[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
I won’t be voting for him.[/quote]
Then you’ll be helping to elect Obama.[/quote]
And people like you willing to compromise core beliefs will deserve him.[/quote]
Isn’t sexmachine Australian?
Billard!
OMFG!!!
[quote]
I say that any boob kin take
And shove a ball in a pocket.
And they call that sloth.
The first big step on the road
To the depths of deg-ra-Day–
I say, first, medicinal wine from a teaspoon,
Then beer from a bottle.
An’ the next thing ya know,
Your son is playin’ for money
In a pinch-back suit. [/quote]
PINCH-BACK SUITS!!!
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Then you’ve never sat by the bed of a cancer paitent who was so sick that they didn’t know up from down. And hopefully you never will. But I can assure you that making drug laws based on what sick people think is pure folly. Just listen to yourself. You’ve abandon all reason.
No. I never said anything about laws. I was talking about making a decision about what to put in person’s body. It is not folly to maybe have the person who’s body is in question be the final call.[/quote]
That’s why we have an FDA. If we didn’t regulate drugs we’d have some very shifty people trying to sell those in need the latest cancer cure. You should read some history on what it was like before the FDA. While it’s far from perfect we need such a body it serves a purpose.
[/quote]
You really think the drug situation is better now? I guess we’ll just have to disagree. I can certainly go along with some of the original laws that required disclosure of information, but not the ones that move decision making from the individual to the federal government.
See above.
[quote]It would help to know how many choose it, and what benefits they derive over other more examined drugs. Making any sense to you? Why do we toss research aside on such a critical topic?
What the hell are you talking about? Who ever said anything about tossing aside research? I never advocated any such thing. I’d fully encourage the patient to consider the research in making THEIR decision about putting chemical in THEIR body. I know I would. [/quote]
And I asked you to post such research. That is “what the hell I am talking about.” Ranting on about how pot should be used to help cancer patients is so much bullshit. Unless of course you can produce evidence which suggests that pot is better than the 200 or so other drugs that have been sanctioned by the FDA.
Are you in this conversation?
Start paying attention!
[/quote]
I am. You aren’t. My argument has nothing to do with the effectiveness of anything. It has only to do with who gets to make decisions.
Again, you haven’t proven you right to make a decision for someone else in the first place.
You’ve not laid out one single fact which would cause me or any other thinking human being to change their mind. Yet you rant on…How silly of me not to buy into your emotionally driven diatribe.
[/quote]
We are a nation in which something is illegal. Unless made legal. The burden of proof is yours. You have to prove first that it is the federal governments right, and second that the bureaucracy is making the correct decision.
I don’t have to prove people are owed freedom. I don’t ask for your evidence to support rose trimming being legal, because by default it should be. Nor does it mean you are pro rose trimming if you think people who own the roses should decide.
Why is greater good the right standard?
Because you don’t own the people you’d kill. Now you are just playing a fool.
[quote]
My gosh please come up with a cogent argument I am tired of this nonsense.
“Um…I want to smoke pot because it’s my right…I own me. Or, the other idiot who said…I believe in small government so pot should be legal maaaaaaan…”
I’m finding that those who argue in favor of legalization of marijuana are the best proof that it should NOT be legalized.
No wonder it’s not been legalized and probably never will be![/quote]
HAH! Pretty much everyone in this thread is laughing at your idiocy. But keep on keep’n on, my small government brotha.
[quote]dk44 wrote:
You want to break up families, friendships, relationships, etc. by throwing people in a cage over a plant. I am going to keep saying it until it sinks in your logger head. Why do you get to choose what people can and can’t do again? [/quote]
Because he knows better because he is old?
I am just trying to paraphrase his argument.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Smoking poison ivy will kill you. Like literally on the spot. How can this extremely dangerous plant be legal? Oh the humanity. Lets right some laws, spend billions on this, and lock people up who never did anything that hurt anyone else.[/quote]
Last I checked no one wanted to smoke poison ivy, or poison oak, or my neighbors maple tree. That would take them out of the illegal drug trade business.
