Latest on MJJC

drugs

Drugs are absolutely horrifying. I've seen what they do to people, and I will never involve myself with any of it.
 
Bloodnofsky said:
I also think we should take advantage of others' problems for monetary gain.
Click to expand...

Said Bloodnosky. ... You are a piece of work. ^... What else can one add to what you said, when you've made it so clear before that you are amoral? Taking advantage of others' problems. I have this friend who seriously wanted to push my buttons and irritate me, hence she'd say absolutely annoying things, others that were blatantly disrespectful, others totally inhumane, and I only realized it recently when she all of a sudden did that, because she used to fuel my depression before. A totally selfish action to do. And now, since I'm better, and saw how I'm not falling in her trap again, she's nice.

Is this maybe the case with you, that you are sometimes typing things on the spare of the moment just to dumbfound? ^...
 
Alma said:
Said Bloodnosky. ... You are a piece of work. ^... What else can one add to what you said, when you've made it so clear before that you are amoral? Taking advantage of others' problems. I have this friend who seriously wanted to push my buttons and irritate me, hence she'd say absolutely annoying things, others that were blatantly disrespectful, others totally inhumane, and I only realized it recently when she all of a sudden did that, because she used to fuel my depression before. A totally selfish action to do. And now, since I'm better, and saw how I'm not falling in her trap again, she's nice.

Is this maybe the case with you, that you are sometimes typing things on the spare of the moment just to dumbfound? ^...
Click to expand...

No, I really feel that way. I don't really know you, so I don't have anything to gain by making you angry.
 
I'll tell you what really pees me off. Addicts who come clean and then develop this self-congratulatory attitude as if they did something amazing for the world. So you got off the drugs? Big whoop! How about a round of applause for those who never took them in the first place? They will regularly want to share their 'story' to remind us how 'tough' their life has been, I mean erm seriously? Life IS tough! Try living life without a crutch like the rest of us before whining about how hard-done by you are! Drugs are a cop-out of life, don't tell me how hard life has been for you on drugs, you've basically not even been living life and dealing with how hard life can be, you chose the easy option. And you chose to take them, nobody made you. Rant over.
 
xMichellex said:
I'll tell you what really pees me off. Addicts who come clean and then develop this self-congratulatory attitude as if they did something amazing for the world. So you got off the drugs? Big whoop! How about a round of applause for those who never took them in the first place? They will regularly want to share their 'story' to remind us how 'tough' their life has been, I mean erm seriously? Life IS tough! Try living life without a crutch like the rest of us before whining about how hard-done by you are! Drugs are a cop-out of life, don't tell me how hard life has been for you on drugs, you've basically not even been living life and dealing with how hard life can be, you chose the easy option. And you chose to take them, nobody made you. Rant over.
Click to expand...


And them saying that we all make mistakes, we're human and we should learn from these mistakes. Until when? We all are making mistakes, however, not all are taking recreational drugs, have one-night-stands, DUI, and often hurting yourself and maybe some by-passer in the process and causing his death etc. Mistakes are small, smaller, insignificant, moderate, big, bigger, huge.... And all the enlisted are huge mistakes which never should've happen. That's great, wonderful for those who come clean, but should also add real firmly, especially those celebrities who are supposed to be these role models or something: "Don't ever do such things, they're damaging for the self and others, look what happened/almost happened to me. I could have lost my health/could have had a heart attack due to my carelessness and self-indulgences and weaknesses. Learn to be more responsible and considerate, more strong, more down-to-earth, without this having to mean you're bound as an earthling to make mistakes on this earth from which you gotta learn, so it's okay to make them, then learn to be a better person once you give them up. there's this thing as relapsing, which is frequent, you become much more vulnerable, much more prone to repeating those huge mistakes once you make them, for in the back of your heard, a voice is saying "You only have one life to live. So you got drunk in a bar and beat people up once, so what? I haven't killed them or myself, I won't do it next time"... Wrong. If you did it once while under the influence, you could do it again, meaning both get drunk or high or both, and beat up folks again, and end up in prison. You simply gotta learn to make less and less mistakes as a human being, not give in or embrace your weaknesses, on shallow, immature grounds of having one life or being young or whatever." ...
 
