Adequacy front page
Stories Diaries Polls Users
Google

Web Adequacy.org
Home About Topics Rejects Abortions
This is an archive site only. It is no longer maintained. You can not post comments. You can not make an account. Your email will not be read. Please read this page if you have questions.
 Why marijuana is the worst drug

 Author:  Topic:  Posted:
Dec 29, 2001
 Comments:
Marjuana. Mary Jane. Dope. Pot. Weed. Grass. Kind Bud. Probably the only thing that outnumbers marjuana smokers are the names that exist for it. We here at Adequacy.org never shy away from the hot button topics of the day, so I feel it is my duty to offer up a few under-mentioned truths about sparking up a spliff. I am taking Thai stick to task, so to speak. Exposing the Herb. Highlighting Hash in the harsh light of heuristic honesty. Scraping away the resin to reveal... well, you get the idea.
drugs

More stories about Drugs
The Adequacy.org Guide to Cheap Legal Highs: Garlic
The Adequacy.org Guide to Cheap Legal Highs: Capsaicin
Electronica: The threat to our youth
The Drug Underground Comes Online
Exploding the Myths of Teenage Drug Use

More stories by
zikzak

Misogyny: Why hurt when you can hate?
Understanding Ayn Rand through the music of Rush
The rise of pseudo-connoisseurship and beer
America is still the greatest
Adequacy sheds light at our darkest hour
Thomas Kinkade brings art back to the people
This week's top-selling music releases
Ken Kesey will go no furthur
Book Review: A pair of holiday novels
Caffeinated Mints: A Comparative Review
Anakin Loses a Hand
Debunking the Holocaust Hoax
You most likely already have the wrong ideas in your head about this article. Unfortunately this website has been tainted by the editorial dominance of Right Wingers, so any preconceptions you may hold are to be forgiven. Let me state up front that we will not be discussing the morality of the drug war, "gateway drugs", legalization, glaucoma or hemp. The title is Why marijuana is the worst drug. We will be evaluating it solely in comparison to other narcotics and mind altering substances.

Marijuana is an insideous beast. It has a tendency to insinuate its way completely into the everyday lives of its users. No, this doesn't happen to all users. Many many people only smoke once in awhile and never fall into the lifestyle of the habitual pot head, but the proclivity of marijuana to become a central part of its users existance is undeniable.

Some other drugs have this tendency as well, but the only ones that do so on the same level are opiates. Even though methamphetamine and cocaine are highly addictive they don't lend themselves to the same type of total, long-term personality saturation. Unlike the habitual marijuana user, you can't take equivalent amounts of speed or coke every day for more than a couple years without totally destroying your life. They are drugs that reinforce the concept of moderation, at least among users who value their lives.

Sure, we all know that guy who spends entire weeks tripping, or the chick who goes clubbing on ecstacy almost every night of the week. The difference is that these people are the exceptions, and they never keep at it for very long. Their activities are more a function of age and transitory lifestyle than of the drugs themselves.

Some would argue that alcohol fits the same lifestyle-saturation pattern as marijuana and opiates like heroin. Some may even suggest that cigarettes fall into this category. What sets them apart is a matter of degree. Having a drink to relax is fundamentally different than getting a little stoned to relax. Even a little stoned is still stoned, and you still have glazed eyes, a stupid grin, and an inability to carry on a decent conversation with non-stoned people. Yes, there are alcoholics, but they are definitely a small minority. As for cigarettes, the narcotic effect is so miniscule as to almost not be worth mentioning.

The tendency of other drugs to inforce moderation in their users can usually be rightfully seen as corollary to their potential danger to the user. In this light marijuana may seem superior in that it doesn't present such a health risk. However, it is that risk that keeps those other drugs in their proper place.

A drug is something that alters you and changes how you react to the world. If you engage in drug use on weekends or special occassions then you are essentially taking a break from life. You are on a drug-induced vacation. But if you take drugs damn-near every day then your use takes on a whole different meaning. You are not doing it to have fun anymore, you are taking medication.

Are you a habitual marijuana smoker? Do you need daily medication from life? How did you get to this point? You started smoking with your friends when you were out having a good time. It enhanced the fun. What changed?

The above points can be addressed with the same answer to the question of what makes marijuana worse than heroin and opium. Unlike those drugs, marijuana lies. Every junkie knows that they are a junkie. Every person who wastes away each evening in an opium den knows that they themselves are also wasting away. Every other drug out there reminds its users that, no matter how much enjoyment they receive, there is a price to be paid. Every one except marijuana.

Marijuana tells you that you are a better person for having smoked marijuana. Marijuana tells you that you are more creative when you smoke marijuana. Marijuana tells you that it helps you concentrate. What marijuana doesn't tell you is that you feel more creative because you have lost the ability to judge your work from the vantage point of someone who isn't stoned. It doesn't tell you that it replaced your critical thinking skills with the naive wonder of a six year old. It doesn't tell you that your present vague awareness of your surroundings is not the same thing as being relaxed and at peace. And most importantly, it doesn't tell you that when you become an habitual user its effects persist even when you are not longer stoned.

The similarities of former marijuana smokers' testimonials should tell you something. "After two weeks it was like a haze was removed from my life." "I felt like I had finally woken up." "I couldn't believe how much more alive I felt after a month away from it."

Any drug that takes two to four weeks of non-usage before you even realize what a mess you were is seriously evil. Drugs that deceive are not to be trusted. If a drug's entire purpose is not to have fun, but rather to make the user believe that the drug itself is harmless and has little real effect, then what point is there in taking that drug?

       
Tweet

Pointless article (none / 0) (#3)
by paradigm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 02:57:38 PM PST
As someone who used once said "After two weeks it was like a haze was removed from my life." I can tell you that this article won't reach the potheads, and if it does, it't won't impact them. For me, it was nearly flunking out of school that made me stop smoking.

I went from smoking at least once a day for a good number of months to going cold-turkey for seven months. I now smoke about once or twice a month with friends and my grades are unaffected.

I know what you were trying to say, I just don't think it needed to be said because the people who know don't need to hear it and the people who need to hear it, won't.

-paradigm


puff puff pass (none / 0) (#4)
by paradigm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 03:04:21 PM PST
err, I meant to say that I was one of those people who has once said that.

wow I suck at logical thinking today,

paradigm


that's because you are a pot head (5.00 / 1) (#28)
by philipm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:44:01 PM PST
So, let me get this straight. You are stoned. You read an article that said that being stoned sucks. Then you post to say "I knew that" "Stop preaching to the choir".

Maybe you should stop smoking? Tell some of your stoned friends to read this.


--philipm

 
Not necessarily (none / 0) (#37)
by Lint on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:34:38 PM PST
I was never a serious pot smoker... or user of any other drug for that matter, with the very real exception of cigarettes and a brief stint with ecstasy. But I have seen what habitual marijuana use has done to close friends, family members and the teenagers with whom I work.

You're right--it's nearly impossible to get this message through to someone who is in the teeth of a serious marijuana habit. Most people think that because pot isn't "physically" addictive that means it is safe and easy to stop using. However, behaviorally and psychologically it is one of the most ensnaring drugs I've ever encountered. I've seen close friends wake up first thing in the morning and light up. This would continue through the day, even at their jobs, and on into the night until the last thing I would hear was the sound of a one-hitter tapping against an ashtray.

It's easy to think that pot smoking isn't detrimental... it usually doesn't have the aggressive factor found in so many drugs and it has quite a few physiological benefits. But it is an extremely dumb drug. Impaired reflexes, motor skills and thought processes cannot, even in the short term, be good for you. And when used for self medicating (as the author mentioned and as I've seen oh-so-often in the kids with whom I work) marijuana usage can cover up serious emotional and behavioral disorders, such as ADHD, anorexia/bulimia, oppositional-defiant disorder, etc.

Another thing I've seen very often is the tendency for depression in the marijuana user. Certain drugs, such as opiates, ecstasy and pot, can stimulate or suppress the receptors in the brain that produce serotonin--the brain chemical that helps regulate mood and sleep. Too much serotonin creates euphoria or panic, as seen with E. Too little can produce serious depression, especially after long term use of the drug that is either suppressing the serotonin receptors or over stimulating them to the point where serotonin production falls off dramatically. And those with preexisting depressive disorders who take medication such as Serzone can have sometimes serious mood affection disorders if marijuana is used while taking this medication.

So enough medical babble from me... I agree that the logic to not use pot due to the scary side of the drug is lost on many who are currently smoking, some even as we speak whilst they giggle at our pretty sentences. But it's not bad information for those who might know someone with a marijuana "problem". Namely, the guy next door who built furniture out of Domino's Pizza boxes. `Strue.


Your denial is beneath you, and thanks to the use of hallucinogenic drugs, I see through you. Bill Hicks

 
Aren't we forgetting some people? (none / 0) (#5)
by Kat on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 03:19:17 PM PST
Some people take marijuana to block out their problems, just as people do with alcohol, and harder drugs. At least they're being sensible about it, and not using crack or drinking a bottle of Vodka.


Sorry, but No. (5.00 / 2) (#6)
by zikzak on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 03:29:05 PM PST
Blocking out problems is why most habitual marijuana users smoke. But that is not the reason most people drink alcohol and take other drugs.

It doesn't surprise me that an addle-brained stoner would totally miss the point of the article, though.


Existence of logic? (none / 0) (#114)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 12:58:26 PM PST
>>It doesn't surprise me that an addle-brained stoner would totally miss the point of the article, though.

Is accusing every contradicting poster of being a drug addict or mentally inferior, your best way to defend your point. I respect your opinion and believe you have the mental competency to reply logically. Please do so.



 
You forgot to mention the corrosion of will (5.00 / 3) (#7)
by Adam Rightmann on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 04:27:45 PM PST
In my limited, second-hand experience, the biggest danger I see with marijuana is the corrosion of will. Too often in my high school and college years did I see friends and acquaintances start a dalliance with the demon weed, starting with the occasional puff of a hand rolled bong at a party, to daily toking fests. Their grades and activities all dwindled into scoring enough smack to keep them high the next day. I would, on occasion, attempt to reach them by listening to their stoned ramblings about the movie they would make, the incredible inventions, the wonderful story, and yet the next morning they would sleep in and skip their morning classes, then play ultimate frisbee and skip their afternoon classes, eventually dropping out of school to get lives delivering furniture, or some other job where will power is not needed, just the ability to lift heavy things. What a waste, intelligent young men and women who were on their ways to becoming engineers, scientists and theologians, turning into furniture movers, burger flippers and custodians, all because they couldn't defer the pleasure of getting high to go to class.

I think it's no coincidence that marijuana use increased in the 1960's as youthful unrest also increased. Someone in a higher position realized that the quickest way to pacify and paralyze the agitating youth of America was with the kynd. I think prayer and Biblical studies would have accomplished much the same, at far less of a cost in human lives, but no one asked me.


A. Rightmann

Biblical Studies? (none / 0) (#9)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 04:51:33 PM PST
How do you think that Biblical Studies would stop people from being agitating? Really, it might have been good. The more you think about the Bible, the less it makes sense..and prayers..well.

Now..I find what keeps most kids busy are computer games, the TV, and video games..which, weren't around in the 1960's, but..then again, most people think those are poison for the mind, which is oh so untrue.

And if you really want to get grades up and keep kids busy, make schooldays longer and more in the week, but kids wouldn't like that.

-D


Get thee behind me Satan (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by fractured clavicle on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:16:44 PM PST
The more you think about the Bible, the less it makes sense..
We have no need for deceivers of men here. Run along and with your God-hating to somewhere it won't be so easily exposed.


I'm not suprised. (none / 0) (#45)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 11:30:47 PM PST
So, you basically don't want me to talk? Feh, just like someone to simply ignore them when they don't want to face the truth. And really, did I ever say I hated anything? I think not. Why put words in my mouth? And as for deceivers of men..well..I suppose that makes deception the revealation of the truth?

-D


"The TRUTH". (5.00 / 1) (#49)
by tkatchev on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 03:32:06 AM PST
Wow, that's an awfully tasty word, isn't it?

Take care, and don't get an ego overdose.


--
Peace and much love...




Pot. Kettle. Black. (1.00 / 1) (#50)
by SpaceGhoti on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 03:56:37 AM PST
(nt)


A troll's true colors.

Haha, you lose. (3.66 / 3) (#52)
by tkatchev on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 04:33:11 AM PST
When have I ever claimed that I hold the patent to the absolute "objective truth"?

As always, liberalist have a termendous problem differentiating between a personal, subjective "truth", and a factual, objective "truth".

There is a difference.


--
Peace and much love...




don't forget, tkatchev (1.00 / 1) (#53)
by osm on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 06:20:56 AM PST
you are talking to a person who believes he can do whatever pleases him as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. of course, he gets to define what hurts someone else, since he doesn't have that annoying restriction of having Christian values to tell him what is right and wrong.


Christian Values (none / 0) (#179)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 3rd, 2002 at 03:22:37 PM PST
You don't need "christian values" to know the difference between right and wrong. There is something called morals that has nothing to do with christianity. To all those who think that they are high and mighty because they are christians and who only do good things to get into the gates of heaven-WAKE UP! Heaven and hell are nonexistant and are only there for those people who don't really care about the welfare of others, they only care about going to heaven. I do good deeds every moment of my life, not because I am striving to go to heaven or not to go to hell (since they don't exist), but because I care about every person that I come in contact with, even those I don't (come in contact with). Also, remember the meaning of christianity- love thy neighbor (even if they are not christian) and let God do the judging, not you.


i agree (none / 0) (#214)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 30th, 2002 at 08:32:23 PM PST
You know damn right!


 
Kettle still holding on line two, Pot. (1.00 / 1) (#62)
by Lint on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 01:29:22 PM PST
Honestly, if you are going to accuse us "liberalists" (as always, the all-inclusive term for any person or point of view with which the conservative disagrees, in insult form) of being incapable of "differentiating between a personal, subjective `truth', and a factual, objective `truth'", why don't you stop generalizing and speaking of those generalizations as if they were "truth". Is the statement:

As always, liberalist have a termendous(sic) problem differentiating between a personal, subjective "truth", and a factual, objective "truth".

truth? Does it even rank as a "subjective" truth? Or is it merely an opinion formulated by you, as you are entitled? If this is the case, and you are entitled to opinion, wouldn't that same entitlement be awarded to the AR? After all, subjectively, we are all entitled to our own definition of "truth". But that does not make subjective "truth" true for all.

Perhaps SpaceGhoti was referring to your ego, pot. This would make sense, based on your predisposition to debunk the opinions of others with arguments based merely on nothing but your own opinions, which you tend to restate as if they were fact. Which is ironic.

Watch what you say, dear tkatchev. You can't keep catching yourself in contradictions forever.


Your denial is beneath you, and thanks to the use of hallucinogenic drugs, I see through you. Bill Hicks

Personal truth. (none / 0) (#90)
by tkatchev on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 02:13:24 AM PST
What matters is that some things that are obviously true from my viewpoint are false from yours.

What's worse is the fact that it is utterly impossible for you to see my viewpoint without reliving my life in all of its entirety; which means that rather than going into a genital-size war about whose "truth" is better, it is much more advantageous to try and see the other person's viewpoint the way he see it, instead of trying to disprove it right off the bat.

But, I wouldn't expect you to understand anything out my tirade. As a liberalist, your ideas of "tolerance" extend only to the ideas that make you comfortable. (That was my own personal "truth"; I'm explaining because liberalists usually have a long-standing conflict with reality.)


--
Peace and much love...




Opinion. (none / 0) (#102)
by Lint on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 09:28:55 AM PST
My problem is with your need to generalize and state those generalizations as if they were fact. Opinions and generalizations are not mutually exclusive, whether or not you label them as "subjective" truth.

Your opinion of liberals is fine, and is your right to express freely. However, it is also a generalization as you are not making allowances for those liberals who do not have a long-standing conflict with reality, who do not define tolerance subjectively, and who do not fall under the various generalized statements you have made on their character.

As it would be impossible for you to actually know each and every liberal in the manner you are to which referring, your statements concerning the nature of liberalists are merely conjecture. Opinion, yes, but far from any form of truth, either subjective or objective.

Just so that you understand my point of view-- "liberal bashing" does not hurt my feelings, make me mad, offend me or in any other way make me emotional. As a liberal, and having first-hand knowledge as such, there are many liberals and conservatives alike who deserve ridicule for their extremist philosophies and inability to look outside of their own individual views to consider those of the "other side".

My issue, again, is your tendency to generalize. For me to say that all conservatives are insensitive or irrational based on a few examples would be wrong. And for me to say, "As a conservative, your ideas of 'tolerance' extend only to the ideas that make you comfortable" would also be wrong, because the fact that you are conservative does not give me allowance to make other judgments on your character. The issue could be the type of car one drives, or where one went to school, rather than this liberalist/conservative nonsense for all that matters--assuming the character of another based on a few facts is still disrespectful, invalid and doesn't make for productive discussion. I hope you see my point.

But, I wouldn't expect you to understand anything out my tirade.

Oh, I think I have understood quite a few things "out your tirade", as you say. Don't sell yourself short, tkatchev old pal. Occasionally you are quite understandable, and would make an interesting person to discuss various issues with, if only you would get over that pesky habit of restating old claims rather than moving off onto exciting new discourse territory.

Glad to be of help! :)


Your denial is beneath you, and thanks to the use of hallucinogenic drugs, I see through you. Bill Hicks

 
liberalist (none / 0) (#180)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 3rd, 2002 at 03:28:32 PM PST
I have never seen such a prejudiced statement. Obviously you don't know any liberlists. Also, there is no such thing as a "subjective truth". That's called an opinion, my dear.


 
You know... (1.00 / 1) (#63)
by SpaceGhoti on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 01:37:23 PM PST
I don't know where I might have gotten that idea from (I'd provide more links, but even I don't have that much time on my hands).

Must be my liberal philosophy muddling my brain again.


A troll's true colors.

 
God Vs. Marijuana, (I like to call it "CHONG& (none / 0) (#206)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 20th, 2002 at 10:47:21 PM PST
I must speak after reading "god Hating" in the Marijuana / Religion discussion.

Studying and Worshipping god killed, kills and will kill an exponentially larger amount of people than any drug, category A B or whatever.


feh (none / 0) (#207)
by nathan on Mon Jan 21st, 2002 at 11:19:03 AM PST
I must speak...

We'd rather you didn't. What's the matter, been stoned so long that you're responding to two-week-dead threads?

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Video games (none / 0) (#56)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 10:03:25 AM PST
I can't recall where i saw this anymore, but I saw a study done showing that playing computer and video games has actually had quite a positive effect on youth. It showed that a large percent of computer and video game "geeks" led to getting high paying technology and computer oriented jobs. Seems quite the opposite of all this junk said about how they cause children to be violent.