Got anything else or is it just straight down hill from here?[/quote]
So, the laws aren’t about the merits of the substance. OK.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey, if you like smoking pot just say “I like smoking pot, and wish it were legal.”
Is that so hard?[/quote]
If you like government controlling people, just say “I like big government, and wish it could get bigger.”
Is that so hard?[/quote]
I like small government with good drug laws. And to say that you cannot have one without the other is one more argument that you will lose.[/quote]
And libs like small government with “good” spending and tax laws.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Smoking poison ivy will kill you. Like literally on the spot. How can this extremely dangerous plant be legal? Oh the humanity. Lets right some laws, spend billions on this, and lock people up who never did anything that hurt anyone else.[/quote]
But poison ivy does not make you feel good.
The haunting fear of puritans is not so much that you kill yourself, but that you enjoy yourself.[/quote]
Exactly.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
You want to break up families, friendships, relationships, etc. by throwing people in a cage over a plant. I am going to keep saying it until it sinks in your logger head. Why do you get to choose what people can and can’t do again? [/quote]
Because he knows better because he is old?
I am just trying to paraphrase his argument. [/quote]
Oh no, I bet Jimmy Carter is older than him, where does that leave us!
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
You want to break up families, friendships, relationships, etc. by throwing people in a cage over a plant. I am going to keep saying it until it sinks in your logger head. Why do you get to choose what people can and can’t do again? [/quote]
Because he knows better because he is old?
I am just trying to paraphrase his argument. [/quote]
Oh no, I bet Jimmy Carter is older than him, where does that leave us![/quote]
Well in that case we move on to square two, he is probably stoooopid.
I know how the game is played, I was in kindergarden.
Big Gov Zeb, your work here is just about done. Now tell us how we are all dumb twenty year olds and to get off your lawn. Hey the good news is, if you get your wish all of us would be locked in a cage, and you get can get back to advocating small government.
[quote]dk44 wrote:
Big Gov Zeb, your work here is just about done. Now tell us how we are all dumb twenty year olds and to get off your lawn. Hey the good news is, if you get your wish all of us would be locked in a cage, and you get can get back to advocating small government.[/quote]
Not me. I don’t smoke that shit.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
“Romney on Pot”
I was expecting damaging video of red-eyed Romney sitting Indian-style on the floor, positing that the earth is, like, a cell. It’s organic inhabitants being organelles. And, like, this cell is, like, part of the universe. Which is, like, an immense organism. And, like, the universe is alive, man. Alive! [/quote]
Me too, I thought there was going to be picture of him hitting a 4 foot bong or something.
No Romney ain’t great, but the alternative is intolerable.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
Big Gov Zeb, your work here is just about done. Now tell us how we are all dumb twenty year olds and to get off your lawn. Hey the good news is, if you get your wish all of us would be locked in a cage, and you get can get back to advocating small government.[/quote]
Not me. I don’t smoke that shit.[/quote]
He would still put you in jail for being under 60 years old. and on his lawn.
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
Big Gov Zeb, your work here is just about done. Now tell us how we are all dumb twenty year olds and to get off your lawn. Hey the good news is, if you get your wish all of us would be locked in a cage, and you get can get back to advocating small government.[/quote]
Not me. I don’t smoke that shit.[/quote]
He would still put you in jail for being under 60 years old. and on his lawn. [/quote]
jajaja, you better not step on his weeds, or else…
Also, no dancing and no loud music after 6 pm.
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
LOL this thread again.
You are never going to change ZEB’s mind because his stance is a MORAL one…and you cannot change morals.
If pot were legal, you would not see ZEB in this thread…just as you would not see him in a thread discussing the candidates stance on drinking beer or smoking cigarettes.
Give it up everybody…I agree with ZEB 95% of the time, but you have a better chance of winning an argument with Professor X over toothpaste use.
[/quote]
You are actually wrong my friend. I oppose it on health grounds. It’s not a moral issue for me. But I do feel that I’ve done enough research to be comfortable with my position. Unlike the many who have opposed me on this thread (it’s like um a plant maaaaaan) I actually bring facts to the table.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]dk44 wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
I actually like small government with strict drug laws. [/quote]
AKA I like my form of big government. [/quote]
To YOU drug laws equal big government because that’s about all you have. But that just doesn’t make it so. You see there is more to government than its drug laws. For example, there are a myriad of government institutions that should be cut and or eliminated. I think that we could cut the size of our federal government by about half! Does that sound like I am for big government?