Last edited:
xMichellex said:
I'll tell you what really pees me off. Addicts who come clean and then develop this self-congratulatory attitude as if they did something amazing for the world. So you got off the drugs? Big whoop! How about a round of applause for those who never took them in the first place? They will regularly want to share their 'story' to remind us how 'tough' their life has been, I mean erm seriously? Life IS tough! Try living life without a crutch like the rest of us before whining about how hard-done by you are! Drugs are a cop-out of life, don't tell me how hard life has been for you on drugs, you've basically not even been living life and dealing with how hard life can be, you chose the easy option. And you chose to take them, nobody made you. Rant over.
Click to expand...

I must voice my agreement, to a degree. While it is good that someone who had a drug problem got help, etc. I, like you, don't really see the point in "congratulating" them over it. As you pointed out, nobody made them take the drugs to begin with--it was entirely a matter of choice (and a grave mistake.) Getting off the drugs is akin to fixing that mistake--nothing anyone should get congratulated for, looking at it logically. You can feel happy for them if they mean something to you, I suppose, but there's really no reason why the general public should admire you, or congratulate you at all.

Some of us who have had lives which were less than pleasant never found the need to do drugs--and yet, no one congratulates us over it (nor do we want them to.) It seems rather twisted that people who basically had the master hand in f--ing their lives over get all sorts of attention and congratulations when they finally get clean, which is frankly the way they should have always been.
 
Bloodnofsky said:
I must voice my agreement, to a degree. While it is good that someone who had a drug problem got help, etc. I, like you, don't really see the point in "congratulating" them over it. As you pointed out, nobody made them take the drugs to begin with--it was entirely a matter of choice (and a grave mistake.) Getting off the drugs is akin to fixing that mistake--nothing anyone should get congratulated for, looking at it logically. You can feel happy for them if they mean something to you, I suppose, but there's really no reason why the general public should admire you, or congratulate you at all.

Some of us who have had lives which were less than pleasant never found the need to do drugs--and yet, no one congratulates us over it (nor do we want them to.) It seems rather twisted that people who basically had the master hand in f--ing their lives over get all sorts of attention and congratulations when they finally get clean, which is frankly the way they should have always been.
Click to expand...
I agree with your post....:agree:
 
Bloodnofsky said:
As you pointed out, nobody made them take the drugs to begin with--it was entirely a matter of choice (and a grave mistake.)
Click to expand...

You're now saying that, besides drugs being a matter of choice, they're also a grave mistake to be doing? After all the theories you've elaborated on that, no matter what, drugs, they're a matter of choice and you advocate for one's free will.

....

Bloodnofsky said:
Getting off the drugs is akin to fixing that mistake--nothing anyone should get congratulated for, looking at it logically. You can feel happy for them if they mean something to you, I suppose, but there's really no reason why the general public should admire you, or congratulate you at all.
Click to expand...

That's about fair to say.

Bloodnofsky said:
Some of us who have had lives which were less than pleasant never found the need to do drugs--and yet, no one congratulates us over it (nor do we want them to.) It seems rather twisted that people who basically had the master hand in f--ing their lives over get all sorts of attention and congratulations when they finally get clean, which is frankly the way they should have always been.
Click to expand...

That's absolutely true. But you are now again self-contradictory by saying that being clean is the way they/people should have always been. Yet you are still advocating for their free will - in this case, about doing drugs (no matter which kind) or not? ... So, what is it, then? ....
 
I can almost always tell when someone is stoned. They sound and act odd, talk too fast, are hyper or laugh/giggle too much. Too much of something. They just aren't behaving normally. Though they think they are.
 
Alma said:
You're now saying that, besides drugs being a matter of choice, they're also a grave mistake to be doing? After all the theories you've elaborated on that, no matter what, drugs, they're a matter of choice and you advocate for one's free will.
Click to expand...

