DVDizzy Forum

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:26 pm**

I think the question of the day anymore is what should be illegal since I'm sure someone can find some reason why everything should be legal.

My biggest concern is the reasoning behind wanting something legalized. There are "right" and "wrong" reasons for wanting something legalized.

Oh and for the record I don't like the age 16 as a legal age. Too young IMO.

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2011 3:53 pm**

The_Iceflash wrote:My biggest concern is the reasoning behind wanting something legalized. There are "right" and "wrong" reasons for wanting something legalized.

Such as in this case?

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2011 5:36 pm**

milojthatch wrote:No. And while you are out it, I'd love to see tobacco smoking as well as alcohol outlawed. I supported prohibition and am sad that it was abolished. I know many say it didn't work, but the reality is that the only reason the US government got rid of it was to make money and make up some debts, NOT becuase it didn't work.

Your denial of historic facts is laughable. It's not a matter of "some people say" it didn't work. It's an easily verifiable fact that it didn't work --and no, I didn't get this from watching Boardwalk Empire, but from reading up on American history. You're tweaking history to make it fit your own prejudiced ideological framework. Also, I find it funny that a super-religious person makes claims about others being "slaves". Unfortunately, you'll never see the irony of it all.

miljthatch wrote:Yes, I understand many here will disagree with me and you are welcome to do just that, but don't expect me to respond to anything after this. I said what needs to be said and I'm moving on.

So, you knew beforehand we would see through your non-arguments, did you? Too bad. I have more respect for people who defend their positions, even if I think they're flat-out wrong, than I do for people who make bold statements, then run away from the debate.

MagicMirror wrote:[...] (personally I would be in favour of as little as possible within reason, and would probably not even outlaw it for certain age groups, ditto alcohol)

Alcohol and marijuana are dangerous to kids, because their brains are not yet full-grown. That's why I would limit it to people 18 years old and over.

MagicMirror wrote:Incidentally - so that I'm not accused of wanting it to be legal so I can get it - I've no interest in taking marijuana personally and my opinion would not change were it legalised.

Why would it be bad if you only argued in favor of it, so you could use it yourself? I guess it would look less 'noble', but politics is mostly about lobbying for things you want to get; ideals often come in second.

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2011 6:13 pm**

Goliath wrote:Alcohol and marijuana are dangerous to kids, because their brains are not yet full-grown. That's why I would limit it to people 18 years old and over.

I completely agree about the medical effects, and the principle that it would be wrong to give the stuff to kids, I'm just not sure how such a law could be enforced - except of course on the sale end - and would prefer simply a law requiring clear labelling, warnings and so forth. Then again if a parent causes harm to their child, through whatever means, that's already illegal, so you're probably right.

Why would it be bad if you only argued in favor of it, so you could use it yourself? I guess it would look less 'noble', but politics is mostly about lobbying for things you want to get; ideals often come in second.

You're absolutely right - but the accusation has been levelled at me in conversation before in debates like this, admittedly in a jokey way. I don't disapprove of it; I'm just not partial to it.

Posted: **Thu Apr 21, 2011 6:25 pm**

MagicMirror wrote:I completely agree about the medical effects, and the principle that it would be wrong to give the stuff to kids, I'm just not sure how such a law could be enforced

Well, just like everything else, it would be hard, and there would, of course, be people who wouldn't be caught, but is it really better to just give up, and say it's okay for minors to be using this stuff? That seems ridiculous.

Posted: **Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:01 am**

Flanger-Hanger wrote:
The_Iceflash wrote:My biggest concern is the reasoning behind wanting something legalized. There are "right" and "wrong" reasons for wanting something legalized.
Such as in this case?

Yes. There are always good and bad reasons for wanting something legalized.

Posted: **Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:27 am**

The_Iceflash wrote:Yes. There are always good and bad reasons for wanting something legalized.

I was looking for specifics out of curiosity. Saying "there are pros and cons" and not listing them doesn't add much to the discussion.