You equate drug laws to big government and that just doesn’t work. As there is far more to government than this. But you know that…you must know that you’re just being argumentative because you have no leg to stand on in this argument and the “big government” excuse is weak at best.
Want to try again…or no?[/quote]
Man the drug war costs a ton of my, and your, money. Stop it. Why keep it illegal. I don’t smoke it, but damn where are the bodies? You have got to be shitting me. You bitch about Obama and his expansion, yet over look the plank in your own eye. Get real. Drug war is the exact definition of govt overreach. Why in the hell do you get to tell someone what they can or can’t do? You are either for freedom or you’re against it. You have chosen the latter FYI.[/quote]
Tell me how much are we spending on the drug war and incarcerating those who break the law. Do you know? [/quote]
Start with the investigation ?, Prosecution ?,Incarceration ?,Lost productivity ?, Legal expenses for defense ?, Mistaken addresses and individuals ?,Law suits for mistakes ?, Money we give other countries to fight our war ?,Lost lives in fighting our war ?
It is a BIG LOSS Zeb , no way to tally the impact on America
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
LOL this thread again.
You are never going to change ZEB’s mind because his stance is a MORAL one…and you cannot change morals.
If pot were legal, you would not see ZEB in this thread…just as you would not see him in a thread discussing the candidates stance on drinking beer or smoking cigarettes.
Give it up everybody…I agree with ZEB 95% of the time, but you have a better chance of winning an argument with Professor X over toothpaste use.
[/quote]
You are actually wrong my friend. I oppose it on health grounds. It’s not a moral issue for me. But I do feel that I’ve done enough research to be comfortable with my position. Unlike the many who have opposed me on this thread (it’s like um a plant maaaaaan) I actually bring facts to the table.[/quote]
No, you bring studies to the table, but even if they were facts you have yet to explain why the war on drugs necessarily follows.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
LOL this thread again.
You are never going to change ZEB’s mind because his stance is a MORAL one…and you cannot change morals.
If pot were legal, you would not see ZEB in this thread…just as you would not see him in a thread discussing the candidates stance on drinking beer or smoking cigarettes.
Give it up everybody…I agree with ZEB 95% of the time, but you have a better chance of winning an argument with Professor X over toothpaste use.
[/quote]
You are actually wrong my friend. I oppose it on health grounds. It’s not a moral issue for me. But I do feel that I’ve done enough research to be comfortable with my position. Unlike the many who have opposed me on this thread (it’s like um a plant maaaaaan) I actually bring facts to the table.[/quote]
Not what you said earlier.
I’m assuming you are for criminalizing tabacco, alcohol, and the excessive use of salt too. Cause I can give you a ton of research proving all that is unhealthy.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Unlike the many who have opposed me on this thread (it’s like um a plant maaaaaan) I actually bring facts to the table.[/quote]
So it’s not a plant? have you been smoking weed fool? careful you’re gonna wind up in a cage!
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]UtahLama wrote:
LOL this thread again.
You are never going to change ZEB’s mind because his stance is a MORAL one…and you cannot change morals.
If pot were legal, you would not see ZEB in this thread…just as you would not see him in a thread discussing the candidates stance on drinking beer or smoking cigarettes.
Give it up everybody…I agree with ZEB 95% of the time, but you have a better chance of winning an argument with Professor X over toothpaste use.
[/quote]
You are actually wrong my friend. I oppose it on health grounds. It’s not a moral issue for me. But I do feel that I’ve done enough research to be comfortable with my position. Unlike the many who have opposed me on this thread (it’s like um a plant maaaaaan) I actually bring facts to the table.[/quote]
Not what you said earlier.
I’m assuming you are for criminalizing tabacco, alcohol, and the excessive use of salt too. Cause I can give you a ton of research proving all that is unhealthy.[/quote]
Look at the damage sugar does , the cost to America is huge