They are a mistake--but it's the person's right to choose whether or not to make that mistake. I never said drugs were good for you--thus the reason I voiced my reluctance to do them, even if they were legalized. I mean, it's no secret that most drugs will lead to the deterioration of your body, but like I said, if that's what someone wants for themselves, they have the right to do that. I don't really care about their personal choices. I only opt for legalizing drugs to get some of the money in that billion dollar industry, which currently the drug traffickers monopolize. So, my rationale for legalizing drugs is for economic reasons. My personal opinion is that no one in their right mind would do them, but clearly, such people exist--so we must adapt and exploit accordingly.

Alma said:
That's absolutely true. But you are now again self-contradictory by saying that being clean is the way they/people should have always been. Yet you are still advocating for their free will - in this case, about doing drugs (no matter which kind) or not? ... So, what is it, then? ....
Click to expand...

No, it's not a contradiction. Clean is the way they should ideally be--never in any of my posts or arguments did I say I thought drug use was a good idea. It clearly isn't. However, this isn't an ideal world, and what people choose to do with their bodies is truly not my problem, nor should it be--thus the reason why I advocate their right to choose their poison. Making drugs illegal seems to do nothing to stop people from using drugs, however, as statistics show--the country with one of the strictest anti-drug policies also has the highest drug use of all illegal drugs, from soft marijuana to hard drugs like cocaine, heroin, etc.

Therefore, I advocate peoples' right to choose whether to make a mistake or not, which is what I have been saying all along.
 
Well, the fact that you said it was a grave mistake was a sort of a bombshell, for in all of your comments about drugs so far, you chose to remain completely impartial as far as people's freedom of choice goes, didn't say whether drugs are a good or a bad thing, just that you're pro free will and you advocated for drug legalization and stated your reasons for your being behind that. That's still a bit self-contradictory, for you're now mixing your personal perspective on drugs with people's freedom to do them or not. If, say, your brother (or other close person who you love, no matter how few, 2, 3..) did drugs he buys from these legalized dream shops (supposing he didn't even use any of them before, meaning illegally) and they're destroying him irreparably, would you still say it was his choice to do that and That's it, knowing your personal feelings about drugs? Would you say to him, "What you did was a grave mistake", meaning buying drugs (again, keeping in mind that he never tried them before they got legalized) from the legalized drug shops? Would you still be advocating for their legalization if your brother dies? Sorry for the creepy scenarios, but I really am trying to understand your point of views better, or your very radical, exact mind. Or at least in your mind say 'Well, I don't care what happens'?.. Even if a huge percentage would exist about the rise of drug usage in people with the legalization of drugs (and say, those people never tried drugs before their becoming legal), including the rise of people's deaths? Would you still advocate it for economic reasons?

You've proved, however, that you are still in tune with emotions, i.e. your personal dislike of drugs when it comes to your health, or others, even if you don't care about their choices. Say your brother told you 'Well, I bought the drugs legally, not illegally, not from drug dealers in the street, so it was all out in the open.' Would you tell him "What a dumb idiot you were, you shouldn't have bought drugs", or "Well, I don't care about you anyway, I only care about myself, it was your choice to do the drugs, so if you're damaged and dying, that's not my problem, but yours". If you'd tell him "What a grave mistake you made", it means you are a human, logical human being with feelings as well, for you admit that drugs aren't good, irrespective of their freedom of choice. However, if that was a friend, instead of your brother, one you don't like/care about, would you tell him "I don't care about you anyway", or also tell him "It was a mistake that you did" ?

I can't imagine one that does have the human conscience to be concluding that drugs are a grave mistake, no matter how selfish, can't implement their conscious behavior into telling to at least someone they care about that what they did (using drugs, esp destroying themselves) was wrong or damaging to the/their health. And selfishness, saying you don't care about others, including yourself is still robotic and inhumane. I mean, you certainly must care somehow about your own being to a degree, of your health, for in spite your poor relationship with your parents and maybe other problems which I won't claim to know, you haven't used drugs, esp you haven't abused them to destroy yourself, even though you say you don't care about whether you're dead or alive/you wished you weren't born....which is horrible, depressive, but that's not the thread for it. Bottom line, you care about yourself to a certain degree, esp since you're feeding your mind and time with lots of information, which you very much enjoy to do. You enjoy to read, you enjoy to learn, thus you live, thus you somehow care about your mind, at least, of your living to a degree, (because you were born and you can't unborn yourself), if not, you would've thrown in the towel altogether. You've cared enough not to give in to drugs and become a weak being, at least so far, and maybe feel some pride inside, for despite your problems, you are strong.