You don't know what "opposite" means, do (none / 0) (#65)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 02:06:31 PM PST
Are you telling us that people in high paying technology jobs cannot possibly be violent? Since you're quoting imaginary research, I expect it will be no trouble for you to refer to another fabricated study proving that technogeeks can't commit violence.


well (none / 0) (#78)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 08:12:27 PM PST
Considering this entire posted article is based on imaginary "research" or the completely limited observations and conjectures of one person, I think you should cut the author of that comment a little slack.


 
Thank God. (1.66 / 3) (#12)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:17:30 PM PST
"intelligent young men and women who were on their ways to becoming engineers, scientists and theologians, turning into furniture movers, burger flippers and custodians,"

Thank god! at least a burger flipper has less real negative impact on other people's innocent lives.


 
Re: Marijuana is the worst drug... (1.00 / 2) (#8)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 04:36:28 PM PST
It goes without saying that this is an editorial piece. Regardless, I feel the need to assert that it is not based on factual information or even, apparently, any kind of anecdotal evidence.

Your claim is made up front: "Marijuana is an insideous beast." The rest of your ramblings do little to further your case and are little more than a repetitive insistence on the same theme.

You have a right to your opinion, of course. You don't, however, have the right to manipulate the truth. There is an obvious tone of distaste, if not outright resentment and loathing, towards marijuana and marijuana users from the outset of your piece. You begin calling them "pot heads". You then go on to make wild, unsupported claims like, "Even though methamphetamine and cocaine are highly addictive they don't lend themselves to the same type of total, long-term personality saturation." Anyone who has known closely someone with a serious substance-abuse problem knows that this is simply not true. There a couple of members of my extended family, one in particular, with whom I know this does not ring true. There are still more that I have made the acquaintence of. Your continued claims in this vein such as, "They are drugs that reinforce the concept of moderation, at least among users who value their lives," are preposterous. People who value their lives don't do methampetamine and cocaine. I've seen this too many times firsthand to believe otherwise and I can only assume that you lack this experience based on your claims.

Furthermore, your defense of socially acceptable substance abusers like alcoholics and smokers is beyond the pale. To assert that relaxing with a drink is "fundamentally different" than smoking marijuana for reason of the supposed inability to converse while under that influence shows your total ignorance of the reality of these substances and inexperience with their typical users. Have you ever even been to a bar? Trying carrying on a conversation with a drunk person. Better yet, you can try talking to my drunk aunt the next time she calls. You couldn't stop there, though. You had to assert that "there are alcoholics, but they are definitely a small minority." How many people are alcoholics? About 5% of the adult population. That's no small number, and though it is a minority in comparison to the total adult population it's no small slice when it comes to the substance abusing portion of this populous. I can only assume that you have never actually known a junky either. You sound so certain when you claim "Every junkie knows that they are a junkie." I know quite a few young people who have experimented with heroin and for all of them but a couple (read: the rare exceptions) it has been true that they get quite near the brink of disaster (read: overdose) before they ever kick the habit... if they ever do. The mode of operations is usually an extended period of relapse and recovery in a cycle that is hurtful to everyone who has to watch someone they love suffer through it, but most of all it is harmful to the person going through the morale shredding process of giving in to their addiction over and over again. What brings them down this long path is denial: "I'm not a junky. I'm not addicted."

You are, as mentioned above, entitled to your opinions. However, if we are ever to actually deal with our country's drug problems as adults we have to stop re-iterating the same old lies and drug war mythos and start telling the truth. I have a challenge for you. Assuming that you are old enough, go down to your local bar for three nights in a row. Look for the people who were there all three nights. They are your alcoholics. I'll bet you that they're smokers, too. Go introduce yourself, but wait until after midnight (don't worry, they'll still be there). Try and strike up a conversation and see what you get. Then try going back a week later and see if they can even remember you. We need to stop pointing the finger, as you have, at the drug, or "insideous beast", and come together in the realization that substance abuse is a problem. It's a very valid problem that quite a few people have.

People who abuse themselves in this way have deeper personal issues that need to be addressed and they do not get the recognition and help that they need in our system. They are criminalized and demoralized. In California you can receive SSI, a social security benefit like disability, for certain mental disorders. Usually this is granted for varying forms of depression and other types of personality disorders. Why can these people, people with a valid mental health issue, receive money, treatment and medication when we leave people with substance abuse issues out in the cold, often for dead? I urge you and everyone else to take the time to educate yourselves about the realities of these issues. They are issues that we will all have to face together, and the only way we can address them adequately is with the proper information.


Ok (5.00 / 3) (#13)
by zikzak on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:22:55 PM PST
Well, I certainly appreciated your long, rambling, proselytizing rant against addiction. I must say, it didn't come across as a tired, worn out, cliche riddled pile of pablum at all. However, you would do better if you could manage to stick to the topic at hand. Here, let me reprint it for you:
Let me state up front that we will not be discussing the morality of the drug war, "gateway drugs", legalization, glaucoma or hemp. The title is Why marijuana is the worst drug. We will be evaluating it solely in comparison to other narcotics and mind altering substances.
You see, we are not discussing an After School Special or a topic on Oprah. I am pointing out that marijuana use has serious negative effects in comparison to other drugs, effects that habitual marijuana users are too stoned to even be aware of.

If you wish to try to defend marijuana, please do so. If you wish to embark on an addict treatment crusade, please do so somewhere else.

And don't quote dubious Canadian health statistics to bolster your cause. We already know that country is full of hopeless drunks.


You're sidestepping his rebuttal (none / 0) (#177)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 3rd, 2002 at 02:16:26 PM PST
Stop trying to "impress" us with your cunning linguistics. Get off your "high" horse. After you have done that, try your hand at addressing the points made in his rebuttal to your own *rant* against marijuana. Judging by your comments, like "If you wish to try to defend marijuana," and "We already know that country is full of hopeless drunks," you feel better equipped to spout red herrings than respond intelligently.

If you want to be taken seriously, lay off the sarcasm is my suggestion. What you do is confuse the reader, making them guess where you are being "for real" and where you are being "funny".

As for the topic at hand, "evaluating it solely in comparison to other narcotic and mind altering substances" - that is what the rebuttal comments addressed. You are criticizing the poster for not addressing the *topic* at hand, but it appears more like you just don't want to address their *comments*.

One other thing. It's obvious that you have more than half a brain, and that you love sarcasm. So what is your motivation? Are you on the side of government propaganda, as your "analysis" smacks of brochure snippets, or are you trying to denounce such crap in a reverse-psychology sort of way?


 
Drugs (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by Slubberdegullion on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:35:12 PM PST
People who value their lives don't do methampetamine and cocaine
This is very similar to the point that the author was trying to make. People who value their lives will not use these drugs, or if they do it will only be once or twice. They will, however, do marijuana, despite the fact that it is just as harmful in its long-term effects.
What brings them down this long path is denial: "I'm not a junky. I'm not addicted."
Giving up a drug has nothing to do with admitting you have a problem. Addiction is often a physical thing, and people trying to give up a drug will experience violent withdrawal symptoms. What brings them down this long path is their addiction to the substance, combined with the saturation of pro-drug messages such as your own in our culture(lies and drug war mythos)


 
Quick call an ambulance! (5.00 / 3) (#18)
by osm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:36:55 PM PST
You're heart is bleeding all over the place. I'm sick and tired of this apologetic, whining, liberal slop.

"Marijuana addicts aren't responsible for their behavior, they have a problem that must be addressed by feeling their pain and sharing their feelings with the group."

It's time people in this country started taking some fucking responsibilities for their behavior, no matter how vile. Marijuana addiction is not a "problem" that needs to be "treated". It's a crime that must be punished. I couldn't even begin to guess how much money is thrown away in this economy because of incompetent pot-heads who have their "civil rights" protected by Clinton-era Feel-Good Legislation.

Do you know what they do to pot-heads in Russia? They fucking send them to Siberia to mine Uranium. That's right. They take a worthless mass of stoned flesh and turn it into something useful. At least until the radiation poisoning kicks in. And - boy! You don't hear anything about a drug problem in Russia, do you?

Yeah, I say it's time we put an end to the Oprah Culture (I was pleased to see zikzak use the same reference in his reply to your drivel) and start calling a crime a crime.


Yeah, dood, (none / 0) (#96)
by derek3000 on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 06:01:19 AM PST
Russia is in great shape. No drugs there!

If you really want to talk about wasting money, why don't you talk about the money spent on the war on drugs? I know you feel that using marijuana is a crime, but it hurts no one else but the user. To spend as much money as we do to prevent people from making decisions that affect only themselves is the true waste of money.

But I guess you'll chime in with something about "society" and how it would be for "everyone's benefit" if marijuana were illegal. That is true liberal drivel that should be ignored at all costs.




----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

 
I dont want your talking about..... (1.00 / 1) (#14)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:28:47 PM PST
But i find doing drugs to be one of the nessisites of life. Humanity for generations have been doing drugs for recreational and spiritual purposes.
Anyway pot is one of the safer drugs out there, the only reason why pot "ruins" your life is due to the laws and ignorance surrounding it.



Re: Typical response from drug abuser (5.00 / 3) (#16)
by fractured clavicle on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:36:11 PM PST
But i find doing drugs to be one of the nessisites of life. Humanity for generations have been doing drugs for recreational and spiritual purposes. Anyway pot is one of the safer drugs out there, the only reason why pot "ruins" your life is due to the laws and ignorance surrounding it.
You have just proven the point of the article. Your incoherent logic, miserable grammar, and 2nd grade spelling all point out exactly how dangerous marijuana is. Seemingly not satisfied by your own shameful writing, you then go on to spread disinformation about the government. You anti-government drug abusers have had it all too easy if you ask me.


 
Oh goody! (5.00 / 3) (#17)
by zikzak on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 06:36:51 PM PST
Another fuzzy headed nitwit spews forth a couple moronic sentences that are both meaningless and completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Does us a favor and re-read the story once you've sobered up a bit, ok? Thanks.


 
Neither do I. (none / 0) (#19)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 07:44:17 PM PST
I've been smoking marijuana for 5 years, and I can tell you from experience that the above article is absolute bullshit. I'm a fairly successful senior programmer/sysadmin for a fairly successful business and I love what I do, and have no problems working to achieve my goals while under the influence of marijuana. I routinely smoke $50-100 worth of marijuana a day, yet I have retained all of my mental faculties. There have been many occasions that I have smoked rather massive amounts of marijuana (2-4 ounces) in rather short periods of time (1-2 hours) and gone to work and performed admirably. I have designed and implemented a VPN for a fortune 500 company WHILE STONED. I have written essays which were apparently worthy of A's while stoned. The list goes on and on. To say that marijuana somehow impedes creativity or that marijuana makes the user "feel that the drug has little real effect" is nonsense. I feel the effect right now, a wonderful physiological state which
cannot be achieved by any other means. Perhaps you haven't gotten your hands on any decent pot?

$15 dollar 1/4 ounces don't give you a good impression about the effects of marijuana.

HEY, LOOK, THAT POST HAD NO SPELLING ERRORS *STOP THE PRESSES*


Nope. You fail, too (5.00 / 1) (#20)
by zikzak on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:00:45 PM PST
Re-read the 3rd to last paragraph, please. Thanks.

I'm eagerly awaiting one intelligent argument from a pot head. I suspect I may be waiting for quite a long time.


Oh no... (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:11:54 PM PST
Eagerly awaiting intelligent argument? I smoke pot and I enjoy it, yet I live in a nice, clean house, and am as productive as any adequacy.org reader. That, in and of itself, is an intelligent argument.


so where is it? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
by philipm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:30:09 PM PST
Reading something and completely missing the point doesn't make you smart. Writing something intelligent is a much better indicator.

I eagerly await your writing something intelligent.


--philipm

blah blah blah (none / 0) (#34)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:30:26 PM PST
I think I'm going to write an article about all the different sorts of snobby USENET fags in existence, would that prove I'm intelligent?


it depends (none / 0) (#36)
by philipm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:34:13 PM PST
That would depend on which particular fags you picked, Mr ass-spelunker.

Is pot really that great? I should try it.


--philipm

 
Translating the pot-head lingo (5.00 / 3) (#29)
by osm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:47:40 PM PST
pot-head lingo

Eagerly awaiting intelligent argument? I smoke pot and I enjoy it

translation

"I'm so stoned, I can have hours of fun staring at a grateful dead album cover and spinning around in an empty field."

pot-head lingo

yet I live in a nice, clean house,

translation

"My parents are rich and I am spoiled rotten. I'm 25, living in my parent's basement, and my mom still cleans my room and does my laundry. While I sleep until 3pm and watch MTV until I pass out again at 7pm."

pot-head lingo

and am as productive as any adequacy.org reader.

translation

"I'm a flaming fucking moron who thinks Richard Stalimann is the second coming of Christ and regularly engage in acts of illegal fornication and hacking."

pot-head lingo

That, in and of itself, is an intelligent argument.

translation

"What was I saying?"


blah blah (none / 0) (#33)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:24:30 PM PST
You newsgroup guys are all the same. Take a post, dissect it, attempt to demean the original poster by using big words and pretty HTML formatting and all that good stuff. By perfecting this somewhat gay form of dialectic you've managed to ensure that future generations of snobby intellectual bitches get the oppurtunity to make themselves a little more sure that they are, in fact, smarter than the entire population of the Planet Earth. I applaud you, osm.


No (none / 0) (#39)
by osm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:39:55 PM PST
You newsgroup guys are all the same. Take a post, dissect it, attempt to demean the original poster by using big words and pretty HTML formatting and all that good stuff.

Big words? Did you drop out of the eighth grade? Maybe you should cut down to a 1/4 ounce an hour there, buddy.

By perfecting this somewhat gay form of dialectic you've managed to ensure that future generations of snobby intellectual bitches get the oppurtunity to make themselves a little more sure that they are, in fact, smarter than the entire population of the Planet Earth.

If you think I'm a snobby intellectual bitch, then you are in a very sad state indeed.

I applaud you, osm.

and I pity you, you anonymous fuck.


Eight grade (none / 0) (#41)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:51:47 PM PST
Don't even get me started.


Only self starters need apply (none / 0) (#120)
by Anonymous Coward on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 05:45:48 PM PST
OK
-- Support the home page homeless.

 
Furthermore... (1.00 / 1) (#22)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:15:39 PM PST
I just downloaded your post with a modified version of *GASP* WGET!!!! I'm going to hell *sad face*


 
User-agent string (none / 0) (#24)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:20:26 PM PST
I wonder how you guys will diffrentiate wget from konqueror if the user-agent strings are identical - in court, that is =D


Easy, fool. (5.00 / 1) (#26)
by osm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:35:37 PM PST
We will use advanced internet technologies innovated by Microsoft for the precise purpose of identifying your illegal hacker tools.

Good luck finding Marijuana in a maximum security federal prison. I hope you're into big, smelly men.


Don't forget (5.00 / 1) (#27)
by zikzak on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:41:09 PM PST
the top secret, proprietary module that allows us to find the IP address of any poster, even those who think they are 'Anonymous'.


 
Cool (none / 0) (#30)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:51:32 PM PST
haha innovated by microsoft? Is the sole purpose of this site to annoy *nix users?


The sole purpose of this site (none / 0) (#31)
by osm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:55:57 PM PST
is to reveal the truth, no matter how controversial or (in the case of Microsoft's innovations) obvious.


liar (none / 0) (#32)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:14:57 PM PST
I think this site was founded for a single, and not so obvious reason - to piss off users of *nix and revel in it. After reviewing your previous posts to this site, osm, I have come to the conclusion that you are a *nix hating gypsy who sit around and plays Deus Ex while drinking diet pepsi and talking about the stock market with your second cousin in Minneapolis on your 2.4ghz shiny metallic cordless phone.

Also, with opera 6.0 TP2 for linux, this site won't allow you to post after previewing a message. What a sad sad rip of slashcode. =(


I guess you can't read, then. (none / 0) (#35)
by osm on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:32:48 PM PST
I think this site was founded for a single, and not so obvious reason - to piss off users of *nix and revel in it.

Let's see how many articles on the front page have anything all to do with hating "*nix":

"Why marijuana is the worst drug"
Nope. Not that one.

"My inlaws are not fertile"
Hmmm. That one doesn't either.

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, terrorism, and decolonisation"
Well, so far it would seem you are hallucinating.

"Review: Saint Luke's Christmas Eve Candlelight Service"
Looks like a pattern is developing. Absolutely fucking nothing about hating "*nix"

"Happy Birthday Christ!"
An article about Christ and His love for us on his birthday. Nothing at all about "*nix" in there.

"Security, Microsoft, and You"
I don't know why this should "piss off" users of "*nix". It has nothing to do with "*nix".

"Uncle OSM's Guide to Covert Dating: Episode II"
My very own article giving dating tips to those of our readers unlucky in love. Nary a mention of anything even remotely computer related.

"Linux Zealot learns a valuable lesson."
Well, I guess this would qualify, even though it's true.

So, let's see, out of EIGHT articles on the front page, only ONE could even be remotely viewed as anti-"*nix".

Oh, wait, you're a pot-head. I guess the paranoia is catching up with you.


Yes! (none / 0) (#40)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:50:42 PM PST
Apparently, you can't read. I said "not so obvious", didn't I? Yes - yes I did. Let me give you a few examples:

1. The banning of wget as an HTTP client.
2. The excessive slander of Richard Stallman - not that I like him or anything, but still.
3. haha your gay haha


No, you still can't read (none / 0) (#47)
by osm on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 12:20:59 AM PST
Apparently, you can't read. I said "not so obvious", didn't I? Yes - yes I did.

I can read just fine. I read all those articles and only TWO even had anything to do with computers AT ALL. It's less than "not so obvious" - it's the product of a childish, growth-stunted, paranoid, delusional pot-head.

Let me give you a few examples:

Oh please do. You're 1st grade level use of the English language is growing on me.

1. The banning of wget as an HTTP client.

wget is an illegal open source hacker tool

2. The excessive slander of Richard Stallman - not that I like him or anything, but still.

Richard Stalimann is a thief and admitted communist.

3. haha your gay haha

Better watch out, mommy and da-da might take away your 'puter if they find you talking like that.

At this point you're just trolling and are off-topic. The subject of this article is "Why marijuana is the worst drug". Not that I expect you to have much of an attention span, but at least make an effort.

Any further off topic posts will be deleted.


blah blah (none / 0) (#48)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 02:56:29 AM PST
There you go again, with your flamboyantly gay USENET dialectic. Insult my english, then reiterate how horrible marijuana and open source are, yada yada yada. It's all about freedom, and that's what you don't seem to understand. The fact that I enjoy smoking pot and using open source software is just a reflection of my aversion towards the brand of corporate welfare our society seems to be heading towards. It's about knowing that you can sit in your own home, that you paid for with money that you worked for, and smoke marijuana with your friends. It's about knowing that you can give one of the aforementioned friends a copy of your favorite operating system without worrying about violating several international treaties and going to hell for your efforts. It's about pride, and it's most certainly not about paying more than $30 for an operating system that rarely does what you tell it to do.


more doper-speak (none / 0) (#54)
by osm on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 06:29:20 AM PST
You seem to have a hangup about homosexuals. Probably another manifestation of the paranoia years of marijuana abuse has instilled in you. Of course, the rest of your breathless paragraph is just more tripe of the brand you have been spouting all day.

