Because I obviously don’t want to live in China because of communism, don’t speak or write Chinese, know nothing about Chinese history and culture, and would not belong in the slightest.
What is with these questions “why don’t you..?” When one discusses a general topic or concept or makes a point?
Also not every authoritative regime has the same sort of society. Eg: Saudi Arabia versus China.
Here you can’t drink in public, you will get a ticket or maybe get arrested, and bars are supposed to cut you off if you are visibly intoxicated.
I never even wrote them all out.
Yes, statistically it occurs within 1/50,000 who use it regularly, heavily over many years. I’d assume it’s in relation to genetic predisposition.
It can happen, but just as LSD use is concerned… it’s incredibly rare
I’ve been to raves, currently it’s all about MDMA, 2-CB, ketamine, coke, speed, alcohol etc… Acid occasionally, but it’s very overwhelming…
I dislike this statement, though you’re free to believe whatever you want. I’ve been to a rave whilst being under the influence of nothing other than a few drinks… You don’t have to take hard drugs to participate.
Why not implement campaigns against other substances?
How… old do you have to be to make a purchase?
I believe the notion is… you can’t refuse to hire on the basis of alcoholism, so long as the person isn’t currently off the wagon. If my employee is drinking on the job/all the time, drunk and disheveled I can refuse to hire. If he’s an alcoholic that has undergone treatment/takes part in AA meetings, then yes… refusing to hire would be a violation of human rights
In that case having sex with a woman is also a choice… We all have urges and desires… very strong urges that influence our decisions (say we try pick up women/ men)
If you’re going to say “well I’m going to ban homosexuality on the basis of I don’t like it… fuck them, their urges don’t matter… but I can still have sex with women if I feel like it”… I’d argue you’re a hypocrite
I apologise, perhaps it isn’t the most coherent point for me to make. I’ll rephrase using the ideology pertaining to a hypothetical, facial society
Would you prefer (rather than say… live in the Netherlands) live in a police state wherein police are deployed en mass (say 20 per street corner), cameras watch you inside you’re own home to make sure you don’t consume drugs, do anything illigal… (also creating privacy issues)… you’ll have speed cameras alongside every street, the second you go over the limit spikes come out of the road, destroying you’re tires and you’ll incur a massive fine, lose you’re license for five years etc…
Punishment for those seen selling drugs will be getting shot in the head instantaneously. Every single move you make will be watched, though laws will be abided by.
Is this a society worth living in? I’d say “no”, too much emphasis would be spent on “aaa, I need to follow the rules to an exact constant all the time otherwise my life is over”… there’s a balance, and going nuts trying to enforce these laws leads to a diminished quality of life for the masses
Say the community also speaks English.
Also, again I’m going to refer to my above question… what about you’re bodybuilding friends? They should be punished… right?
Why would you want to go to a drug party if you aren’t into the drugs? Also I hate techno music.
You’re the one talking about decriminalization.
I think 18 or 19 at most of them, I wouldn’t be surprised if some sold to kids. They started cracking down on those stores after weed became legal and they give the landlords massive fines so the illegal stores are gone, but there are still dealers and you can also buy weed, hash, etc. online and I don’t believe you need ID.
That’s what I’m saying. And with drugs like crack or meth where people often start stealing anyhting they can get their hands on to get more, you don’t really want one of those people working for you.
So what about pedophilia? Some people argue that isn’t a choice either. Or bestiality. Ever seen a dog humping someone’s leg? Sounds like consent to me!
Can you find me any authoritative regime wherein the country is listed as safe (to live in/travel to), the inhabitants are generally happy and wherein mass corruption isn’t a problem?
No!
Your posts are littered with straw-man statements, like… all of them!
A guy fucking a guy (adults, consenting) doesn’t harm anyone. Pedopehlia isn’t a choice, I’d argue one who doesn’t act on his desires seek help… Chemical castration = no libido. Furthermore the majority of “pedophiles” never act upon their sick desires. You’re speaking about child molesters, in which case… death penalty. A 40 y/o man having sex with an 8 y/o is a very different story to two 40 y/o men having sex with each other. The child isn’t developed enough (neurologically) nor is he ready for such an act, this irreversibly harms the child
If two CONSENTING gay MEN decide to have sex, it’s the same as a consenting man and woman. As to beastiality, animals can’t consent either
This isn’t consent, and I’m talking about sticking you’re dick in an animal.