Posted: **Fri Apr 22, 2011 5:59 pm**

Goliath wrote:
milojthatch wrote:No. And while you are out it, I'd love to see tobacco smoking as well as alcohol outlawed. I supported prohibition and am sad that it was abolished. I know many say it didn't work, but the reality is that the only reason the US government got rid of it was to make money and make up some debts, NOT becuase it didn't work.
Your denial of historic facts is laughable. It's not a matter of "some people say" it didn't work. It's an easily verifiable fact that it didn't work --and no, I didn't get this from watching Boardwalk Empire, but from reading up on American history. You're tweaking history to make it fit your own prejudiced ideological framework. Also, I find it funny that a super-religious person makes claims about others being "slaves". Unfortunately, you'll never see the irony of it all.

Let's not bash religion in a thread about legalizing weed. I'm of the same religion as milojthatch, and I voted yes. I don't smoke weed, and honestly don't think I ever would, but legalizing it would cut down on crime and help boost the economy.

Milo, remember that we're taught to Choose the Right. Can't make a choice if there's only one option.

Posted: **Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:12 pm**

Just Myself wrote:
Goliath wrote:[...] Also, I find it funny that a super-religious person makes claims about others being "slaves". Unfortunately, you'll never see the irony of it all.
Let's not bash religion in a thread about legalizing weed. I'm of the same religion as milojthatch, and I voted yes. [...]

I just wanted to point out how invalid his argument was. He said people can be "slaves" to alcohol, cigarettes and marijuana. That's certainly true, but in turn, I would argue people can be "slaves" to religion as well. After all, like Karl Marx said: "religion is the opium for the masses". But we don't consider outlawing religion, do we?

Posted: **Mon Apr 25, 2011 2:22 am**

Goliath wrote:
Just Myself wrote:Let's not bash religion in a thread about legalizing weed. I'm of the same religion as milojthatch, and I voted yes. [...]
I just wanted to point out how invalid his argument was. He said people can be "slaves" to alcohol, cigarettes and marijuana. That's certainly true, but in turn, I would argue people can be "slaves" to religion as well. After all, like Karl Marx said: "religion is the opium for the masses". But we don't consider outlawing religion, do we?

If you're quoting Karl Marx, it'd be nice if you gave the entire quote, since it reads the complete opposite that way:

Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man—state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d'honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion. Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Posted: **Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:54 am**

I've discussed this pretty heavily before on here, so I don't really want to get into it again, but I do just want to say one thing - Goliath, you shouldn't assume that everyone who thinks pot should remain illegal has no problem with alcohol being legal. Like I've said before, I absolutely think alcohol should be illegal. I understand your whole argument about "read up on your American History", and I get that prohibition didn't work and it had all kinds of negative effects. I just wish we could figure out SOME way to make it work.

Overall, if I could have my choice between either pot or alcohol being illegal, I would choose alcohol. But I'd like it to be both.

Best case scenario, in my opinion, would be for none of this stuff to ever have existed, so that every single person would be 100% in control of their own mind. It'd be a much better world. It's too bad the human race is the way it is, and will continue to produce and consume so many things that are bad for us.

Posted: **Mon Apr 25, 2011 6:58 pm**

KubrickFan wrote:If you're quoting Karl Marx, it'd be nice if you gave the entire quote, since it reads the complete opposite that way:

I don't read it that way at all. The way I'm reading it, Marx is essentially acknowledging religion only exists to bring comfort to people who have nothing; that people who have nothing in this life make up stories to create the illusion that one day (like, in the afterlife) they will have something. And as long as this illusion stands, the people have no incentive to improve their own (earhtly, material) lives.

Posted: **Mon Apr 25, 2011 7:42 pm**

I do believe it should be legalized... I'm actually very confused as to why it is not already.

The economy goes up, less crime rate, and people are happy. Although the latter is not something the government is always looking to ensure.

Posted: **Mon Apr 25, 2011 9:18 pm**

^It's a plant, and the health industry(*blegh*) like having control over drugs and over us.

DVDizzy Forum

Should marijuana be legal?