Please shut up now and go back to your pot den and your illegal hacker OS before I kick you.



 
*Yawn* (none / 0) (#91)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 03:22:18 AM PST
The banning of wget as an HTTP client.

Wget runs in windows, too. Thus this has nothing to do with Unix.

The excessive slander of Richard Stallman - not that I like him or anything, but still.

Slander is a serious accusation. I don't think you can back it up.

haha your gay haha

You seem to be sexually insecure.


Sirs (none / 0) (#186)
by Martino Cortez PhD on Sat Jan 5th, 2002 at 03:12:25 PM PST
Anonymous reader, this really proves what a sophisticated debater you are. You follow up to yourself and defend a completly different argument. Playing devils advocate are we?

Tell us, Anonymous Reader, what do you really feel on the subject?


--
Dr Martino Cortez, PhD
CEO - Martin-Cortez Financial Corporation
Copyright © 2002, Martino Cortez.

 
idiots (none / 0) (#125)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 06:23:15 AM PST
they got lots more anti linux articles, just not on front, including How To tell if your son is a computer hacker, which says that Linux is an illegal OS stolen from the government by russian terrorists. Also, Opera is 500% better than IE, so non-standard my ass. IE is only standard because they got lots of corporate backing. Opera's quality is much better, as well as its features and speed.


 
slashcode (5.00 / 1) (#38)
by error27 on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:36:00 PM PST
>>What a sad sad rip of slashcode. =(

This site doesn't use slashcode. It uses a highly proprietary version of scoop. (Read the bottom of the page.)


Sorry (none / 0) (#43)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 09:56:36 PM PST
We all make mistakes - it is striking similar to slashdot as far as the layout is concerned, though.


 
Typical Self-Absorption of Hackers (5.00 / 1) (#60)
by MessiahWWKD on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 12:13:28 PM PST
I think this site was founded for a single, and not so obvious reason - to piss off users of *nix and revel in it. After reviewing your previous posts to this site, osm, I have come to the conclusion that you are a *nix hating gypsy who sit around and plays Deus Ex while drinking diet pepsi and talking about the stock market with your second cousin in Minneapolis on your 2.4ghz shiny metallic cordless phone.


Many articles posted on Adequacy don't even mention Linux. Sure, many Linux users use drugs, hate Christianity, hate America, and have other anti-social behaviors, but to believe that all these articles only exist to annoy Linux users is ridiculous.
Also, with opera 6.0 TP2 for linux, this site won't allow you to post after previewing a message. What a sad sad rip of slashcode. =(


Blaming the site because of a beta version of non-standard browser? You are truly an idiot.
Guardian angel, heavenly friend, walk with me 'til the journey's end.

 
Bzzt. Try Again. (none / 0) (#44)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 10:58:30 PM PST
It is obvious that you have never even seen 2-4 ounces of weed at one time. A quarter pound ("QP") of weed barely fits into a large ziplock bag. Even if your lungs could handle it, it would take DAYS to smoke that much shit.

While I admire you attempt to piss off everyone here (Really, I do. That's not scarcasm), you're clearly not telling the truth.

In attempting to defend your fellow dope smokers you've made yourself look like an idoit. Please don't speak for us in the future.


Admiration, 1/4 lbs, and more! (none / 0) (#67)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 03:32:22 PM PST
I'm happy I have an admirer, I was all but hopeless. Also, I really do smoke quite a bit of pot. In all likelihood, I've smoked more pot than anyone posting to this site - I was smoking and selling 1/4 lbs at the age of 14. I can totally understand why you wouldn't believe that, as it definitely seems a bit far-fetched, but it's true. Keep on harassing the blue-collar adequacy.org pricks until your testicles bleed.

Keep on rockin' in the free world!


 
A Word of Advice (none / 0) (#61)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 12:19:45 PM PST
From one struggling pothead to another, try to cut down. If you are truly smoking as much as you say you are then your tolerance should be so high that you barely feel the drug's effects. Believe me though the drug still affects you.

You seem like an intelligent enough person which is probably why you have been able to compensate for the drugs negative effects. But think, if you can be this productive with it, imagine how well you'd do without it. Now I'm not saying to quit cold turkey but to try using it more recreationally. Use it to spice up that concert, or that trippy movie you were planning on seeing. Life's mundande tasks are meant to be just that: mundane. When you are stoned all the time you get to a point where feeling sober is more alien than feeling inebriated. When you save pot for occasional use it becomes that much more exciting and enjoyable.

While this site does seem to exist primarily to upset /. geeks, that doesn't make this article any less true. I think it exaggerates a little (like when it downplays the seriousness of alcoholism) but not much. And finally though you vehemently deny having any problem, look seriously at the amount of money you are spending on a plant. In my opinion the numbers speak for themselves.


Recreational pot usage (none / 0) (#69)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 03:43:28 PM PST
I appreciate your concern, and while your heart is in the right place, I don't think you understand my motivation for smoking pot. I _love_ marijuana. I love rolling extremely fat joints, and doing household chores while in a semi-vegetative state. I love taking bong hits before I have sex or masturbate, then sleeping for ~15 hours. I love waking up from ~15 hour naps and smoking one of the extremely fat joints I mentioned above. Sure - I have a fairly high tolerance to pot, that's why I get good pot. I'm going to start growing in my basement soon - Northern Lights #5 X Haze...mmmm... I'll be sure to share the results with my dear friends here at adequacy.org.


 
Senior programmer/sysadmin? (5.00 / 1) (#93)
by Adam Rightmann on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 03:35:11 AM PST
Well, I think that line speaks more eloquently of the dangers of marijuana than anything I could write.

For those gentle readers who don't have the benefit of my decades of experience in the software industry, let me explain.

Programming and system administrating have two completely different skill sets, with little overlap between the two (hacking out shell scripts and Perl scripts is hardly programming). Furthermore, a competent senior programmer makes 3 times a competent sys admin. These facts make me question the veracity of your statements.

What competent business manager would have a senior programmer doing the scutwork of system adminstration? Do you see Kurt Warner selling hot dogs in the football stadium when the defense is on the field? Do you ever hear of head chef/busboys? I suspect this whole fairly successful business where you are a senior programmer/sys admin is little more than a pipe dream, if you catch my drift.


A. Rightmann

 
Marijuana is deceitful like AIDS. (none / 0) (#59)
by MessiahWWKD on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 12:05:47 PM PST
But i find doing drugs to be one of the nessisites of life. Humanity for generations have been doing drugs for recreational and spiritual purposes.


Humanity has been murdering and raping each other for generations too. Are you suggesting that we humans don't become civilized? Are you suggesting that weed, rape, and murder be legalized since humans have been doing that those terrible things for generations?
Anyway pot is one of the safer drugs out there, the only reason why pot "ruins" your life is due to the laws and ignorance surrounding it.


What a moronic statement. You obviously didn't read the article. It might seem safer just like AIDS might seem like a safer disease, since you feel all right for a couple months, but by the time you realize that you're fucked, it's too late.
Guardian angel, heavenly friend, walk with me 'til the journey's end.

 
The problem with marijuana (5.00 / 2) (#23)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Dec 29th, 2001 at 08:18:34 PM PST
The problem with marijuana is it has insufficient debilitating side effects. Drugs like crystal meth, cocaine, and lsd quickly reduce the habitual user to a wasted druggie who obligingly slinks off to some skid row, away from the eyes of decent citizens. No so with marijuana: prolonged marijuana use does lead to lung, throat, and brain cancers, but that can take years. In the meantime, the chronic marijuana user can hang on a long time as a semiproductive citizen.

Pudgy, dreadlocked, slovenly, driving garishly painted VW microbusses, incapable of carrying on an intelligent conversation on an topic other than the latest growing techniques or how much they smoked last night, chronic marijuana users pose a grave threat to the aesthetic sensibilities of decent people everywhere. We must support the efforts of law enforcement officials to root out and eliminate marijuana smugglers, dealers, and users before our precious children become "stoners" and are reduced to addlebrained, barely employable dolts who are unable to discriminate between quality Reggae like Culture and horrible garbage like the Beemie Man oeuvre.


Damn I hope you are kidding. (1.00 / 1) (#144)
by DieForYourGovernment on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 09:01:28 PM PST
If not, there is something seriously wrong with you. You know would make it much better? A little herbal remedy :)


 
Indeed (5.00 / 4) (#51)
by Pussy Is Money on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 04:03:25 AM PST
This from a friend of mine. Thought I'd share it.

Back in highschool it was just fun. We would just take a couple of joints in the morning to feel good. But then it came to skipping class in order to get stoned, spending money on weed and table soccer in the local coffeeshop until well after noon. Then it got bad.

I lost my non-smoking friends. Finished school, got a job in IT. Work late, play hard. The weed helped me blow off steam. Or so I thought. I'd smoke myself in a coma watching tv and wake up late for work. After six months I was fired. Shortly thereafter my girlfriend left me. She just couldn't get in touch with me anymore, she said. I don't blame her.

Now I'm on welfare and smoking 2 grammes a day. Sometimes I don't have enough money left to buy weed at the end of the month. I kill the time by doing the dishes or washing some clothes when that happens. Or sometimes the girl nextdoor helps me out.

I tried to stop. But after two or three days I got horrible dreams and started sweating like a pig. Another time I got panic attacks that were so bad I almost couldn't leave the house to get some weed. Meanwhile they are threatening to cut my welfare, and the bills are piling up. I've stopped opening them. The last time I opened one I felt such a terrible rush of anxiety that I thought I was having a heart attack.

What's really exasperating, though, is how nobody takes us pot victims seriously. Heroin addicts have their meth, the coke addicts -- well, everyone knows how dangerous coke is. But when you have a pot problem there is nobody there to help. Pot rehabilitation programs are virtually non-existant, and those that do exist are woefully ineffective. What pot addicts need is counseling by trained specialists, but who can afford that? It would be the least the government could do, seeing how they're the ones making this stuff so easy to get your hands on in the first place [note: the author is from the Netherlands].

So frankly I don't know where to go from here. I wish they'd all just leave me alone.

Peace,
[name omitted]



look on the bright side (none / 0) (#148)
by Nobody on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 04:02:46 AM PST
Hey, at least he can still type!


 
heh, whatever (none / 0) (#153)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 10:23:24 AM PST
<i>What's really exasperating, though, is how nobody takes us pot victims seriously.</i>

I know what you mean. I had a similar experience. I smoked pot on occation in school, hung out with mostly stoner-types and AP students. Finished school and got a job in IT. Then it all went downhill from there.
I used to smoke only when offerred. Then I started smoking out with my IT friends every weekend, and soon every day after work. Then it got real bad. Smoking 2 or 3 bowls with my roommate as soon as I got home every day. Going in to work late. I must have changed jobs 6 times since I started working. And doubled my salery 3 times.
I got this extremely paranoid feeling and started researching everything I could find about our government and mary jane and the taliban, etc. Long before Sep. 11th. I discoverred the media conspiracy stories, etc. But when Sep. 11th struck I knew I would be falling into a drug induced coma while this whole net ecnomy was going to topple down around me.
I'm still making 6 figures, going in to work after 10, 11, sometimes noon. Smoking an O a month. Most of my friends have left the state due to the ecnomic problems so I'm smoking most of that O myself now. Hundreds of thousands, if not, millions of people lost their jobs. I'm still watching people get laid off left and right. Hell, I've asked to be laid off myself, but they "need" me or something. Heh, whatever.
And you know what? I saw all this coming months before everyone else. I told everyone I could. I complain, I bitch and whine and attempt to educate. Then I sit back and smoke a phat bowl and let Americans fuck up their country one vote at a time, play my games, smoke another bowl, and forget. Forget, forget, forget. You'll never be able to remember it all anyway. Besides why remember it when you can always look it up?
You know what? Weed does make me less social. It does (partially) hinder my ability to think creatively or function at my best. My best? I've NEVER functioned at my best. Why? Why should I function at my best when its so fucking easy to make LOTS of MONEY with all these stupid freakin Americans around. Why when its so fucking easy to outperform my coworkings, even while being stoned off my ass, not that I work while being stoned, just as a comparison. You want to know what my best is? If I performed at my best I could have been another rocket scientist, quite literally. I'm a mathematician and a physicist at heart. But I also would enjoy the complexities and simplicities of computer algorhythms. As it sits now I enjoy learning how to program, but I don't take a scientific approach to it, or anything for that matter. Science doesn't matter to me. No matter how smart I am I'm still just another stupid human. I'll never know the truth about anything with so much misdirection by government and society. You could be the smartest person on earth, able to recite everything you ever read in school, and still be working at taco bell. The goal for most Americans is to make a lot of money and I've already obtained THAT goal. My goal would be to learn everything I can in life and apply that knowledge, but WHY? I'm having fun learning everything over and over and over again. I could spend the rest of my life learning this way, or forgetting... I can't remember. But its all in good fun.
And Why should I not smoke just because you want someone to talk to? I don't want to talk to you. Have you ever thought about that? Perhaps the reason I smoke so much is because you or your friends don't read enough. But you sure as hell vote. I'd perform at my best, and stop smoking weed, when you decide that money is not the goal in life, but instead knowledge and self improvement.
So in conclusion. I'll quit when society pulls its head out of its proverbial ass. Besides, I get such a kick out of outperforming people while I'm on drugs. It really makes me happy to think that it takes a few bowls just to bring me down to your level. ;)



 
your the problem (none / 0) (#183)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jan 4th, 2002 at 09:35:01 AM PST
You cann't blame pot for the way you feel. You obviously just take it excessively to escape your problems. If it wasnt pot it'd be aclohol, heroin, coke...... If everything was illegal you'd probably just be depressed. I think its time people started to ask what the real social problems are instead of just blaming drugs.


 
serious (none / 0) (#57)
by johnny ambiguous on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 10:12:08 AM PST
I do know what adequacy is all about. But some jokes are too coarse to laugh at.

...Even a little stoned is still stoned, and you still have glazed eyes, a stupid grin, and an inability to carry on a decent conversation with non-stoned people. Yes, there are alcoholics, but they are definitely a small minority.

Sentence one in the quote above is merely inane, a repetition of cliches, somewhat like osm's "grateful dead album cover" rubbish. Are you attempting there to project the impression that your only contacts with marijuana-smokers are fourth-hand or yet more distant? Sentence two, now, is unforgivably contemptible.

...Do you need daily medication from life?

Hell, yes.

You started smoking with your friends when you were out having a good time.

Where did you ever get that idea? "Good time" indeed. You ass. If you ever see anybody anywhere having a "good time," slap him for me, will you?

It enhanced the fun.

What "fun"? Three decades ago when I was a potsmoking teenager my potsmoking friends might have interpreted "fun" as that dreamt-of future state of affairs when we'd have moved out of our alcoholic dads's houses, whereupon they wouldn't be able to slap us around any more.

What changed?

Only this; for those of us still breathing, the passing decades have utterly extinguished hope.

Zikzak, are you channeling Thomas Friedman, or some other similar self-satisfied purblind optimist? Your entire article is based around the ridiculous premise that, for everyone, an "unmedicated" life is a fine thing, a desirable thing, something any sensible person might well enjoy. Whereas in fact there exist half a world-full of sober people, among them myself, for whom our happiest moments, in fact our only happy moments, are when we are asleep and dreaming.

Sincerely WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net


Getting into my Chevrolet Magic Fire, I drove slowly back to the office. - L. Rosen

Try eating bananas (5.00 / 3) (#64)
by zikzak on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 02:01:25 PM PST
Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens;
Bright copper kettles and warm woolen mittens;
Brown paper packages tied up with strings;
These are a few of my favorite things.

Cream-colored ponies and crisp apple strudels;
Doorbells and sleigh bells and schnitzel with noodles;
Wild geese that fly with the moon on their wings;
These are a few of my favorite things.

Girls in white dresses with blue satin sashes;
Snowflakes that stay on my nose and eyelashes;
Silver-white winters that melt into springs;
These are a few of my favorite things.

When the dog bites,
When the bee stings,
When I'm feeling sad,
I simply remember my favorite things,
And then I don't feel so bad.


Gotta love those Von Trapp girls (5.00 / 1) (#66)
by osm on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 03:06:18 PM PST
they're some of my favorite things.


skippy (none / 0) (#95)
by nathan on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 03:52:27 AM PST
You, skippy, are no Von Trapp chick. You butthole.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
lying (none / 0) (#108)
by johnny ambiguous on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 11:34:49 AM PST
blue satin

You claim

 ...Unlike those drugs, marijuana lies...

I dispute that first of all. It's a customary trick to conjure up a debate opponent and discredit his argument on the ground that he, (whom you have puffed up out of thin air), is either deranged or simply mindless. Elenchos elegantly performs the former evolution above; the core of your argument is the latter one. That the typical chronic smoker is fooled by the chemical where he isn't aware that something has gone wrong.

"Isn't aware" first. Tee hee, potheads are like so zoned out mannn that they don't dig what's happening mannn. Cue up sitar music. Cut to a commercial. No. On the contrary, I think you grossly underestimate the intelligence of human beings (that is, other human beings beside yourself, a selected some of your friends, and another handful of famous people whom you respect), really I do. People in general do know what they are doing. Jurisprudence assumes this implicitly, demonstrated best by its rare and extraordinary exception, the "defense by insanity," codified in the U.S. as the M'Naughton rule.

Rather than being deluded by a chemical which "lies," if I wanted to anthropomorphize, I'd say "the chronic marijuana smoker consciously and deliberately makes a bargain with marijuana." My next point being, however, that I don't want to anthropomorphize. You can't make a bargain with marijuana nor can it lie to you, it is inanimate.

Finally, "something has gone wrong." If as I assert the chronic marijuana smoker freely and knowingly prefers his internal sensation of being affected by marijuana to not being so, what exactly do you object to? Provided, of course, that some fiend is not holding you down and forcing you to submit to that lying drug that is.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net


Getting into my Chevrolet Magic Fire, I drove slowly back to the office. - L. Rosen

finally... (none / 0) (#136)
by peeps on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 05:29:40 PM PST
I've wasted so much time grappling with the hobgoblins of this site that I temporarily missed your brilliant thoughts. Cheers.


 
Diversional Living (none / 0) (#71)
by peeps on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 05:04:56 PM PST
First, thank you so much, zikzak, for providing me this golden opportunity to respond to this truly fascinating forum of capable minds and hot-button, brain exercising issues. Having been a daily pot-smoker for the last 14-15 years of my life I see my destiny of opposition in your words.

My first task would be to utterly obliterate your perception of the typical potsmoker vs. a supposedly normal, "not-addicted-to-anything" (bullshit) human being. I can tell you of several 4.0 students I've known who go to class high. I can also share with you the testimony of many successful bussiness owners who spark up daily (I fall into this catgory). Nevermind several artists and musicians (another group of my peers) whom I'm sure you've heard of drawing inspiration from beyond the confines of the capitalist machine we all endure as a matter of survival.