You can’t compare the two. I respect you as an individual, I’m open to talking about different ideologies. But if you’re homophobic/hate someone on the basis of sexual orientation then I don’t want to continue this conversation, nor do I wish to continue talking to you as I can’t respect the notion of homophobia/thinking “gay people should be locked up or they don’t have a right to be having consensual sex”
Stop getting angry… what the hell is a straw man?
You’re comments are littered with the condoning of aggressively pushing authoritative measures to stifle certain demographics on the basis of you as an individual not wishing to tolerate certain behaviours. I’m not going to complain about that, it’s your ideology… that’s fine
To ME, it appeared as if you’d rather live in a police state. So I asked the question as to whether you’d prefer living somewhere wherein you’re every move is monitored… I just want to know how far you think we should go… or whether you merely think where we’re at now is fine
First when you said this yesterday I was Half asleep. Now I’m calmly eating my lunch and sipping coffee after a very boring meeting.
Dammit, I can’t tell when people are angry. Esp on forums… this sucks
I (literally) just ate an entire avocado
Anyway my current questions are
do you believe you’re bodybuilding friends ought to be punished for using gear
how far do you believe (realistically) one should take authoritative measures to curb drug use and generalised delinquency
what’s a straw man?
@BrickHead
what’s you’re opinion on homosexuality, it appears Chris Ottawa might not be fond of it.
Decriminalisation doesn’t = condoning… it equates to “prison time” not being the punishment… Prison time equates to a criminal record… prison in general tends to be psychologically straining. Getting out one may now be affiliated with hardened criminals… now you’re out, unable to find a job and affiliated with hardened criminals
The answer is homelessness or criminal activity (unless you live in a society wherein the government gives you a menial monthly check, just enough for basic necessities.) Even legalisation isn’t “condoning”… If we were to legalise MDMA, yet fund campaigns regarding why you shouldn’t use it… place warnings all over the packaging etc, this isn’t encouragement. It’s harm minimisation, avoid people taking pills with lethal contaminants… PMMA for instance
Not all homosexual male couples do anal sex (it is actually fairly common). They don’t like it (uncomfortable or hurts). They are more in the relationship for the bond they have with the other person.
Regardless, why should anal sex between a man and a man be outlawed?
I know many couples (men/women) who have experimented with anal sex… what’s the difference?
A straw man is usually a term used in debate, and is generally seen as fallacious reasoning. It is modifying (usually subtly) your opponent’s position to something that is easier to defeat.
Ahhh, I apologise to Brickhead, this was never my intention.
I am not arguing that. I am fine with whatever people want to do sexually as long as there is enthusiastic consent among participants.
Straw man is common in debate. Learning about the common logical fallacies can go a long way to make your arguments more sound. If you know them, they are easy to spot. The people who use them are almost always unaware of it. If you notice it, it is usually better not to call out the actual fallacy (makes you look like a dick, I’ve done it), but to explain why the argument is invalid.
I make my mistakes, but I try to get better over time.
You get too worked up about this gay stuff. I wasn’t even trying to start a conversation about it either, just giving an example of how things could end up if drugs were legalized.
The thing is that ecstasy is almost never pure MDMA, it’s a combination of drugs that may or may not include MDMA and often has stuff like fentanyl, meth, and who knows what else in it. The only way to change that would be to provide pharmaceutical grade MDMA to the public, and by making that available as a safer alternative it certainly does sound like encouragement. The risk of overdosing or having adverse reactions to unknown ingredients is a pretty big deterrent, and one reason why I never tried it.
Platonic gay couples?
I wouldn’t even care about this stuff at all if it wasn’t being promoted at every turn.
In many places it’s illegal between a man and woman too, yet gay rights organizations say it’s discrimination. It isn’t really, because straight people are also prohibited from engaging in anal sex.