and family that have proven them to be among the most dangerous.
I've been a user of everything from tobacco to heroin, and by far the two that took the worst toll on me were cocaine and alcohol.
I know your ground rules are an ideal, but unfortunately most people have to break every one of them, and fall on their face, before they can ever get there.
Since there are no definite lines to be drawn that would resolve anything, I believe the only way is complete legalization across the board. Of course this would have many negative effects, but in the long run I think it would work itself out with heavy casualties.
However drastic and silly that may seem to some, one thing has proven evident. -drug laws do not work. The immediate rebuttal is regulation, but then you bring back the lines to be drawn.
You can't win. When it comes to law, the only winning strategy is not to play.
I am living proof of this. I took law and rules out of the equation all together. Even as a kid, I had no limits on what i could do.
Over many years I've had unlimited access to huge amounts of high quality drugs of every kind for as long as I wanted. Many people would not be alive to write this if they had followed my path. But that would just be one more way of life working itself out.
I'm sitting here now completely sober. The only real negative impact I've had on others is the drugs I may have directly or indirectly influenced or enabled them to do. But I believe those negative impacts on their lives would have been much less significant if were not for the drug laws themselves.
Inevitably it has to be up to the individual to control themselves. Those who cannot must be left to lie in their own bed. A harsh reality of life.
"...but truth is a point of view, and so it is changeable. And to rule by fettering the mind through fear of punishment in another world is just as base as to use force." -Hypatia
Ya it's almost so rediculous it's shoking it remains this way. Here, atleast it seems as though the cause of this irrationalit it obvious, it simply boils down to cultural bias, our long histopry with alcohol and taboo view towards weed. It's right up their on my list of total bullshit and nonsense groups of laws with another doozie-the fact that the legal drinking age in canada is 19, and even more strange in america 21, yet the age to join the army and fight in a war, and the age to be legal to do super hard core porn is 18. I mean common this makes so little sense again I'm flabergasted it remains this way. The laws here are saying at 18, you are mature enough to handle engaging in super ruff sex on camera or stripping in front of an audience, and you are also mature enough to fly to the other side of the world and bust some caps in peoples ass and kill for your country, and you are deemed mentally mature and able to deal with these experiences. But you are not yet ready or mature enough to handle a drink at the bar, that is going to far...lol So you then have to ask the obvious question, why the hell is this the case? What are the things like the above cultural bias of the people towards weed and alcohol causing this irrational glitch in the legal system, causes this redicous age law fauxpas of legal drinking age vs legal adult age, to remain this way. It's damb silly is what it is. I can't for the life of see anyone making a decent argument of how someone could be considered ready for war/porn...but not yet be ready for some drinks. Fucking rediculous if you ask me.
I agree with pretty much everything you say here, I think were on the same side of the fence.
About the beer delivery...huh I had never even thought of that, it's actually such an obvious and beneficial Idea, you should be able to start a company that does this. We have one here but its DL and run by the hells angels and a 12 pack costs $50 and you get the kind they give you, you wouldn't dare argue...lol
I remember hearing in high school how "weed" was the gateway drug to all other drugs and I was like... huh... Mr Policeman.. are you fucking crazy? It's alcohol dude...
I was 18 and I could walk in to a 7-11 and get a case of beer or an Albertsons and get a keg and throw a fucking party with 200 people. WTF? really... weed is the gateway drug? Not.
You nailed it man and I've always said the same thing and giggled at those ignorant authority figures. Alcohol is definetly 100% the undisputed king "gateway drug" if their is such a thing. When youngins drink, they drink in larger numbers, progress to high energy loud and crazy socializing, party late into the night and find all kinds of things to do and experiment with. Youngins smoking weed are usually doing it with a few friends, playing some video games, ending up lying around with not much ambition to do anything too crazy like trying some new drug. The first time I was offered a line of cocaine i was ofcourse at a party, where everyone was drunk as hell and falling around all over the place doing stupid shit like jumping off the roof on the trampoline, and their it seems obvious alcohol is the real starting point for all kinds of experiments. Never once in my life, when I was sittin garound with a couple friends smoking a joint playing music or video games or something, did one of us ever say "hey lets try some cocaine" hahahaha. Nope, it was "dude, lets get bbq chips, and then feed one to that ant farm outside and watch wat they do..." haha what a menace we were after smoking a doobie eh.
I don't think there should be a line. If someone commits a crime while under the influence, they should simply receive the same punishment as they would have if sober. If they cronically commit crimes while under the influence, then they should be legally restricted from using such products on an individual basis, and punished for taking substances as a drunk parole violee would be today.
Otherwise, they should be left alone. Throwing innocent, hardworking people in jail is just stupid.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Poor Americans.
*Call's dial-a-bottle to get any booze sold in Canada delivered to my door, for $7*
Btw, you can, at 18, legally drink in Quebec and Alberta, as the legal age of majority is 18 in those Provinces. Or anywhere in Canada if you are on a plane, since the lowest Provincial age of majority applies in all Canadian airspace.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
I have to say I wonder often about the difference between Canada and the USA on the whole "weed is the gateway drug" issue. Since weed is not a big deal here, and you are charged with a simple misdemeanor for possessing small amounts of it, I think it helps prevent it from being exactly that. It's extremely easy to acquire, and has almost no social stigma attached to it. I personally think it does a number on one's memory to regularly indulge in it, but perhaps that's just me.
I think that putting such a mild drug into the same category from a legal point of view as meth or crack, does much to make it a gateway drug. In Canada, it tends to be viewed quite differently from more heavy things (although magic mushrooms tend to be the next one, but most people I do know stopped it there, if even going that far)
Theists - If your god is omnipotent, remember the following: He (or she) has the cure for cancer, but won't tell us what it is.