Self-medicated? Yes, I am. An addict? Yep, and this is the point that needs to be made clearly: by experience I have found this to be a very minor liability in my own existence. My introduction to weed and it's subsequent saturation of my life is absolutely nothing like the perception you, your supporters, and everyone else in the world who have formed thier opinon of ganga users from watching those afterschool specials, and fearing social repercussions of alternative thought processes.

It's a given that folks are easily troubled in thier teens. For reasons not worth going into, I may have been on the extreme side of troubled. A good friend of mine turned me on to grass when I was 16. After three utterly tortuous years of being placed on a variety of that era's "antidepressants" which included wonderful side effects such as reduced appetite, nervousness, sleeplessness, and impotence (NOT good for your average middle-teenage boy). In my situation at the time these doctor prescribed, manufactured substances were the WORST drugs I could be ingesting, and I can look way back and still classify them as EVIL. I was quite grateful to have found an answer to my wishes to finally feel something like "normal".

I'm enjoying my life now, much more than when I made the very concious decision to avoid those in my past who have chosen alcohol, meth and heroin (my musician experience introduced me to most every flavor of vice). Of course I gave these diversons a shot, and found out very quickly they weren't for me. I don't suppose you've ever had to sit with anyone all night trying to keep them sitting upright so they don't choke on thier own puke, have you?

Some folks on the other side of this issue may find it of interest that I do not have dreadlocks, I bathe every morning by 7am, and my vehicle is not a VW microbus - It's a Volvo station wagon.

The most obvious example of a potsmoker to anyone who would be reading this would be the dirty, dumb, broke and unmotivated loser. I suppose that you have to take my word that I don't fall into this category. You'll also have to take my word that due to my experience I can strongly suggest that you, zikzak, should not ever consider backing off your position. I know that probably won't happen, but in reading your commentary I can't help but think that there is a specific individual in your life that is sufficient inspiration for your stance. If you're looking at this person (or persons, there may be a group you're writing about) with utter distaste at the waste of life they have become, chances are it would have happened regardless of the existense of the great green goddess they got on the wrong side of. And it could happen to you, so stay away from my weed!

Many, many folks do not respond to the benefits as I have because, simply, they are not me. The classifcations of "Evil" and "Worst Drug" seemed to be based on those situations where INDIVIDUALS lack the ability to put their existence in this life in perspective. Speaking of perspective, my work is constantly judged by a wide variety of folks who may or may not be under the influence of anything other than life itself. It really does seem like my work passes muster quite well, thank you very much.

For me, and a few of my closest friends, it has a pervasive prescense in our lives because we find it beneficial to US. We are not moving furniture and doing dishes anymore. We are programming cell phones, publishing menus for succesful restaurants and designing webpages. All of these are tasks that require concentration, intellect and perseverance.

In regards the the "naive wonder of a six year old", what is so wrong about keeping in touch with that inner child? I suppose that's another subject for sober grown-ups...


More lies, fantasies and delusions (none / 0) (#72)
by osm on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 05:18:46 PM PST
I can tell you of several 4.0 students I've known who go to class high.

Yeah, I'm sure. It's easy maintaining a 4.0 in a community college taking your typical "liberal studies" load with 4 hours a semester.

I can also share with you the testimony of many successful bussiness owners who spark up daily (I fall into this catgory).

Drug dealers are not successful business owners.

Nevermind several artists and musicians (another group of my peers) whom I'm sure you've heard of drawing inspiration from beyond the confines of the capitalist machine we all endure as a matter of survival.

Oh, what a surprise, another communist.

*** a long diatribe of slush I couldn't bring myself to read ***

Please don't post here under the influence.

In regards the the "naive wonder of a six year old", what is so wrong about keeping in touch with that inner child?

Oh, nice, a pedophile too. The FBI will be contacted with your IP token information.


nope, reality (none / 0) (#81)
by peeps on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 09:19:39 PM PST
- Cultural anthropology + psychology (a neighbor of mine); another friend of mine floats a 4 in computer science.

- Retail technology, maybe someone you know.

- So, why can't an artist be an American?

***it's ok, you wouldn't get it anyway***

- It just so happens, I ran out last night.

- Oh, and, eat shit and bark at the moon...


Yeah, sure (5.00 / 2) (#83)
by osm on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 11:06:40 PM PST
- Cultural anthropology + psychology (a neighbor of mine);

translation: "A neighbor of mine takes ebonics classes while staying in a halfway house for addicts."

another friend of mine floats

Yeah, I'll bet.

- Retail technology, maybe someone you know.

I seriously doubt it.

- So, why can't an artist be an American?

Why can't an American be a communist?

***it's ok, you wouldn't get it anyway***

Probably not. That pot-head logic is so difficult to untangle.

- It just so happens, I ran out last night.

And already having withdrawal symptoms.

- Oh, and, eat shit and bark at the moon...

I think I made it clear I don't smoke marijuana.


Heh. (none / 0) (#150)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 05:21:21 AM PST
I know a music theory major that likes cocaine and a 3.7gpa.

3.2 comp sci major is growing shrooms. 3.2 isn't specacular, I just thought it was cool that he's growing shrooms.


Why? (none / 0) (#151)
by tkatchev on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 05:44:43 AM PST
Actually, any toxic mushrooms (e.g. toadstools) have a psychedelic effect if used in miniscule amounts.

This is why, by the way, the classic "witch" image includes toadstools. No joke.


--
Peace and much love...




 
indeed (none / 0) (#171)
by nathan on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 06:25:43 PM PST
Music theory has, and will continue to drive its adherents to horrible, horrible deaths.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Fascinating (none / 0) (#73)
by zikzak on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 06:46:17 PM PST
So, let's see what we have here: A person in their early 30's who has been a habitual marijuana smoker since they were 16. A person who began smoking marijuana to deal with the problems of a teenager. A person who, 15 years later, is apparently still trying to deal with the same problems, ones that the vast majority of us had outgrown by our early 20's.

Well you've certainly convinced me! I only wish I had possessed the wisdom to continue hitting the bong well after my teen angst had subsided. Why, instead of shrugging off the inconvenience of puberty, I could still be carrying that baggage around with me! Who knew?

You are truly a great person, peeps. Most everyone else I know managed to leave their insignificant pathos behind them once they grew up, but you've kept it close to your heart all these years. And you have the lies of marijuana to thank for never feeling the need to move on to something else.

You are an inspiration to us all.


Enlightening (none / 0) (#82)
by peeps on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 09:44:39 PM PST
To those who feel as though they have all of the answers for everybody, you've missed the point. Not everyone's on the same track in the first place, we'll definitely not be riding in the same car.

I'm not posting here to inspire anything other than awareness of individuality (someone here actually accused me of being a communist, I'd like to sternly correct them), and the FACT that I know what works for ME and my PEEPS. Angst is born of feeling misrepresented, which happens. Time has taught me how to exist on my own terms, and among dickheads like you who wouldn't guess after an hour with me that I was the target of your angst towards a plant.

That's how I can feel absoulutley comfortable with myself. Like I said, you don't want to be like me...

Those who feel they know what's best for me, and their opinions that pass laws that complicate matters, mirror your alignment in this matter. The fundamentalist rhetoric that labels what is misunderstood as "evil" is an immature level of evolution.


You don't even understand angst (none / 0) (#87)
by T Reginald Gibbons on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 11:40:41 PM PST
Angst isn't a result of misrepresentation. That idea went out of style with early nineties PC political debates. Identity politics are dead. I have to assume that you are still carrying around the opinions you picked up at college. Perhaps it is your long term use of the vile weed that has kept you in a state of suspended animation. Perhaps it is too difficult for you to keep up with the pressing issues of the day, while hitting the bong every other hour.

The modern media does not misrepresent people. It is simply not profitable to sell people an image which does not reflect their ideals. Observe the ease with which the media has fed rave culture to the young. (You'll like that, of course. Ravers are drug fiends, just like you.) The media has learned a thing or two since you dropped out.

You have no excuse for feeling misrepresented. If you can't make the small effort to be a part of society, why should society slow down and make a place for you? Society hasn't excluded you. You've excluded yourself.


thank you! (none / 0) (#99)
by peepss on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 07:05:10 AM PST
You're soooo wrong, and in expressing yourself as such you've helped me to make my point.

First, my use of the word angst may have been inappropriate. Let's just go ahead and call what I feel anger. You, sir, are much more a product of modern media than I will ever be. Having found the mind programing of college inappropriate for my budding identity until I was sure of why I was there, I missed the part where the "required curriculum" attemtped to program me to actually take everything media tells me to heart.

You're placing the power of media on a much higher pedastal than I would ever dare to attempt to place the positive results of my strategy for effective existence in the form of a plant.

What I actually meant by misrepresentation is on a far more personal level that what you perceive. Programmed individuals like yourself happen to be the only bain of my existence. I expect nothing more and nothing less from the vast amount of media I ingest than to be made aware of what's going on in the world, and the opinions of those that I agree and disagree with. This matters to me, and the evidence is here in my posts. Herein is further proof that I am a very functional and important part of society.

Your comments shed light on the fact that your perception of "society" has yet to catch up with the flavor of openmindedness that those who are members of my facet(s) of society are forging ahead upon. Other than the proliferation of bland techno music, I've seen no other facet of media feeding rave "culture" (likened to mold) to our youngsters. Most of them can look at the hard facts of the damaging effects of MDMA, a much more serious problem than the vile weed. Go ahead, just try to help me catch up...you'll have catching up to do yourself before your worthy of that, buddy.


Ummm (none / 0) (#100)
by osm on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 07:15:55 AM PST
Why has your nick suddenly changed from "peeps" with one 's', to "peepss" with two? Did you forget your password, Acapulcuo Gold?


very observant... (none / 0) (#104)
by peepss on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 10:05:41 AM PST
Yes, I'm new here...and you can certainly tell.

No, I haven't had the chance to memorize the system genrated pw yet, which proves nothing. So in the interest of keeping up I've set up another similar id just so I can respond to your marvelous attacks on my alignment in my travels. This is fun, really...

I suppose if I really wanted to get creative, I would take your suggestion here and form an id around your "Acapulcuo Gold" tag, or maybe I could just id myself as "pedophile"?

Just so you know as my newfound adversary, Overbearing Simplistic Moron, taking apart my comments in the fashion you have stands as proof to me and most anyone else who feels as I do that you are incapable of formulating a solid argument. You'll need a little more than that to go toe-to-toe with yours truly a full 12 rounds (an ideal that stands to deviate from what I would imagine your conclusion of who you're dealing with is), or would that be 12 steps?

"I've decided medicine isn't the answer to my problems. It's a spiritual thing." God, who the hell are you, anyway? If you'd actually read what I'm saying you may see that we agree on a thing or two. And, you'd see that I figured out the solution for what you've gone through with your medication(s) long ago. But then you'd have no means to actualize your superiority complex over someone who does have his shit together, would you? Get back to me when you get a clue, fuckwit.


Dork. (none / 0) (#105)
by osm on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 10:18:54 AM PST
No, I haven't had ... {rambling slush omitted for brevity} ... This is fun, really...

Maybe if you sobered up, you would notice that link in the upper-left that says "My Adequacy Options" and beneath it "User". There, you can set your password to whatever you want: "Moonbeam", "ShirleyTemple", "DeadHead"...

Just so you know ... {rambling slush omitted for brevity} ... be 12 steps?

I think you forgot to exhale.

But then you'd have no means to actualize your superiority complex over someone who does have his shit together,

LOL! Potheads are notoriously self-doubting, paranoid, lazy idiots. If that's having your shit together, then you have also entered the final stages of delusion.

Get back to me when you get a clue, fuckwit.

Must've hit a nerve to get him all riled up like that.


psychological bitchslap (none / 0) (#109)
by peepss on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 11:44:52 AM PST
New here, AND sober...but that's ok...I don't need you to be nice about your user tips, I'll figure it out.

Yeah, keep dancin' around laughing boy! You're classification of my kind as "self-doubting, paranoid, lazy idiots" is exactly what I am succesfully debunking...thanks for your help Mr. Cut & Paste.

Typing must be pretty difficult in that post-antidepressant haze you're experiencing. Seems to be effecting your ability to form cognitive arguments, too.

Is your mind aching yet? Do you need a rest? Why don't you just lie down and play with your eyelids and laugh at yourself laughing at yourself for a while...


Ahhh (none / 0) (#110)
by osm on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 11:58:28 AM PST
Now, we've decayed into the realm of trolling. Continue along this dangerous path, my delusional friend, and your posts will be deleted mercilessly.


troll? (none / 0) (#113)
by peepss on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 12:41:50 PM PST
So sincerly sorry about that, are you a site admin? If so, go read the mission statement again. If not, sounds like it's time to go crying to daddy.

Now, somebody please share with me the parameters for "trolling" and let me know if that includes accusing somebody you've never met before of being a drug dealer, a communist, a pedophile and a "self-doubting, paranoid, lazy idiot". You had better expect a response for that kind of crap.

If you do have the ability to delete me, go ahead...give me the satisfaction of knowing that's the best you could do and I'll find somewhere else to return verbal abuse.


Troll or paranoid psychotic? (none / 0) (#117)
by osm on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 03:30:45 PM PST
Now, somebody please share with me the parameters for "trolling"

How about posting completely offtopic comments. How about posting inflamatory comments, profuse with unacceptable language?

The topic at hand is MARIJUANA, which you admitted to using. Not my medical situation, which is being treated by a LICENSED PHYSICIAN. You dare compare your marijuana abuse with a medical therapy admistered by a person who has successfully completed medical school? You people kill me.

If you wanted to post comments about my condition, your opportunity was presented when I published those diary entries. This is not the time or place. This is an article about MARIJUANA and its effects. I DO NOT USE MARIJUANA.

So sincerly sorry about that, are you a site admin?

Yes, I am an editor here and have the ability to delete your nonsensical ramblings forever. The only reason I haven't is because I have already received several emails from people laughing at you. I decided the entertainment value was worth the waste of bandwidth.

if not, sounds like it's time to go crying to daddy.

I am your daddy, bitch.

...you've never met before of being a drug dealer, a communist, a pedophile and a "self-doubting, paranoid, lazy idiot"

You admitted to all of that yourself, buddy. Maybe you should go back and read your comments. Looks like your short-term memory is shot.

Now, back to your little problem. It is a well-known fact that marijuana spikes the levels of trinitrotoluene in the brain, causing severe violent reactions such as those exhibited by yourself on this very message board. The only thing you are proving here is the medical fac that marijuana is a dangerous mind-altering substance that lures its victims into a false sense of security. But as the trinitrotolouene levels continue to be unnaturally altered, even that false sense of security vanishes, giving way to even more violent outbursts, paranoia, anxiety, hallucinations and, ultimately, schizophrenia.

I can't believe your little stoner buddy who is studying (para)psychology hasn't told you this. Must be short-term memory loss?


ok (none / 0) (#128)
by peeps on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 09:15:57 AM PST
So, Dr.O is telling me that it's a "well known fact" that the level of dynamite in my brain is at an unnatural high. (trinitrotoluene=TNT=a yellow, odorless solid that does not occur naturally in the environment). Whew, I guess I need medical attention...next time I light a joint my head could blow-up, right?

All I've admitted to is being someone who over an extended period of time has found this stuff useful. And the primary focus of my posts had been only to make the author of the story aware of this, until somebody lit a fuse. We can look back into the subsequent posts and clearly see who threw the first punch. In case you didn't notice, osm, I didn't get pissed off until you started drawing your very own inflamatory conclusions (dealer, pedo, commie, etc....) of who I am. NOTHING was witten by yours truly that could have led a sane person to size me up in that way. I believe that would be enough to rattle anyone's cage, whether or not his brain was soaked in explosives.

Here's a well known fact for you: the LICENSED PHYSICIAN who prescribed your medicine is statisically very likely to have recieved a kickback for prescribing that junk to you and many others from the drug company that produces it. He's got one helluva student loan to pay off, and he's probably got an eye on that 30' yacht too. Like I said, I went down that road years ago, fell off a dead end, and decided to take a path through the woods.

You and your buddies may continue to laugh at me, the paranoid schizophrenia I was born with has long subsided. I won't be going anywhere until you use your clout to erase me...you sad, silly little man.


You're a real piece of work (none / 0) (#129)
by osm on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 09:51:57 AM PST
(trinitrotoluene=TNT=a yellow, odorless solid that does not occur naturally in the environment). Whew, I guess I need medical attention...next time I light a joint my head could blow-up, right?

Did you just make that up? Wow, it must be true, since you just typed it in here. Give us a break. Reread that paragraph a few times and see how insane you sound.

NOTHING was witten by yours truly that could have led a sane person to size me up in that way. I believe that would be enough to rattle anyone's cage, whether or not his brain was soaked in explosives.

YOU are the one who so boldly asked "what is wrong with touching children?" YOU are the one who called drug dealers successful business owners. YOU are the one who commented that you cannot exist within the American "Capitalist Machine (tm)".

Here's a well known fact for you: the LICENSED PHYSICIAN who prescribed your medicine is statisically very likely to have recieved a kickback for prescribing that junk to you and many others from the drug company that produces it. He's got one helluva student loan to pay off, and he's probably got an eye on that 30' yacht too. Like I said, I went down that road years ago, fell off a dead end, and decided to take a path through the woods.

Oh, for the love of Jesus. Here comes the paranoia again. Tell us, have you any special insights into the UFO coverup in Roswell too?

You and your buddies may continue to laugh at me, the paranoid schizophrenia I was born with has long subsided.

I'm no doctor, but judging by your comments, I would think not. The pot has just put you in such a cloud, you are unable to see the effects of your ailment. I am truly sorry about your mental health problem. But it is your own fault that you choose to blind yourself to the truth by sitting around with your friends sucking on a paper dick.


bwah-ha-ha (none / 0) (#133)
by peeps on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 05:00:39 PM PST
One thing I love about this information age is how we may instantly access any tidbit of info we'd like in seconds.

one of many references

Now, you give me no choice but to pick you to pieces. YOU are the reason this has degraded into personal attacks.

YOU are the one who so boldly asked "what is wrong with touching children?" YOU are the one who called drug dealers successful business owners. YOU are the one who commented that you cannot exist within the American "Capitalist Machine (tm)"

I posed the question what is so wrong with staying in touch with my inner child, you dumbass. I made it perfectly clear that I don't sell drugs. I sling technology. And, finally, I have been trying to share that I can and do exist quite well within the boundries of Capitalism which allows us all to eat and live and buy almost anything we'd like, except pot. Oh well, I can go back to an original American ideal and grow it myself, for myself.

And here's some more research you can do before you consider filling another prozac prescription

So, since I'm reading your sincere concern for my mental well-being...please go kill yourself and relieve the earth of one more fucker that drives me crazy.


Raging Temper? (none / 0) (#135)
by osm on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 05:28:25 PM PST
One thing I love about this information age is how we may instantly access any tidbit of info we'd like in seconds.

... and how you can make up your own website and put any load of nonsense on it you want. Anyone can do a medical search on trinitrotoluene and clearly see that it is a hormone produced by certain glands in the brain which regulate temper, among other things. The fact your levels are out of control is proven with every post you make.

I posed the question what is so wrong with staying in touch with my inner child

It doesn't matter WHOSE child it is. PEDOPHILIA IS PEDOPHILIA, you sick freak.

I made it perfectly clear that I don't sell drugs

You said you were a successful business owner who "lights up" or somesuch. Since it is impossible for a pothead to be successful at any business other than dealing drugs (which requires nothing more than sitting around in your underwear, zombi-like), I drew the obvious conclusions myself. Perhaps if you weren't stoned for Jesus, you would be able to see such logic for yourself.

I can and do exist quite well within the boundries of Capitalism which allows us all to eat and live and buy almost anything we'd like, except pot

No, you said, "Nevermind several artists and musicians (another group of my peers) whom I'm sure you've heard of drawing inspiration from beyond the confines of the capitalist machine we all endure as a matter of survival."

Only a communist would need to "endure" the "capitalist machine".

Oh well, I can go back to an original American ideal and grow it myself, for myself.

I would imagine that is far more physical labor than you can exert.

And here's some more research you can do before you consider filling another prozac prescription

and here's a link to a guy who claims to be Peter Pan. And here's a clue for you: JUST BECAUSE IT IS ON THE INTERNET DOES NOT MEAN IT'S TRUE.

So, since I'm reading your sincere concern for my mental well-being...please go kill yourself and relieve the earth of one more fucker that drives me crazy.

Very mature. But I know it's the pot which is causing such a violent rage within you.

You have revealed yourself to be a truly disturbing human being.


placid amusement (none / 0) (#137)
by peeps on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 06:48:37 PM PST
... and how you can make up your own website and put any load of nonsense on it you want. Anyone can do a medical search on trinitrotoluene and clearly see that it is a hormone produced by certain glands in the brain which regulate temper, among other things. The fact your levels are out of control is proven with every post you make.

Sorry, too lazy and stoned...It's my day off and it's soooo much more fun staying here and tormenting you. I searched Google, then WebMD on your initial, correct spelling. Guess which one gave me the result, for that matter any result. Now it's your turn, try and come up with a long, fancy name for that "certain gland".

BUT WAIT: Anyone can do a medical search on trinitrotoluene... LATER IN THE RANT: JUST BECAUSE IT IS ON THE INTERNET DOES NOT MEAN IT'S TRUE

Disturbingly contridictory, typical tool of a conservative against the ropes.

It doesn't matter WHOSE child it is. PEDOPHILIA IS PEDOPHILIA, you sick freak

Thanks, and I guess it's a good thing you can't be threatened with FBI action for playing with yourself.

No, you said, "Nevermind several artists and musicians (another group of my peers) whom I'm sure you've heard of drawing inspiration from beyond the confines of the capitalist machine we all endure as a matter of survival." Only a communist would need to "endure" the "capitalist machine".

I can read that back and realize how just a couple of words sent you on a tangent that has so little to do with the matters at hand. We can hash out things that are right and wrong about capitalism another time. I'll be here a while, thanks. And I'm not a communist, you'll just have to take my word for it.

And here's a clue for you...

Get a clue for yourself, laws of probablility would dictate that somewhere in the 1600+ links in that search, the truth will be found by most who can click and read.

Very mature. But I know it's the pot which is causing such a violent rage within you. You have revealed yourself to be a truly disturbing human being.

I've already shared how and why you're pissing me off with your lame attempts to debunk my position with name calling and out-and-out fabrication. Most folks with thier faculties about them would agree that it would be pretty disturbing for a self important mindless slug like yourself if a violent, raging, idiotic drug fiend such as myself was able to expose you to be a complete fool so handily.


You are pathetic (none / 0) (#138)
by osm on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 07:08:49 PM PST
Sorry, too lazy and stoned.

Obviously.

BUT WAIT: Anyone can do a medical search on trinitrotoluene... LATER IN THE RANT: JUST BECAUSE IT IS ON THE INTERNET DOES NOT MEAN IT'S TRUE

Disturbingly contridictory


You dolt. I said a MEDICAL search. Do you think the only place you can do a medical search is on the internet?? Have you ever heard of a LIBRARY? How about a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY? Or don't they have those in LA-LA Land?

Thanks, and I guess it's a good thing you can't be threatened with FBI action for playing with yourself.

Nobody asked about your masturbatory habits. It goes without saying that you masturbate too often, as marijuana renders you emotionally incapable of forming long-term relationships. However, I don't care to go into the gory details of your self-fulfillment habits. Rest assured that the FBI will be more than interested in your pedophilia.

And I'm not a communist, you'll just have to take my word for it.

Your "word" means absolutely nothing to me.

violent, raging, idiotic drug fiend such as myself

Now we're getting somewhere.


yawn, sleepy... (none / 0) (#139)
by peeps on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:09:16 PM PST
Now we're getting somewhere

Good sarcasm wasted on ignorant translation. We've gone nowhere but clear accross the page with this garbage and shit-talk. A search is a search is a search, libraries are obsolete now and we all know it. By the way "...as marijuana renders you..." just where the hell do you get that stuff? My wife of five and half years would disagree. And "...masturbatory habits..." I was actually referring to you, I'd weep for any woman weak enough to subject themselves to an obviously battered ego like yours.

Go ahead and have the last word, but try not to revert to the same old third-rate name calling and pseudoinfo...please. I'm tired and I'm going to go to sleep with my wife, enjoy your pills and your cats.


Smoke up, Johnny (none / 0) (#140)
by osm on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:36:20 PM PST
We've gone nowhere but clear accross the page with this garbage and shit-talk.

Whatever it takes to show the world your complete ignorance.

A search is a search is a search, libraries are obsolete now and we all know it.

Yeah, because the internet is just saturated with useful information. All reliable. People like yourself will be the ruin of this once-great Nation.

My wife of five and half years would disagree

Probably, at least until she sobered up and realized the truth: that your lives are nothing without pot.

I was actually referring to you

No you weren't. You were referring to yourself, in a pathetic attempt to divert attention away from the fact that you're a disgusting pedophile.

I'd weep for any woman weak enough to subject themselves to an obviously battered ego like yours.

My, that grass gives you such insights. Does everything look like it's made of clay?

Go ahead and have the last word, but try not to revert to the same old third-rate name calling and pseudoinfo

The only one who has been calling names is yourself. The only one posting "pseudoinfo" is yourself. Your delirium is reaching a fevered pitch.

I'm tired and I'm going to go to sleep with my wife,

Oh, you mean she isn't cheating on you with the pot dealer tonight? I guess she got enough of a private stash out of him last time.


smoke up our collective ass (none / 0) (#157)
by peeps on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 02:25:47 PM PST
Why-oh-why do I let you egg me on? I really can't answer that, other than my lame attempts to take pride in the abilities of myself and other human animals to have a spirited exchange of usefull verbiage. Now my wife thinks your scum too, but I'm sure that doesn't matter much to you either.

Everyone here has access to the truth, whether or not our plants are lying to us. I can't imagine how unhappy you must be to be involved in this technological frontier yet so doubtful of its abilities to inform. But, I suppose that adds yet another level to the nonsense of our little exchange.

As an editor (whatever that means, dream job?) at a site that boasts to be controversial perhaps this is your singular motivation. Stir up shit...you do it well, keep it up. With your weak tactics you've made it easy for me to feel righteous.

Thank you. Godspeed.


Everybody Must Get Stoned (none / 0) (#159)
by osm on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 03:04:28 PM PST
Why-oh-why do I let you egg me on? I really can't answer that, other than my lame attempts to take pride in the abilities of myself and other human animals to have a spirited exchange of usefull verbiage.

Whatever. Though, you do remind me of an animal.

Now my wife thinks your scum too, but I'm sure that doesn't matter much to you either.

No, I place no value in anything a pothead says or "thinks" (hallucinates).

I can't imagine how unhappy you must be to be involved in this technological frontier yet so doubtful of its abilities to inform

I hate to be harsh, but my God, you're an idiot. My involvement in technology has shown me how easy it is to put anything on the internet and have people take it as gospel: especially impressionable pot-heads who have no ability to think critically.

As an editor (whatever that means, dream job?)

Being an editor on Adequacy is not a "job". This site is the result of a group of people who share common ideas and interests. You see, sober people have things called "hobbies" they use to relax, pass time, whatever. What my job actually is, is not any of your concern.

With your weak tactics you've made it easy for me to feel righteous.

If you only had the slightest clue what an ass you've made of yourself in this thread.


enlighten me... (none / 0) (#160)
by peeps on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 03:54:31 PM PST
That's what this is about, right? Tell me how I've made an ass of myself, I'd really like to know. YOU tell me how I should be, then everything will be fine. I suppose in your world communism isn't even a factor because you seem to be existing solely in the totalitarian state of your own opinions. Explain it in plain English, I'm obviously not getting it. And don't hold back, since you "hate to be harsh" and I'm really tired of pointing out how many ways you've deliberately tried to piss me off (congrats, you've succeeded) just because you disagree, and that's your hobby? Jeez...you're a twisted fellow.

Maybe I'm making an ass out of myself because whether or not you are an element in this site's design, you and your opinions can't possibly be the primary focus here. I still have hope for you and everyone else. I've read/responded to your posts and I'm right here to say that it's quite easy to NOT take your word as gospel. Those of us with our own minds know better. All this seems to be now is a race to the last word...and I've probably got better things to do.

You obviously don't...what and where is your motivation? What could you possibly hope to achieve with this endless bashing? You'll get nowhere with me until you can exhibit true and pure intellect, everything you've posted up to this point LACKS. Do your pride a favor, CONCEDE!


It's quite simple, really (none / 0) (#165)
by osm on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 04:16:21 PM PST
You come on here, spewing utter nonsense and raving like a lunatic after making the claim pot has been good for you. It is really quite obvious to everyone how nonsensical you are.

At this point, all this conversation is doing is repetitively underscoring the above paragraph.


 
please pay attention (none / 0) (#143)
by nathan on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:47:23 PM PST
Without regard to any other quibbles I might make, I must object to your use of 'conservative' to mean 'someone to whose cultural ideology I object.' Good grief. Conservative is not equal to GOP.

I consider myself an old-fashioned person in the best sense of the world. That certainly doesn't mean I subscribe to the cultural agenda of self-described 'cultural conservatives' in America. It beggars belief that people like Buckley and George Will are called 'conservative' today.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

attention paid (none / 0) (#156)
by peeps on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 01:53:17 PM PST
Sir, I owe you another apology. There is nothing wrong with being conservative in my book, other than the occaisional episode of intolerance exhibited from some individuals. There is the tendency I've picked up on in my exchanges with various folks that define themselves within those parameters to resort to contradictory "spin" in the interest of "winning" thier argument. Osm has yet to establish himself within any parameters, or for that matter make a lick of sense...so it was probably very wrong for me to toss him in with the Limbaughs and Gingriches of the world that I have become so accustomed to disagreeing with. That is doing thier kind a grave injustice as well.


no need to apologize (none / 0) (#170)
by nathan on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 06:20:58 PM PST
It is scum like the American "cultural conservatives" who ought to apologize for dirtying the good name of conservatism. Sorry I answered you so harshly.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
this probably isn't even worth posting, but... (none / 0) (#152)
by derek3000 on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 06:11:03 AM PST
here.

Being that I smoke daily, I don't have the motiviation to doctor something like this.




----------------
"Feel me when I bring it!" --Gay Jamie

 
don' forget, osm, (none / 0) (#142)
by nathan on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:41:20 PM PST
An important part of being a doctor is not merely having graduated from medical school, but also holding a medical license.

Just as having a CS degree doesn't make you an MCSE, being a med-school grad by itself does not make you a licensed physician.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Boring (none / 0) (#88)
by zikzak on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 12:28:39 AM PST
Here's something for you to chew on during your next bake out session: Since every single pot head on earth trys to justify their habit with the exact same 1/2 baked (pun intended) arguments, we can only draw one of two possible conclusions.

1) Marijuana attracts a certain type of person. Thus, all users argue the same line.

Or

2) Marijuana use encourages a certain type of fallacious logic. Thus, all users argue the same (fallacious) line.

Here's a hint: Your drug of choice is lying to you.


a plant is not capable of lying... (none / 0) (#101)
by peepss on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 08:12:22 AM PST
...and I'm begining to think that you are incapable of understanding what I'm saying, or reading my posts at all for that matter.

What you are missing here is the fact that I am not really arguing with you in the sense that I or anyone else who induldges in my type of enlightenment feels that it's for everyone. It's not.

People from all walks of life find this diversion useful and enjoyable. Think of something that you enjoy doing and that you believe helps you in your everyday life. Then, imagine what it would be like if some jerk tried to tell you that through no experience of thier own they have reached the conclusion that said activity should be stopped immediately and that you are dellusional to think that it has been any help to you whatsoever, EVEN THOUGH YOU KNOW BETTER BECAUSE IT'S YOUR LIFE TO LIVE!

Being a person with a gift for the written word, I would imagine you would lash out at said verbal antagonist with everything you've got. It's at this point you would be defending your personality, and your righteousness. That's all I'm doing here, zik. And I have every right to.

I'm not defending the drug, I simply don't feel the need to at this point. Plenty of folks have done this for me, including quite a few fathers of this country whose main goal was to provide thier future generations with a country based on individual freedoms.


 
fundamentalist? (none / 0) (#94)
by nathan on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 03:48:41 AM PST
The only fundamentalism I see here is from the Church of Dope.

Anyway, you are not Christ, so for pity's sakes get down from your cross. In real life, we are not "dickheads" who'd harsh you buzz. We just find your humourlessness, furtiveness, and self-justification utterly ridiculous.

Good for you that you can hold yourself together as a chronic. What I haven't seen anywhere is the aspiration to be anything more. You haven't mentioned wanting to become supreme at anything; you haven't talked about anything of genuine emotional depth; I don't see the good old agonic drive anywhere here; hell, man, it's not even clear that you want to learn a fourth language.

There's more to life than 'vegetating,' so to speak.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

contextual definition (none / 0) (#106)
by peepss on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 11:21:49 AM PST
fun·da·men·tal·ism (fnd-mntl-zm) n. A usually religious movement or point of view characterized by a return to fundamental principles, by rigid adherence to those principles, and often by intolerance of other views and opposition to secularism.

See today's response to the author. I have every right to defend what he, you and others are condemning. There is absoluteley nothing ridiculous about that. I have nothing to justify other than my position that we all have a right to exist on God's Green Earth the way we choose.

I didn't think my goals and aspirations were part of the topic here, other than the fact that I have goals and aspirations. Seeing as how you see fit to inquire: I wish to "become supreme" in the realm of true human interaction, and the understanding and tolerance required to do so. And, I've long understood this reqires me to take into account as many human perspectives as possible...want more? Do you want me to write a book about it for you? Give me a few weeks, I'll have that for you in no less than five languages...sarcastic bee-atch.


fourth language (none / 0) (#141)
by nathan on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:39:08 PM PST
What, you think that's not possible? You ought to try taking life straight. FYI, many Europeans take four or five languages for granted; for that matter, I have never met an ethnically Chinese Malaysian without at least four languages. A good friend of mine, who is Dutch, speaks Dutch, German, English, French, Spanish, Italian, Russian, and has Greek and Latin as well - at 24.

Fundamentalism has a rather more specific meaning than you think. With regard to Christianity, it means accepting the literal truth of every word of the Bible. You may quibble with this, but that is the origin of the term. I don't believe in this, so I am not a fundamentalist. Nor are many members of this site, although we do have some valued contributors of that stripe; regardless, your use of the term is ill-taken.

I don't know where you're getting this nonsense about having a right to exist as you choose on God's green earth. Maybe if no-one's actions affected anyone else, there existed unlimited free resources, and society had no need to educate its youth, your position would be sensible. As it is, no-one is anything like completely free, and there's no end to that in sight.

What I was getting at about supremacy is quite germane to the topic at hand. You may recall that, according to Jaspers, the goal of every Athenian was to establish himself as "the best among the best" (I think it was aristei ten aristein, or some such, but I haven't any Greek yet.) The author's article talks about the ambition-blunting effects of marijuana, and I noted in my post that you give no evidence of the agonic drive whatsoever. I don't know; maybe you see yourself as somehow working at becoming a great scientist, poet, adventurer, or soldier. "Human interaction" sounded promising until I realised that you didn't mean through rhetoric or persuasive writing, you meant having a good time with your pals and chumming around. So much for that, Militiades.

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

worthy of response (none / 0) (#154)
by peeps on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 12:21:52 PM PST
Your posts are relatively nice for this forum, even if we disagree. Someone here has successfully put me in ultra-defensive mode, sorry about the name-calling.

Actually, I've long believed I can learn and do whatever I need to when opportunities and neccesities arise. I'm heading back to class this summer to pursue a degree in engineering, and I suppose the languages of technology have been more of a focus of mine lately leaving those written and spoken ones by the wayside. I write my own prescriptions for learning as well, with priorities placed on what sort of knowledge will be useful to me immediately.

For instance, in my late teens and early twenties I cooked in a variety of kitchens in which it was beneficial to learn Spainish, and I learned what I could to communicate with my co-workers handily. That friend of yours probably has practical applications for the languages he's learned, and I'd have to say I envy that. I suppose if I were better traveled and/or had a healthier interest in languages other than English, I'd pick them up.

So, on Fundamentalism, indeed a quibble or two. I placed that definition of the term as a generalization noting the emphasis on intolerance, please accept apologies and as breif as possible explanation. In a spiritual sense a lot of folks these days like to explore a variety of religons and draw from them what will be useful to better their existence and thier interaction with other humans. Fundamentalism as a concept does not allow for this exploration. I would hope for the sake of any and all Christians reading this that they don't lay exclusive claim to this inflexible mindset, as the term "fundamentalism" is readily applied to certain factions I'm sure that we are all aware of that apply every word of the Quaran to thier death monger activities. Alas...we're off topic again. How all of this relates is the inherent dangers of intolerance of the actions and beliefs of others that don't share your views or perspectives.

And, of course I realize that my rights as a free-thinking, free-acting human being disappear as soon as I have a detrimental effect on the happiness and well being of my fellow humans. My decision to spark up in the comfort of my home at the end of the day doesn't even have potential to hurt anyone but me. This brings us back to the issue of intolerance, and the danger that many "in the right" would disagree that I have that right threatens all sorts of personal freedoms that make life worthwhile, not just the topic at hand.