Cannabis doesn't destroy families and it's not toxic, nobody can die from it like from alcohol poisoning. It's the most useful plant on the planet. It should be legal no matter what.
So, what would the results be if the use of drugs would be legal? I suggest their use would increase for a while (the novelty) and then steadily decrease. How much, that depends on social attitude, how cool the drug use would be.
Just a little bit of history, alcohol was a highly controversial drug for millenia, there were wars over it. I mean Hussite wars, where these medieval terrorists fought for the right of ordinary people to ritually ingest mass wine. The clever Catholic priests had this handy doctrine of "vicarious sacrament", where a priest took a bite of the holy wafer and a gulp of holy wine in stead of all the people present in the church. (that was how the Catholic Church invented homeopathy
) He also read the Bible in latin so nobody would understand what the hell is going on. No wonder John Hus got pissed at them and after they burned him the Hussites drowned Europe in blood.
Beings who deserve worship don't demand it. Beings who demand worship don't deserve it.
I started smoking pot in 1973 when I was 14 years old. An ounce of weed cost ten dollars. I had lots of good times while I was buzzing and I never hurt myself or anyone else. It should be legal.
Yeah, yeah, rub it in. Yet another area where Canada is more free than us. If only there was a way to deport all of our puritans.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
Honestly I'm continuesly in shock and flabergasted at how the US treats maryjuana use. I often forget a little for a while living here in Vancouver, and then catch a clip of cops on tv, where a group of cops tackle a kid to the ground like he's a murdere and pull a dime 20 bag out of his pocket to justify the force. It literally blows me away and always makes me laugh a little the way cops take it so seriously, especially when then say stuff like "yup, see the perp had a bag or maryjuana in his pocket, probably planning to split it up and resell it..." all SUPER serious faced with a sense of pride as they slam him up against the car... It's insane man.
Could be, from my observations it's more on a case by case basis. I know peole who smoked 1-2 joints everyday for 20 years and are totally mentally accute. I know others who smoked the same for 5 years and by their early 20's seem to stay slightly high all the time and were noticably delayed with their reactions and memory often..."perm-afried." I'd guess it has everything to do with the person and their unique brain chemistry and function,. I knew a "genuis" with IQ 170 who smoked one everyday after she put her kid to sleep and she read a new giant science book every week adding to her massive home library, totally brilliant women and not even noticably high atall after her nightly smoke she could debate the best right their. I smoke a joint almost everyday after I'm finished all the days business, and it hasn't (as far as I can tell) at all affected my memory, it's the same it's always been if not a little better over the years. That said, no doubt for about 1 hour after smoking a joint, my mind is a second or 2 behind it's normal speed. lol Which is why it's never been a social thing for me it makes me "in my head." But it seems to have no longterm effect atall past the time of use, and doesn't effect memory I can remeber the book I read earlier exactly the same, it more effects general sense making during that time...lol Like I've found myself stumped as to what I was looking for or about to do, or almost putting the ketchup in the dishwasher and the plate in the fridge... stuff like that, but never a loss of real memory outside those times or even any noticable effects atall, I'm totally sober 1 hour after smoking a joint.
Ya and I'm a perfect example... Sure I was offered and tried shrooms when I was younger (although that had nothing to do with maryjuana use atall) and I found right away it was too strong, too mind altering, and I didn't enjoy it. I did shrooms I think 2-3 times long ago and never did again. I prefer very light highs, and will never be into heavier ones, even being very drunk is too much for me i prefer a light buzz. I think it's really a person by person thing, if someones the type to get into heavy highs, their gona get their with or without light intoxicants being legal, and if someone isn't into heavy highs they won't be even if they are available at the corner store.
What about 'bath salts', that supposedly created the Miami cannibal?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2152208/Rudy-Eugene-Miami-cannibal-attack-video-shows-victim-Ronald-Poppo-conscious.html
I think that some drugs where there is evidence of a high correlation with crime need to be banned altogether. Crack may fall into this category. Other drugs like marijuana, cigarettes and alcohol need to be prohibited for minors, prisoners, people on probation or welfare.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
Shrooms are the only thing. Psilocybin not aminita.
Take less.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Not everyone who uses bath salts turns into a crazy cannibal any more than everyone who drinks gets violent although some people almost always get violent when drinking. We should regulate and punish the violence regardless of whether the cause was drugs, alcohol or insanity.
Of course there is a correlation- drugs are illegal, therefore 100% of people who use them are criminals. If you are breaking one law you are more likely to break another one, especially if the new law you are breaking has less punishment than the one you are already breaking. I think it is blatantly obvious that having drugs be illegal does not make them hard to obtain- I know people who can get any drug they want delivered to their doorstep faster than a pizza.
Nor does it reduce violence. It actually increases it because the victims cannot seek legal protection. When alcohol was illegal buying and selling alcohol was dangerous and surrounded by crime. Where prostitution is illegal it is far more dangerous for all parties involved than a legal brothel. Where gambling is illegal it is far more dangerous than a casino. Making things illegal makes that activity dangerous because the act removes police power from the transaction.
If, if a white man puts his arm around me voluntarily, that's brotherhood. But if you - if you hold a gun on him and make him embrace me and pretend to be friendly or brotherly toward me, then that's not brotherhood, that's hypocrisy.- Malcolm X
Unnecessary. Decriminalise and cheapen those relatively 'safe' drugs that have been consumed for hundreds of generations, and you'll find demand for meth and other extremely unhealthy drugs which were designed to circumvent the drug wars' resources will drop to practically nothing.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.