You'll have to forgive my using a literal definition of "agonic" drive rather than the context of Greek mythology (and I'm sure you can tell that I am woefully lacking in that feild of study as well) that you were actually refering to. Agonic in an English translation equates to "having no angle" (ref: American Heritage Dictionary) which I translated for this context to mean neutrality. I then related that to my personal goal to remain as understanding as possible of the views of ALL of the many people I interact with every day.

In order to further justify my position that pot is not neccesarily the cause of demotivation among it's users, but rather that user's reaction to it...my repeated posts to this board against bitter and spiteful opposition should stand for something. What matters more than that is the fact that human interaction should still sound promising to you, that's the only way issues like this get dealt with. If I need to define what is driving me, then there you go. My life is saturated with the nature and value of TRUE communication, which must include listening, speaking, reading and writing to as many folks with as many views as possible to try to find some common ground. If any of those four factors are ignored or made light of, communication fails and our hopes of understanding each other are empty.


agonic drive (none / 0) (#169)
by nathan on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 06:17:47 PM PST
I'm not familiar with that definition, so it's a good thing we're clearing up that miscommunication. Nietzsche called the classical drive to be supreme the "agonic drive," and he claimed that competition - the destructive kind as well as the constructive kind, by the way - was the engine that powered the Greeks to greatness. One famous example was the drama competitions leading to Greek drama becoming one of the greatest literatures in the world. (Compare it with Roman drama to understand the total superiority of the Greek sort.) Personally, I've always taken great inspiration from the eternal youth of Greek civilization. It is a wonder.

All the best,
Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Well... (5.00 / 1) (#155)
by hauntedattics on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 12:54:41 PM PST
You're free to smoke all the weed you want, but if I were a single woman, I'd certainly give you a wide berth, regardless of your ability to program cell phones or design web pages. The presence of THC in my man, as a potential ingredient of the sperm that conceives my children, is a pretty big turnoff, as is the idea of potsmoker as role model.

And as for what's wrong with keeping in touch with that inner child, you're 30-odd years old. It should be fairly obvious by now.



...thanks (none / 0) (#158)
by peeps on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 02:57:49 PM PST
...I will.

The last evidence I was aware of concerning any effect that pot may have towards my ability to produce healthy offspring is a study in the late '80s that told us if we happen to smoke the skin of a marijuana seed we run the risk of being rendered sterile. I've done my very best to avoid that should my wife and I decide we want to procreate. There has been no link to THC afflicting a father's DNA that I know of. If you do, gimme the facts ma'am. So far as rolemodels go, it's been my experience that the families I've come in contact with where there is an air of openness and patience potentially brought about by the parent's use of the herb, the offspring tends to be rather intelligent and well-adjusted.

I'd have to say I appreciate your translation of my "inner child" statement over others here. For clarification this has to do with psychological philosophies pointing out the potential dangers of ignoring the youngsters (early developmental issues we have no control over) that exist within all of us, like it or not. Smoking has forced me to deal with some of these issues, and has played a role in being an actuator in the long road to mental health.

But I can't say it enough, these are not paths cut for all feet...my point to responding to this article is to show that absolutely nothing is that cut-and-dry.


go sniff around somewhere else, pal (none / 0) (#162)
by osm on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 04:02:35 PM PST
she already said she's not interested in unmotivated, confused, mutant-dna-having, pedophilic, communist dope fiends.

And now you dare suggest that potheads make better parents?! My God. That's called CHILD ABUSE. Not that you care, being a pedophile.


a sparkling example... (none / 0) (#168)
by peeps on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 05:17:35 PM PST
...of the dangers of NOT addressing the inner demons.

Nope, no name calling from osm. None at all...he's a pillar of righteousness with unlimited wisdom at his disposal, why would he need to revert to that? Please, Lord, give me the intellectual fortitude to be more like osm? puuleeeze?


 
Like I said... (none / 0) (#172)
by hauntedattics on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 06:29:12 PM PST
what you do with your body (and time) is your own business. There may not be a medical study that conclusively shows that a person's sperm or DNA is adversely affected by long-term pot smoking. That said, however, my own instinct tells me that the less potentially hazardous stuff I mix with conception, the lower the odds of having problems during and after pregnancy. This is the same instinct that, when I do get pregnant (be patient with me, Mr. Rightmann), will keep me from smoking, drinking alcohol, taking cold medicine, getting a perm or eating too much red dye #2.

As for marijuana as an 'actuator' of your mental health, I'd be interested to see how that works. My own mental health has been greatly enhanced by moving beyond my adolescent 'traumas' and accepting (embracing?) the responsibilities of adulthood. Those responsibilities can actually be quite enjoyable, and help me toward becoming the fully realized human being I'm striving to be.



My apologies, hauntedattic (none / 0) (#174)
by Adam Rightmann on Thu Jan 3rd, 2002 at 06:24:06 AM PST
I was under the mistaken belief that you were expecting. Good luck when you and your husband do decide to.


A. Rightmann

 
So easily we forget... (none / 0) (#84)
by trueEQUALSfalse on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 11:08:41 PM PST
I'll begin with a question that I don't really know the answer to: How many people did Marijuana's <I>illegal</I> use kill last year? I contrast this question with a radical under-statement: Alcohol was a factor in at least 100,000 American deaths last year. The office of drug control policy released statistics that 52,000 deaths were related to drugs, but this number includes "all drug-related deaths, including suicide, homicide, motor vehicle injury, HIV, pneumonia, hepatitis, endocarditis, and infant deaths, as well as overdoses" (<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/corrections.html">here</a>), and, as you can tell, marijuana was the cause in only a fraction, if that, of those deaths

Based on these statistics alone, I feel it is impossible to call marijuana the WORST drug. To do so would be to overlook the other most commonly used and abused drugs in American society: nicotine, caffeine, alcohol. People suffering from nicotine addiction are prone to violent mood swings and irritation, not to mention the horrible withdrawal symptoms of trying to quit. Ever get in the way of a person who NEEDS a cigarrette RIGHT NOW? Other people feel they just "don't function right" if they don't get their dose of coffee in the morning. Alcohol speaks for itself: drunk driving murderers get off clean, alcholic husbands beat alcoholic wives who are really doing their best to raise their soon-to-be alcoholic children. (This may or may-not be an exaggeration, but I think I'm making my point) One must ask themselves "Why is marijuana illegal?" It's easy for you zikzak, because your drug has been made legal, however the fundamental difference you speak of is the same foundation for a drug abuse. At one time alcohol WAS illegal, right here in the United States, but that law was ratified because OUR VERY OWN COUNTRY was full of "hopeless drunks" (<a href="./2001.12.2.0160.24792.html#13">
The reason for bringing up three other drugs, is because they are the most common and most used by YOU, ME, and (just about) EVERYONE. And every one of those drugs is taxed by the government. Everything is simply a matter of: "Can the government make money from it?" (I guess I'm off on my 'pothead anti-government' kick, but really... think about it) The rainforest's would be saved if Hemp were turned into the cash crop it should be. The government tried to do away with alcohol, but realized they could make a fortune from it and people would be happy and buzzed, so it sacrifices 100,000 of its citizens each year and reap the benefits of dollars in the bank. It's only a matter of time before the government decides marijuana should be legal because its effects aren't 'that bad', then all of our pulp production problems will be solved, and nobody will die from marijuana related car crashes, just like they don't now.

People are high all over the place, all the damn time, doing an innumerable number of things to get that way. Some people, like you zikzak, are high on life, looking at whiskers on kittens and thinking about how warm their gloves are. Other people are high on life about going to church and praising Christ (which is somehow univerally accepted on this network as that which is RIGHT, and TRUE), lots of other people are hopped up on caffeine driving their car too damn fast on the way to work, and others are high and floating in a pool of alcohol waiting to drown in their own vomit tonight. </p>
<p>"A drug is somthing that alters you and changes how you react to the world."
<BLOCKQUOTE>
Nicotine: Drug; Use: Daily/Hourly/etc.,.<br>
Caffeine: Drug; Use: Daily/etc.,.<br>
Alcohol: Drug; Use: Monthly/Weekly/Daily/etc.,.<br>
THC: Drug; Use: Monthly/Weekly/Daily/etc.,.
</BLOCKQUOTE>

"Drugs that deceive are not to be trusted." Who, precisely, trusts in any drug, and what drug does not deceive? Rhetorical questions: Do people start smoking thinking "I trust this drug, so I am going to make a lifelong habit of this and die of lung cancer?" Do people start drinking thinking "I trust this drug, so I am going to get drunk and drive my car into oncoming traffic killing people?" No. Drugs are not to be trusted, but don't confuse what drugs are. Drugs are drugs, and we're addicted.


Oh god (none / 0) (#89)
by zikzak on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 12:50:10 AM PST
You read not only the article, but several (if not all) of my comments as well, and you still can't manage to address the stated thesis. Actually, I'm pretty sure all those THC cobwebs in your skull kept the thesis far from coming even close to registering with you.

How many people did Marijuana's illegal use kill last year? I contrast this... [blah blah blah]

I don't know and I don't care. Relative danger was only mentioned tangentially in the article in order to make a totally different point. You aren't arguing on topic, you're spewing the same tired rubbish as everyone else.

It's easy for you zikzak, because your drug has been made legal

It has? Which one? Oh, that's right. You were too stoned to understand the article. Never mind.

I guess I'm off on my 'pothead anti-government' kick, but really... think about it

No, I won't think about it. It sounded really stupid coming from Billy Thursten in 11th grade, it sounded even more stupid coming from the patchouli-reeking Dead Head in my dorm, and it sounds idiotic beyond belief when posted on a web site for grown-ups.

Drugs are drugs

No, they are not. If they were then you wouldn't have spent the preceding paragraphs trying to justify your use of one in particular while bashing others.


Drugs ARE drugs... the sooner you realize... (none / 0) (#107)
by trueEQUALSfalse on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 11:23:56 AM PST
that, the better off you'll be.

I'll answer in order:

Your thesis, in all reality, was very unclear. It was made perfectly clear that you didn't want to talk about "the morality of the drug war, 'gateway drugs', legalization, glaucoma or hemp", and that you clearly believe marijuana is the WORST drug, but your thesis does not exist in any traditional form. You went out of your way to stand behind other drugs, saying "[Drug user's] activities are more a function of age and transitory lifestyle than of the drugs themselves." As for the difference between holding a semi-reasonable conversation with a pothead, I believe it was made clear by an Anonymous Reader <A HREF http://www.adequacy.org/?op=comments;sid=2001/12/2/0160/24792;pid=0;cid=8#8>here</a>.

The relative danger was not mentioned tangentially, because essentially you tried to convey the message that alcohol is an okay drug, while marijuana is not. My reply clearly stated that all drugs should be considered just that: drugs. The reason alcohol (as well as nicotine and others) has been so widely accepted is because it is now LEGAL to purchase these drugs and ingest them.

I wasn't stoned when I read your article, and I wasn't stoned while replying to it. I think you were too stoned to realize that I made a valid point against your alcohol/cocaine/meth-praising and marijuana bashing, and it has damaged your ego so you need to 'spew' slurs at me about being a pothead. The fact that you don't care about the SCIENTIFIC and ACCEPTED statistics about alcohol/nicotine related deaths per year is really quite a frightening display of a twisted personality.

I was quoting you when I said I was off on a 'pot-head anti-government kick', because apparently you believe that the government is NOT full of greedy, money-grubbing hypocrites. The fact that you give no thought to anyone's opinion but your own, and discredit all opposing statements as being the ravings of crazed potheads shows precious little about the intelligence you want so badly to display. "Grown-ups" aren't necessarily the smartest people, but the knowledgeable ones realize that LISTENING skills are imperative to any worthwhile conversation.

In this light, I think it is important for you to re-read my statement to realize that I wasn't trying to justify any use of any particular drug. I never once stated that I am a user or abuser of marijuana or any other drug. I simply stated that based on statistics alone I feel it is impossible to call marijuana the WORST drug. If you had read what I wrote you would realize that I was bashing all drugs, if I was bashing any.







 
I have a question for pot addicts. (5.00 / 2) (#86)
by elenchos on Sun Dec 30th, 2001 at 11:34:38 PM PST
How can you seriously expect anyone to believe one single word you say in defense of marijuana??? You're a POT SMOKER for crying out loud!!!

I mean, do I have to draw a picture? Well, sure, of course I have to draw a picture. I'm addressing drug fiends, after all. Look: drugs ruin your mind. Drugs make you think what is bad is good. Drugs make you tell lies, and believe them yourself. Everyone knows this is a fact. Even pot users know this. Don't you tell each other "Never trust a user?" Don't you?

Nobody knows better than you pot addicts that pot addicts can't be trusted. So who do you think you're fooling?

I just want to add that I think this weak defense of "grass" is a pure insult to man's best friend, alcohol. In every instance where it can be shown that pot will destroy your life, alcohol enhances it. To claim otherwise it to attack one of the greatest American institutions, the beer, wine and spirits industry, not to mention the world-famous American tradition of mixed drinks. I get choked up, I mean it, when I think on the colorful calvalcade of fine American beverages that pot smokers denegrate every day: vodka, gin, whiskey, wine like champagne or a fun little lambrusco, or the endless good times of all the lagers, pilsners and more that the rich world of beer has to offer.

Where pot makes you think you're cool (see foolish pot-smokers like Bart Simpson or Bill Clinton for examples), alcohol really does make you as cool as cool itself: Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Neal Young and every truly great American of the last 200+ years swore by alcohol as his true freind can companion in good times and bad.

You would admit that you are ashamed of yourselves, but of course, the pot is doing the talking and so you can't but lie.


I do, I do, I do
--Bikini Kill


Sarcasm? (none / 0) (#112)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 12:31:37 PM PST
I truly hope that you are being sarcastic.

If not, I'll reply to you osm style.

<sarcasm>

>>How can you seriously expect anyone to believe one single word you say in defense of marijuana??? You're a POT SMOKER for crying out loud!!!


translation: I am an alcoholic who finds reassurance in attacking those who perform the same act of self-medication by different means.


>>I mean, do I have to draw a picture? Well, sure, of course I have to draw a picture. I'm addressing drug fiends, after all. Look: drugs ruin your mind. Drugs make you think what is bad is good. Drugs make you tell lies, and believe them yourself. Everyone knows this is a fact. Even pot users know this. Don't you tell each other "Never trust a user?" Don't you?

translation: As an alcoholic I am of course the most trustworthy person and should be treated with more respect as I blunder through life in a drunken stupor.



>I just want to add that I think this weak defense of "grass" is a pure insult to man's best friend, alcohol.
>>...
>>I get choked up, I mean it, when I think on the colorful cavalcade of fine American beverages that pot smokers denegrate every day: vodka, gin, whiskey, wine like champagne or a fun little lambrusco, or the endless good times of all the lagers, pilsners and more that the rich world of beer has to offer.

translation: I'm not rational enough to formulate an argument as to why pot is bad, but I can say that there are multiple ways to partake in another DRUG(alcohol) that magically enhances my life.


>>Where pot makes you think you're cool (see foolish pot-smokers like Bart Simpson or Bill Clinton for examples), alcohol really does make you as cool as cool itself: Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley, Neal Young and every truly great American of the last 200+ years swore by alcohol as his true friend can companion in good times and bad.


translation: All people who choose to use pot recreationally are idiots, whereas I defend my abusive behavior by pointing out a couple of famous people who shared my abusive behavior yet have absolutely nothing else in common with me.



>>You would admit that you are ashamed of yourselves, but of course, the pot is doing the talking and so you can't but lie.

translation: I am degrading pot users as a means to make my self feel better as I stumble around in a alcohol induced haze. As added protection from replies, I assume that everyone that disagrees with my opinion is a lying drug addict.



I hope that my supposedly "intellectual" response has caused you to rethink your opinion and stop your evil alcoholic ways.

</sarcasm>


Bah.





 
they can be trusted (none / 0) (#124)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 06:18:30 AM PST
thats just discrimination really, it depends on the person. It dont make u any less trustworthy.


 
What The hell??? (none / 0) (#163)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 04:15:31 PM PST
Alcohol and Marijuana are two highly different substances. I don't even understand how you can begin to phathom and compare the two. The have no common factors. Actual effects are to distant to be considered related. Alcohol has caused more Deaths over the time span of a year than Marijuana has in all it's existence. Do you know how many people die from being hit by a drunk driver or how many people ingest alcohol to a fatal intake and suffer from alcohol poisoning? Not once, have I ever known a drug treatment center dedicated strictly to Marijuana users. I wonder why that is? Because there isn't one. Meanwhile, losers check into clinic after clinic searching for ways to minus their addiction to Alcohol. I'm sure you'll look in the back of your depleted narrow mind and search for the most obvious excuse you can comprehend. Marijuana is illegal. Yes, that's in America and that's now. Alcohol went through a time of prohibition. Did it not,statistics do not lie. It's impossible to over dose from Marijuana. Do you have any clue as to what the withdraw symptoms are? Alcohol can lead to a severe chemical dependency. Marijuana is only psychological. For instance, it takes the average user of Marijuana 72 hours to recover from all adverse effects experienced while using it one time. Do you know how long it takes the average drinker to recover from use of alcohol? Years, and years. They never fully recover. THC leaves the body within 22-43 days. alcohol lingers on as it henders digestion, liver failure, pancreas malfunctions, chemical dependencies, jaundice, and makes you gain weight. I'd rather put a joint to my mouth then go out and by hit by a drunk driver or check into the nearest meadows due to chemical dependency and liver troubles. Check your facts.


Re: What The hell??? (none / 0) (#184)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jan 4th, 2002 at 03:07:09 PM PST
Not once, have I ever known a drug treatment center dedicated strictly to Marijuana users. I wonder why that is? Because there isn't one.

Huh? How's that for circular reasoning. I have never seen X because there is no X. Duh! No shit. WTF is your point? Is stating the obvious and making a big point of it something you're proud of? A big accomplishment for your brain?

Hey, you wouldn't happen to be stoned right now?


 
okay, im a user! (none / 0) (#164)
by gjs4786 on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 04:16:00 PM PST
....and you're a stupid bastard!


 
Wow (none / 0) (#166)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 04:55:23 PM PST
I feel for you my friend. I truly do. You are the target of serious brainwashing and deceit. There is nothing more to explain. You are BLATANTLY uneducated, and I'd appreciate it if you'd read up. Please, please click this link. www.jackherer.com/comparison.html

If you choose not to - here is something for you.
Deaths per year-
Alcohol- 350,000-450,000
Cigarettes- 150,000 plus
Legal Drug overdose- 14,000-27,000

40,000 YEARS OF MARIJUANA USE - ZERO, I REPEAT, ZERO Deaths. This is FACT buddy. Taken straight from the Surgeon General's Reports.

You are disgustingly uneducated. I pity you.

www.norml.org


whatever (none / 0) (#187)
by Anonymous Reader on Sun Jan 6th, 2002 at 06:21:47 PM PST
Are you sure man kind has had knowloadge of fire for 40,000 years?


 
mmmmmmm (none / 0) (#167)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 05:10:09 PM PST
WELL THAT IS THE CRAZIEST BULL I HAVE EVER HEARD


 
rubbish (none / 0) (#182)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jan 4th, 2002 at 09:31:59 AM PST
I'd just like to say that I've never tried but in my life but think it is absolutely brilliant. I know its unusual for someone to to have tried put to say they actually think its a good thing. From experiencing friends who do smoke pot I can say none of them have ever caused any trouble (violence) while on pot. However my friends that drink alcohol (I dont drink either) often become nasty and violent.

Can I just finally say that if I wasnt such a health fanatic and had to choose something nasty to put into my body (alocohol, heroin, cigarettes, etc.) then it'd be pot.

Thanks for listening


Not pot, DMT! (none / 0) (#216)
by dmg on Thu Feb 14th, 2002 at 11:04:00 AM PST
Can I just finally say that if I wasnt such a health fanatic and had to choose something nasty to put into my body (alocohol, heroin, cigarettes, etc.) then it'd be pot.

Can I suggest you try DMT. Its supposed to be much better.

time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration.
-- MC Hawking

 
dude.... (none / 0) (#215)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Feb 1st, 2002 at 08:49:13 PM PST
bart simpson doesnt smoke weed. he got drunk and acted like a damn fool. weed kills no one. drunk drivers kill thousands each year. why dont you tell the victims reletives that weed is worse than alcohol? something to think about.


 
lol (none / 0) (#92)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 03:28:44 AM PST
This site gets more stupid by the moment. I think this is run by the Cristrian coalition


 
Let me rephase your editorial a little ... (none / 0) (#97)
by pyramid termite on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 06:40:21 AM PST
"Coffee tells you that you are a better person for having drank coffee. Coffee tells you that you are more creative when you drink coffee. Coffee tells you that it helps you concentrate. What coffee doesn't tell you is that you feel more creative because you have lost the ability to judge your work from the vantage point of someone who isn't wired. It doesn't tell you that it replaced your critical thinking skills with the naive wonder of a hyperactive six year old. It doesn't tell you that your present hyperalert awareness of your surroundings is not the same thing as being attentive and awake. And most importantly, it doesn't tell you that when you become an habitual user its effects persist even when you are not longer jiffed.

The similarities of former coffee drinkers' testimonials should tell you something. "After two weeks it was like a haze was removed from my life." "I felt like I had finally woken up." "I couldn't believe how much more alive I felt after a month away from it."

Any drug that takes two to four weeks of non-usage before you even realize what a mess you were is seriously evil. Drugs that deceive are not to be trusted. If a drug's entire purpose is not to have fun, but rather to make the user believe that the drug itself is harmless and has little real effect, then what point is there in taking that drug?"


He who hides his madman, dies voiceless - Henri Michaux

What rubbish (none / 0) (#130)
by MessiahWWKD on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 10:21:32 AM PST
Coffee does none of the things you mention. Not only are stoners lazy and paranoid morons, they also can't make a reasonable argument.
Guardian angel, heavenly friend, walk with me 'til the journey's end.

 
Marihuana (hash) for medical use. (none / 0) (#98)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 07:02:02 AM PST
I have been suffering from fibromyalgia for more than 10 years now. The less I sleep, the more pain I have all day. A 3-4 hours sleep every night, waking up after a hour, having trouble falling asleep again. Pain and being tired, that was how my life was.

3 years ago I started smoking hash. I don´t like to be high, so it is small amounts I smoke, just to be able to sleep 7-8 hours at night. It have changed my life.

I am now able to participate in our daily life in the family. I can now do the shopping, help the children with schoolwork, play with the children (I have 4) and read books again, and not just be in the bed the most of the day.

I still have pain, and I am still tired, but not as much as before.

Should I not be allowed to smoke hash ?

(Sorry if I´m not writing so good in english, but I´m from Denmark)

Hermann
dko10966@vip.cybercity.dk








some poetry to cheer you up (none / 0) (#103)
by philipm on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 09:32:31 AM PST
I have written some pot head poetry to make you feel better about your liberalist problems.

Four Score and Twenty years Ago
When the corn was growing high
I was smoking pot like a slashdot moderator
and watching the clouds roll by.

How many years was that again?
I wish I could count to ten?
The magic of pot has addled my brain.
But, hey!
With that magic of pot, maybe to ten, count I can!

They tell me pot is wrong
but I am strong
They tell me pot makes sweet baby jesus cry
But hard as they try
Take away my dignity, they can't!

Sweet sweet pot!
Sweet sweet pain!
The way I see it smoking pot is to everyone's gain




--philipm

 
Horrible waste of Government Money... (none / 0) (#111)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 12:04:20 PM PST
CFC# 7981 NORML... Where US Government Workers can check off to send money to an organization devoted to breaking the law. Abusing a system designed to send money to fine organizations like the Salvation Army


no it is not a waste of govt money (none / 0) (#119)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 31st, 2001 at 04:52:19 PM PST
Potheads are boring people with no goals or ambition. Ie, France. Even the most skinflint of the Founding Fathers would not have balked at the expense of saving this country from turning into France.


 
The Drug War is a Waste of Money (none / 0) (#127)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:38:43 AM PST
Legalize, regulate, tax, and teach. The answer to our nation's drug problems in four words. Obviously its not that "cut and dried," but its a far better solution than locking up people with drug problems. Addiction is a disease, not a crime. Why don't we just lock up people that get tobacco related cancer?


 
My experience ... (none / 0) (#123)
by Ben Reid on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 02:38:43 AM PST
Marijuana made me an under-achiever in all aspects of my life, education, relationships, spirituality, you name it.

And for me it was really hard to see the effects of pot smoking in my life, initially. My grades DID NOT go down, I came first in both of my university degree 's (I gave up pot before exams mind you), I was maintaining meaningful relationships (or so I thought) despite having to hide the extent of my pot smoking at times. But deep down I knew that I was not reaching my full potential, I think all pot smokers know this - it still makes me a little sad to think about.

Over time, pot gradually eroded the true meaningful relationships I had with those close to me and most importantly, it eroded my relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ.

The day I decided to quit was truly one of the defining and great moments of my life.

I was a pot smoker for over 6 years. I could NOT have quit pot by myself at that stage, no way, it was too hard [1]. After a while pot smoking really embeds itself in all parts of your life. I have read about heroin addicts who have found it harder to give up their pot habit than their heroin habit!

The reason why pot is so dangerous and addictive is similar to the cigarette addiction - it's the dis/association game. You begin to disassociate with non pot smoking friends as your habit gets worse. You gradually associate pot with all different parts of your lifestyle (smoking after meals, after coffee, after/before sex, before watching favourite TV shows or movies, smoking as a means to catch up with "friends" etc) and before you know it you are enslaved to the drug. It truly is a "lifestyle drug" - you are dedicating your lifestyle to pot.

But the good news is that you can turn it all around!! The physical effects of pot (including lung damage) are nearly 100% reversible if you give up in time. I am now as fit and healthy as I have ever been. The social aspect is the real hard part - this is where I needed God's help.

Don't be surprised to find that you can't beat the pot addiction by yourself - I sure couldn't. But the good news is that all you have to do is honestly ask God for help. He will gladly give you the power and wisdom to remove the addiction from your life ... you just need to be sincere.

God bless,

Ben

[1] Quitting was not easy -- make no illusions about it. I had the most vivid, sometimes horrible dreams for months. My body spewed out all the toxins that "hydro" had introduced, I was violently ill at times. I had to redefine my social groups. But was it worth it - YES!!!!! :)



 
Read it and learn. (none / 0) (#126)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 08:31:48 AM PST
http://www.jackherer.com/chapters.html


 
Enough with the banter of right and wrong... (none / 0) (#131)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 03:18:39 PM PST
Enough with the banter of right and wrong on the boards here. (I thought this was a liberal site.) Many of you buzzards sound like you beleive the hype our government feeds you. Drugs are illegal because our society would not function economically if they were legalized. Anyway, I won't get into a tirade.
<p>
And, well, I didn't read the whole article, but I read a few posts here, and had to respond. I already know why cannabis is good.
<p>
First of all, to know anything about Marijuana, you MUST experience the plant while it is living. The cannabis flower must be one of the most intricate flowers that exists. Examine one with a loupe for optimal clarity and magnification.
<p>
Smell the plant. You won't have to try. Depending on the variety, you'll notice the purity and healthful nature of it's smell. Watch it, if you have the time you'll see several bugs including worms (caterpillar looking little buggers), ants and a variety or two of tiny beetles. They love this plant.
<p>
Okay, now that you've truly experienced the plant, you realize that it's just a plant. Most of the time this is what one receives, (cured of course) when a purchase is made. Generally there is no processing involved.
<p>
Now, smoke it or put it in tea or brownies. I find that many inexperienced smokers or people who 'smoked it once, but it just made me hungry and tired' heads usually were too stoned their first times to realize that they were communicating more effectively and honestly when they smoked (granted everyone's different, and if your a paranoid person, you'll have to get past that.)
<p>
Now, marijuana is a truth serum to a certain extent. And I don't mean a lingual truth serum. I mean that it's an indicator of purity, health, and symbolic and social truths.
<p>
For example, when you smoke, and eat or drink something truly nasty (coca cola for instance) you know that it's nasty, unnatural stuff.
<p>
I'm always motivated to drink fruit juices and take my vitamins (okay I'm a health nut vegetarian anyway) and sometimes take a run.
<p>
I think moderation is key with marijuana or any drug. If you decide to flip out about that, well, consider for a moment that recent research shows that there are receptors in our bodies that were built to receive cannabinoids. More work needs to be done, but it looks like our body actually has the ability to Produce cannabinoids.
<p>
Anyway, the point I was about to make is that everything is a drug. TV, food, prozac, coffee, jimson weed, they're all drugs. How you use them should be your choice. Yes, I believe it is true that some people have addictive personalities, and they may learn the hard way, but on the other hand the reason most of those people try drugs in the first place is because of their taboo nature.
<p>
Smoke it, eat it, drink it. It's organic (hopefully), all natural and good for you.
<p>
Happy New Years, now let's get back to changing the world, kids!



Oh my God. (none / 0) (#132)
by osm on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 03:40:23 PM PST
(I thought this was a liberal site.)

Well, if nothing else, at least you have proven you are a drug addict.

Drugs are illegal because our society would not function economically if they were legalized.

Drugs are illegal because they do physical damage to you. They impair your senses and judgement. Let me guess, you drive drunk?

First of all, to know anything about Marijuana, you MUST experience the plant while it is living.... Examine one with a loupe for optimal clarity and magnification. Smell the plant. You won't have to try. Depending on the variety, you'll notice the purity and healthful nature of it's smell...

You are truly frightening. It's not like it's Natalie Portman, you sick freak.

For example, when you smoke, and eat or drink something truly nasty (coca cola for instance) you know that it's nasty, unnatural stuff.

Go look at the contents printed on the label of any Coca-Cola can and you will see it is made from all-natural ingredients. And even if it weren't, everything is chemistry. Quit listening to the Grateful Dead and take a chemistry class.

...and sometimes take a run.

I'll bet that's funny.

recent research shows that there are receptors in our bodies that were built to receive cannabinoids. More work needs to be done, but it looks like our body actually has the ability to Produce cannabinoids.

Where did you find that? The Jerry Garcia Guide to the Human Body? In fact, OPIUM is an almost exact copy of a certain set of chemicals used in the brain. That is why it is the best pain-killer known to man.

It's organic (hopefully), all natural and good for you.

Yeah, if you enjoy getting cancer, unnaturally increasing the estrogen levels in your body, throwing your brain chemistry utterly off balance, having chronic bronchitis, mutating your sperm, incapacitating your ability to mature emotionally, need I go on?

Happy New Years, now let's get back to changing the world, kids!

Yeah, it's so easy to change the world by sitting in a circle with a bunch of zombies sucking on a paper dick.


 
"organic" (none / 0) (#147)
by Nobody on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 03:59:04 AM PST
You seem to think that using a drug is justified on the basis that it is "organic" or "natural".

Magic mushrooms are organic too, but I somehow doubt that society would function normally if everybody indulged in that on a regular basis...

Similarly, you seem to imply that taking something "unnatural" like coca cola is inherently worse than taking something "natural". Send me your address and I'll post you some poisonous berries mate. :-)

There are LOTS of reasons why certain drugs are illegal, although it does not follow that the law is consistent. That they do harm to the individual is not a significant factor (we know this because alcohol and cigarettes are legal).


 
My story (none / 0) (#145)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 1st, 2002 at 11:09:57 PM PST
I started smoking pot at 13 years old. I just wanted to try it so i did. At first we got high about once a week tops. Then it soon became an every day thing. I kept smoking every day for a coule of years and at 16 i quit.
Then a year later i started again, soon returning to the every day habit. Some things mentioned in the article are true, it does decieve you. But i did have a job during those years and i did have a social life, so calling weed worse than heroin is rediculous. Heroin will kill you and drive you to steal or even kill to get money. I never committed a crime to get money. I got some debts though, but a lot of people have debts.
Anyway, it started to get a bit expensive and i didn't feel good about myself to be dependant on a substance to feel comfortable, plus it messes with your charisma, turning you into a dull person.
So i quit. Wasn't too hard, i got nervous and upset or about 2 weeks and then it went back to normal. Now it's been more than 6 months and i never missed it once.

Weed can, and in the case of every day use, will mess with your motivation, willpower and self-judgement. But calling it worse than heroin, cocaine and other hard drugs is really dumb. Those are drugs that will ruin your life, i know a guy who has smoked weed daily for over 25 years and he might be a weird man but he has a decent life.

And don't whine about my grammar/spelling just so you think you get a good argument against me, English is my second language.


 
WTF? (none / 0) (#146)
by Nobody on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 03:49:09 AM PST
"Having a drink to relax is fundamentally different than getting a little stoned to relax." No it isn't. In fact, you know it isn't, that's why you have no evidence to support your statement. "Even a little stoned is still stoned" This is also true of alcohol. I.e. even a little drunk is still drunk. "and you still have glazed eyes, a stupid grin, and an inability to carry on a decent conversation with non-stoned people." The same is true of drunk people. "Yes, there are alcoholics, but they are definitely a small minority." They are a bigger minority than pot-heads. Unless you have some statistics to show otherwise. "Marijuana tells you that you are a better person for having smoked marijuana" Only if you are stupid and don't know what it's affects are. In exactly the same way that alcohol tells stupid people "oh, it'll be okay to drive" or "hey, go and chat up that ugly woman". Have you ever noticed that nearly all people who are against marijuana have never tried it? N.B. I didn't say I wasn't against it.


 
Liked it... (none / 0) (#149)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 2nd, 2002 at 05:17:14 AM PST
Seemed fairly non-biased, and didn't falsely assert that all smokers are cheeched out losers. Some of it's not fully true, but it's not the same type of puritanical misinformation "because the mexicans should all be locked up"...


 
The important question... (none / 0) (#173)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 3rd, 2002 at 03:42:18 AM PST
I happen to know a few young people (teenage - from 15 to 19) who smoke a bit more pot than they should - and of course they believe it doesn't cause them any problems.
Well, they've dropped out of school. One of them has a fair job in computers and seems to function fairly well despite being somewhat moody, one of them does absolutely nothing, one works from home as a system administrator (but does very little work), one works a whopping one hour a week cleaning toilets.
None of them show a lot of enthusiasm for anything in life beyond staying home and using the bong.
It's quite depressing really... but they are close friends, and I do care for them.
Any suggestions? I don't think I have the ability to get the message across (although I haven't really tried yet, to be honest - mainly because I haven't been sure how to go about it).



 
osm, what drugs do you take? (none / 0) (#175)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 3rd, 2002 at 07:40:24 AM PST
A quote from OSM's website:- "...my nervous system tweaked into a taut, vibrating rubber band by the excessive dosages of antidepressants."

OSM, I'm curious to know (a) what antidepressants are you taking, (b) what level of dosage have these been prescribed at, (c) how long have you been on antidepressants, (d) what affect do you think these have on you, and (e) what would you say is the single greatest cause of your depression.

Please don't think I'm trolling - I simply want to understand a little more about the psycho-chemical position you speak from, OSM.

Personally, I've never used/taken marijuana nor antidepressants - so I can't speak about either of these drug types from any kind of direct/personal experience... ..but I've met people with all kinds of different problems with all kinds of different drugs - I'm a retired doctor, having worked in rehab for over 20 years.


 
err, heres a question that needs to be asked (none / 0) (#185)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jan 5th, 2002 at 06:15:23 AM PST
Were you stoned when u wrote this crap?


 
Most potheads are losers (none / 0) (#188)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 10th, 2002 at 05:37:53 PM PST
I don't know of a single person who's kept up their "tokin'" after college who's gone on to any sorta degree of success. And I don't mean making a lotta money or any other "societally acceptable goal." Just because you don't want to be a corporate slug doesn't mean that getting baked and playing Ultimate is going to be any more fulfilling. Find that third path - if you're reading this site, you're probably more intelligent than the average. I suggest reading "The Iceman Cometh" by Eugene O'Neill around age 23.

Yeah, pot's harmless. It doesn't cause brain damage. You can probably smoke the highest quality shit on a daily basis and you still won't have to sell your ass to get your next fix.

But its insidiousness lies in these same facts. You might not get brain damage from the weed, but you're not turning into a genius by sitting around and playing GameCube or whatever the latest waste of consumerist time/money is. What pot is most guilty of though, is simply being boring. Personally, I can't fucking stand sitting around, getting baked, and doing stoner activities. What a bore. Stoners always have this cliquish mindset too, like people are either "cool" or not by whether or not they get baked daily. It's so funny to watch them flail and fail at almost everything they do, convinced that they're so suave and no one can tell when they're baked, which trust me, we ALWAYS can.

I smoked every day for six years. When I stopped shortly after my 23rd b-day, I found that my life improved DRAMATICALLY (insomnia went away, got a good job/hot girlfriend, started developing myself intellectually, etc.) All my friends who are still stoners are extremely depressed and have NOTHING going on. They're out of shape, can't get a date to save their lives, etc. But yet somehow when I suggest they stop toking up daily, they invariably reply that they can't do that or they'd get "depressed!" Go figure.

At least drugs like coke, E, and ketamine get boring and cost a lot, so after a month of heavy use most of us are like 'Fuck! This is too expensive, and ain't that much fun anymore. THink I'll go back to using this shit once every couple of months." Whereas every pothead I know is bored off their ass with smoking weed, yet they STILL can't stop because they're just trapped in the "stoner lifestyle" and it's so readily available. It might not lead to utter destitution like crack/heroin addiction, but for those of you who are under 25 and smoking weed every day, don't be surprised to wake up in complete loserdom in five years. Stop now.

Just one ex-stoner's opinion. This article was dead-on... good job!


Sorry, but it is your problem. (none / 0) (#190)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jan 11th, 2002 at 07:09:10 PM PST
>>>I don't know of a single person who's kept up their "tokin'" after college who's gone on to any sorta degree of success. And I don't mean making a lotta money or any other "societally acceptable goal."<<<

Well I'm confortable in the knowledge that you've met every person on the face of this planet. Tell me, how did you do it?

>>>Just one ex-stoner's opinion. This article was dead-on... good job! <<<

Maybe you're just a weak minded person who is capable of allowing a drug to take your life over in such a manner. That's your problem, and certainly not the rest of the world's.




Read my post again, doofus (none / 0) (#213)
by Anonymous Reader on Thu Jan 24th, 2002 at 11:53:06 AM PST
For starters Goofus, re-read my message. I said *MOST* potheads are losers. And note my qualifying 'opinion' at the end. Of course I don't know every fucking person in the world who smokes. But I have known several hundred, from all around the world, and am qualified enough to make generalizations about them.

You're probably eighteen years old or so. Write back to me when you're near thirty and please give me an update on how successful your little friends are who are still toking up every day. And while you're at it, spend some time around very successful people (and that doesn't mean people who make $60k/yr doing some Cisco networking or whatever - I'm talking about PhD's and M.D.'s.) I'm sure you'll find just as high a concentration of weed-smokers there as you will at a Phish show. Duh.

Of COURSE there's successful people who smoke weed. But my point is, BY AND LARGE, it's a detrimental thing. And MOST people go through a stage where they smoke every single day, despite the fact that EVERYONE says "oh, I'll just do it on the weekends/every once in a while" when they first start doing it. That was the whole point of the article, that MJ's "benevolence" is what leads to chronic habitual use.

With that being said, if you feel like getting baked every day and playing GameCube is like, totally kick-ass, dude, go right ahead with your little lifestyle. Just don't come complaining about how unfair the world is when you're 27. Also, one thing I really get sick of is loser potheads who fail their drug tests and then whine about how unfair it is. I've had a half dozen piss tests in my life, most when I was using tons of drugs. You generally know weeks in advance if you're going to have one, and if you're unemployed and looking for a job and you can't stop, in all honesty I probably wouldn't want you in a real job anyway. It's so funny how some potheads just choose this or that line of "work" (i.e., pizza delivery) so they can remain baked on the job. Yeah, that's the dream lifestyle right there.


 
Any experience? (none / 0) (#189)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Jan 11th, 2002 at 06:58:56 PM PST
Err... has this guy/gal even tried the stuff?

Regardless as to whether you like drugs or not, it is not your place, nor the governments, to dictate what people do to themselves.

Marijuana does certainly not tell you that you are a better person for smoking it (I think you've been hanging around with the wrong crowd, or reading some very strange material). In fact, if you knew anything about narcotics, you'd be able to appreciate the fact that drugs do different things to different people. That's not even mentioning the different forms of weed there are out there and the variety of affects they can have on an individual.

What are these quotes your refer to? They seem rather random to me and I can make stuff up too. Hell, I don't need to make anything up because I can tell you from my own experience and that of friends and family.

No one has ever died from smoking cannabis. Having said that, the most dangerous aspects of the plant is its cancer element (but this comes from burning any substance).

As for addiction, it is impossible to become physically addicted to weed (or even cocaine for that matter). The body does not become dependent on it. What can happen is a mental addiction, but anything can become a "drug" in this manner, from TV to sex.

So please get out of the stone age and stop refering to "typical drug posts" (you have no idea what the person behind the text is like, nor do you know if they have, are or even will smoke). If this is just an evil substance, then why are more and more countries takign a less harsh view on it?


Hmm... (none / 0) (#192)
by hauntedattics on Sun Jan 13th, 2002 at 05:27:00 PM PST
Regardless as to whether you like drugs or not, it is not your place, nor the governments [sic], to dictate what people do to themselves.

Putting aside the argument that it isn't the government's place to tell people what they can and cannot do to themselves, even though governments do that frequently in both more and less advanced societies, let's focus on the 'what people do to themselves' part of your statement. People who smoke marijuana and other drugs are not just affecting themselves. There is an entire illegal and incredibly profitable industry built on their need for selfish pleasure, and it causes misery to untold millions of people around the world.

No one has ever died from smoking cannabis.

Back at ya with the accusation of making stuff up, Skippy. Do you actually know this for a fact? A few years ago, in researching sudden cardiac death, I came across several accounts of people who'd died of cardiac arrest while smoking weed. That these people had genetic heart defects is secondary - smoking weed triggered their cardiac arrests and was thus directly responsible for their deaths. Are you going to argue that these unfortunates only make up 0.5% of the population and thus the the risk of death via weed is negligible? I wouldn't go there. Death is death, whether it's 3 people or 3 million.


Hypocrite (none / 0) (#194)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 05:26:11 AM PST
>>>There is an entire illegal and incredibly profitable industry built on their need for selfish pleasure, and it causes misery to untold millions of people around the world. <<<

What about the tobacco industry, alcohol or even the model or music industry? The crap surrounding these is incredible (the latter I have experience with, and it would shock you to know what's going on). The legal issues are created by nanny-states and their feel that their population is incapable of thinking for themselves (legalisation and slapping a tax on it would produce a nice little income and still keep prices lower than at the moment). The stuff is going to get smoked, whether you like it or not. Perhaps if the western world wasn't so obsessed on banning it to the Third World such suffering wouldn't occur. We could then grow the plant legally on our own shores and thus reducing the pressures placed on other countries.

>>>That these people had genetic heart defects is secondary - smoking weed triggered their cardiac arrests and was thus directly responsible for their deaths.<<<

No its not secondary. For example, WW1 wasn't caused by the assassination of the Archduke, it was a whole host of other issues boiling over. I guess for simple people they'll take the first thing that's thrown at them. Even so, if you want to blame anyone then its the people themselves for acting so stupid. If you're educated in narcotics and taught to use them responsibly they'd be no problem. Someone who has breathing problems is hardly likely to smoke (they do its their problem), or someone with an allergic reaction to a food is unlikely to comsume food. Sigh.

By the way, I hope you don't drive or consume any electrical energy, because those are just as selfish acts. You're actions are result in untold suffering around the world.

>>> Are you going to argue that these unfortunates only make up 0.5% of the population and thus the the risk of death via weed is negligible? I wouldn't go there. Death is death, whether it's 3 people or 3 million. <<<

I see you like to be pedantic. People die from all sorts of things, form pillows to peanuts (go and have a look around, you'd be amazed at how many weird deaths there are per year). This is no reason to ban them or moan about the risks. You show me evidence that someone has died as a direct result of cannabis (and nothing from some anti-weed group, we all no people with a mission love to make crap up). You won't find any.






nanny-states? (none / 0) (#196)
by nathan on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 07:24:30 AM PST
So what is, in your opinion, an acceptable limit on freedom, as opposed to an unacceptable one?

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Ahem. (none / 0) (#197)
by hauntedattics on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 09:30:45 AM PST
My original post simply took issue with the fact that you said that "no one has ever died from smoking cannabis." And I should have added that in all cases, the people who died of cardiac arrest from smoking cannabis had no idea that they had genetic heart defects. It's hard to blame them for not knowing they had severe, but difficult-to-trace, medical problems. My point was, however, that smoking weed is not necessarily as benign as you might think it is.

By the way, I hope you don't drive or consume any electrical energy, because those are just as selfish acts. You're actions are result [sic] in untold suffering around the world.

Yes, I do drive and I do consume electricity. I do so with the knowledge that I am consuming resources and thus attempt to keep my consumption to a necessary minimum. And I do so knowing that energy and oil are vital to the growth and expansion of the world economy. How is the production of illegal drugs contributing to the world economy?

The stuff is going to get smoked, whether you like it or not.

OK, and people are going to kill people, rob people and beat people up, whether I like it or not. That doesn't make it legal, or ethical. When will drug users (including pot smokers) realize that they are doing something wrong and that they need to take responsibility for their actions?

I'd be interested in your response to Nathan's post as well, by the way.


imagine: (none / 0) (#198)
by nathan on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 10:24:21 AM PST
OK, and people are going to kill people, rob people and beat people up, whether I like it or not. That doesn't make it legal, or ethical.

"But, Your Honour! A person in that neighbourhood has a 0.58% chance of being mugged every day. I just happened to be the one doing it that time! If I hadn't done it, statistics show somebody else would have!"

The beautiful part is that, in the real world, such an argument is almost always a product of "marijuana thinking."

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Why aren't there rehab programs for MJ addiction? (none / 0) (#191)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jan 12th, 2002 at 02:12:36 AM PST
Because it is not lethal, nor is it physically addictive. This article far blows the drug out of proportion.

Marijuana is not hard to quit if you have the desire to do so. Even some of the heaviest smokers will only expirience irritability, boredom, and other minor mood related side effects without the drug. There are rare incidences where someone who really wants to quit would need rehabilitation.

For most people the marijuana does not effect their lives. Despite what this article claims, small amounts of marijuana do not impair you're thought activty to a great degree, nor do you get "cashed" eyes and a clown grin. People who are not accustomed to the drug get these sort of symptoms, but as people become accustomed to it (similar to how people who don't drink easily get to become foolish off small amounts of alcohol) no one would be the wiser.

It can be abused, like anything can be. I don't think there's anything to expound upon in that matter.

As far as quitting and learning what the drug has done may be true to some, but the few, for sure. I am a habitual user, and have quit for long periods, (months, and in one case, years) and I didn't feel any different whatsoever. When I don't smoke it's typically by choice. I just don't feel like smoking. I don't feel a draw or longing for the drug when it's not available. Perhaps some small dissapointment if I'm stressed, or want some for a social occasion, but definitely not anything near what someone with a physical withdrawal would have. Not much more than a passing amount of dissapointment.

There is so much misconception and propoganda to this drug even to this day. If you read the history on the drug, you'll learn that it's illegality stemmed from racial discrimination in the early part of the century. It was not made illegal from any rigorous testing, simply racial propaganda drove the present condition regarding illegality.

I hope that this was at least somewhat informational and helpful to dispel some long lived misconception about marijuana.


 
All kids take fuck loads of drugs (none / 0) (#193)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 02:40:13 AM PST
Hello

I take lots of drugs everyday. What parents don't know is that there kids take fucking drugs all the time, but are to dumb to notice. We all fuck our heads up everyday on the shit. So what it's our lifes you dumb fucks.



Partly Agreed (none / 0) (#195)
by Anonymous Reader on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 05:34:04 AM PST
Well I wouldn't put it in such words, but I partially agree. People are addicted to things all the time, from TV to sex to shopping to laziness to religion, and these all have negative impacts, including psycologically.

However, it is a grave misconception that all kids are taking drugs all the time. Although I did partake frequently in my teenage years, I was surrounded mostly by people who didn't touch any of such drugs. There is nothing wrong with "getting high". Why do you watch TV or listen to music or go on vacation? Its to escape.

I think the most important thing, here, though, is for people to mind their own business.


 
That's why we call it medicine (none / 0) (#199)
by IgnatiusJR on Mon Jan 14th, 2002 at 03:26:55 PM PST
Ever since that renaissance thingy happened, everyone's been like, "dude, get a job." Before the renaissance, we could've just been stoned all the time; now everyone expects something of you. That's just wrong. I don't want to work.


 
You forgot about REEFER MADNESS, AHEAD.... (none / 0) (#200)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 15th, 2002 at 05:32:26 AM PST
...of its time. It was a cinematic government tool, that most of you must think is pertinant, but it's just more of the same. Let's legalize it, tax it, wipe out the national debt, and let 'survival of the fitest' reign!


 
I love this place... (none / 0) (#201)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 16th, 2002 at 09:28:20 AM PST
Never in my life have I encountered so many people without a clue as I have today. This is my first look at this board and I must say that many of the people responding to posts here have no sense of humor...

To the point of this post: I have an excellent job, make six figures; have an extrodinary reputation in my field;, am a model family man, husband, and friend to all; anyone who meets me will tell you the same.

The reason for saying all this is that I smoke just about every night when I get home from work and have been doing the same since about 1990. I'm just glad I don't drink. ;-)


bah (none / 0) (#203)
by nathan on Wed Jan 16th, 2002 at 06:56:52 PM PST
many of the people responding to posts here have no sense of humor...

And many of those reading them, as well. Listen, I don't doubt that you're a good guy, successful, happy enough with things. This is not what being a human being is all about. Did St. Francis rest easy on his worldly success? How about Kierkegaard? Was Einstein satisfied to just kick back and raise a family? How about James Joyce? How about Carole Maso? How about Jacqueline Du Pré?

You ought to be out there living life to the full, not quietly dying day by day, lulled, content - and made more so by the gentle, numbing plant. Like bitter snow in a land without refuge, the pot smoke falls. It floats infinitely slowly to the ground, never falling fast enough for the eye to see; yet, one looks again, and it's gone, never to return. So passes time in one's life, never missed, until one day, one awakes to find one's self grown old, the children gone, and the spouse too; and what remains is only a small cold house all alone, a little time, and the reckoning.

Kierkegaard said that "men's immortal fingers slip through their fingers like smoke." For heaven's sake, I implore you - I implore you from the bottom of my heart - never be content. As Xenophon wrote in the Anabasis,
...here we lie as though it were time to rest and take our ease. I too! what am I waiting for? ...am I waiting to grow a little older?


Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
How about a biblical response... (none / 0) (#202)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 16th, 2002 at 09:38:27 AM PST
Alcohol is created by humans.
Marijuana was made by God.

Humans were commanded to use the things provided to them by God...if you believe in such things.


Correction (none / 0) (#204)
by hauntedattics on Thu Jan 17th, 2002 at 07:57:38 AM PST
The plant from which marijuana is derived was made by God, as were the wheat, the hops, the juniper berry, etc. needed to make alcohol. There is nothing intrinsically more 'natural' about marijuana than alcohol, and even if there were, that wouldn't make it superior. Nature is full of harmful things.



 
Crap (none / 0) (#205)
by Anonymous Reader on Sat Jan 19th, 2002 at 02:29:28 PM PST
The idea some people have that marijuana is an addictive, horrible thing is a load of shit. Maybe it's all the propaganda that the US government feeds you guys. People who smoke pot are not a bunch of ambitionless, crazed rapists, as some seem to think. Most of the people I know smoke pot and on the whole it is nothing compared to how many people get fucked up by tobacco and alcohol. Potheads don't fight or commit crimes other than smoking up. Crackheads and alcoholics do. Pot does not make people stupid either. I got straight As in highschool during a period when i smoked a lot of pot and i got one of the largest scholarships in my class. Stop believing everything the government tells you and learn things for yourself before you start talking shit about things


 
I'm an intelligent pothead (none / 0) (#209)
by Anonymous Reader on Tue Jan 22nd, 2002 at 07:20:52 AM PST
This is the first time i've been to this website, and my first impression was that it was full of crap.

I'm not one of those idiots that make a statement and can't back it up, so i'm going to tell you the reasons why...

1. The first article I read was by someone called T Reginald Gibbons whom wrote an article called
"Is Your Son a Computer Hacker?". This guy was telling people that "Flash" was a hacking program, but Flash is actually a piece of software
used on the internet to make games,cartoons and web pages, everything this person said was WRONG he is the stupidest person in the world and should be shot.

2. On the home page I found an article by a mother who decided not to allow any of her six children to go to college even though she had been saving up for years so she could. This decision was made mostly because her mates daughter went to MIT and turned into a goth.
she banned her children from seeing this girl, who they'd grown up with, this is what she says

"The strident complaints of my three daughters told me I had made the correct decision. Already they had begun to be drawn to her attitude of teenage rebellion. It felt good to know that I had acted in time to save them. "

she is a fuckin stupid bitch, of course they're going to complain they've been mates with her all their lives.

3. The article by zikzak "Why marijuana is the worst drug"

This guy and some others who've posted comments seem to think that weed is worse than cigarettes, alcohol and hard drugs such as heroin and crack.

All of those drugs will kill you if you take too much, except weed which is the ONE OF THE SAFEST DRUGS IN THE WORLD LEGAL OR ILLEGAL.

All of these people are treating their personal opinions as fact, which they are not. One person even wrote a comment not only claiming alcohol is everyones best friend and giving the impression that you should drink it all the time, but he also named all the types of alcholic drinks he could remember, saying that they where all American and i'm pretty sure Vodka is Russian and whiskey is Scottish(possibly irish). I can't remember what else he said.

And I should know. I can smoke an ounce in less than 6 hours.

PS> I'm British.



it is true (none / 0) (#210)
by nathan on Tue Jan 22nd, 2002 at 11:45:24 AM PST
This guy is so smart from smoking pot that he can even distinguish between T Reginald Gibbons (author of the well-known "Hacking" article) and T Reginald Gibbons (author of the "College" article.)

Nathan
--
Li'l Sis: Yo, that's a real grey area. Even by my lax standards.

 
Wow. (none / 0) (#211)
by hauntedattics on Tue Jan 22nd, 2002 at 01:18:05 PM PST
Wow, look how smart you are! You can summarize articles, then 'back up' your statements against them with your own opinions. And you can smoke an ounce of weed in less than 6 hours.

Man, those are some accomplishments. I only aspire to the dizzying heights of your ambition as a human being.



 
spank my arse and call me jim (none / 0) (#212)
by Anonymous Reader on Wed Jan 23rd, 2002 at 04:39:59 AM PST
fair enough i didn't read who wrote the college article, cos i couldn't be arsed, this asite is sooooooooooo booring so shut the fuck up u cheeky fuckin yanks


 
alcoholics are a minority? (none / 0) (#217)
by Anonymous Reader on Fri Sep 6th, 2002 at 08:10:01 AM PST
You have some good points on marijuana use, but your make pot look bad by comparing it to alcohol and cigarettes. Alcohol kills countless people each year, as do cigarettes. I see your point on pot, because it seems harmless is really the worst of all, but could it really be that pot seems harmless because, used in moderation, it is virtually harmless? You can't make a point on marijuana by belittling the effects of alcohol and cigarettes. Both are very dangerous drugs. Tobacco is more addictive than heroine. I don't even like tobacco, but I still smoke one every now and then because I used to smoke them and I still crave it for some reason. Pot is very different in that way. The 'addiction' of pot is purely psychological and can be easily overcome. All you have to do is WANT to quit. I guess my point is that your argument is not a valid one simply because you act as if alcohol and tobacco are not a big deal, and that pot is somehow the real menace. It's lunacy. No one has ever died from smoking pot. No one ever will. At least pot doesn't contain chemicals added by a factory to make it addictive. Your argument almost works, but you may need to rethink a thing or two.


 

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest ® 2001, 2002, 2003 Adequacy.org. The Adequacy.org name, logo, symbol, and taglines "News for Grown-Ups", "Most Controversial Site on the Internet", "Linux Zealot", and "He just loves Open Source Software", and the RGB color value: D7D7D7 are trademarks of Adequacy.org. No part of this site may be republished or reproduced in whatever form without prior written permission by Adequacy.org and, if and when applicable, prior written permission by the contributing author(s), artist(s), or user(s). Any inquiries are directed to legal@adequacy.org.