But, in short, I'm asking you what would you if your closest friend (if you don't have any, say one you truly love, which it can't be it ain't anyone), your brother (if you care about him) used drugs for the first time, after purchasing them legally, and got addicted and irreparably damaged/dead?
 
Last edited:
Alma said:
Well, the fact that you said it was a grave mistake was a sort of a bombshell, for in all of your comments about drugs so far, you chose to remain completely impartial as far as people's freedom of choice goes, didn't say whether drugs are a good or a bad thing, just that you're pro free will and you advocated for drug legalization and stated your reasons for your being behind that. That's still a bit self-contradictory, for you're now mixing your personal perspective on drugs with people's freedom to do them or not. If, say, your brother (or other close person who you love, no matter how few, 2, 3..) did drugs he buys from these legalized dream shops (supposing he didn't even use any of them before, meaning illegally) and they're destroying him irreparably, would you still say it was his choice to do that and That's it, knowing your personal feelings about drugs? Would you say to him, "What you did was a grave mistake", meaning buying drugs (again, keeping in mind that he never tried them before they got legalized) from the legalized drug shops? Would you still be advocating for their legalization if your brother dies? Sorry for the creepy scenarios, but I really am trying to understand your point of views better, or your very radical, exact mind. Or at least in your mind say 'Well, I don't care what happens'?.. Even if a huge percentage would exist about the rise of drug usage in people with the legalization of drugs (and say, those people never tried drugs before their becoming legal), including the rise of people's deaths? Would you still advocate it for economic reasons?

You've proved, however, that you are still in tune with emotions, i.e. your personal dislike of drugs when it comes to your health, or others, even if you don't care about their choices. Say your brother told you 'Well, I bought the drugs legally, not illegally, not from drug dealers in the street, so it was all out in the open.' Would you tell him "What a dumb idiot you were, you shouldn't have bought drugs", or "Well, I don't care about you anyway, I only care about myself, it was your choice to do the drugs, so if you're damaged and dying, that's not my problem, but yours". If you'd tell him "What a grave mistake you made", it means you are a human, logical human being with feelings as well, for you admit that drugs aren't good, irrespective of their freedom of choice. However, if that was a friend, instead of your brother, one you don't like/care about, would you tell him "I don't care about you anyway", or also tell him "It was a mistake that you did" ?

I can't imagine one that does have the human conscience to be concluding that drugs are a grave mistake, no matter how selfish, can't implement their conscious behavior into telling to at least someone they care about that what they did (using drugs, esp destroying themselves) was wrong or damaging to the/their health. And selfishness, saying you don't care about others, including yourself is still robotic and inhumane. I mean, you certainly must care somehow about your own being to a degree, of your health, for in spite your poor relationship with your parents and maybe other problems which I won't claim to know, you haven't used drugs, esp you haven't abused them to destroy yourself, even though you say you don't care about whether you're dead or alive/you wished you weren't born....which is horrible, depressive, but that's not the thread for it. Bottom line, you care about yourself to a certain degree, esp since you're feeding your mind and time with lots of information, which you very much enjoy to do. You enjoy to read, you enjoy to learn, thus you live, thus you somehow care about your mind, at least, of your living to a degree, (because you were born and you can't unborn yourself), if not, you would've thrown in the towel altogether. You've cared enough not to give in to drugs and become a weak being, at least so far, and maybe feel some pride inside, for despite your problems, you are strong.

But, in short, I'm asking you what would you if your closest friend (if you don't have any, say one you truly love, which it can't be it ain't anyone), your brother (if you care about him) used drugs for the first time, after purchasing them legally, and got addicted and irreparably damaged/dead?
Click to expand...

While I appreciate the scenario you presented above, I still stand by my original stance, as I have done all along. I believe I said in previous posts that, as a personal decision, drug consumption is not a smart idea for the person who chooses to do that. It's a mute point to try and argue otherwise--however, one's personal choices/problems are not a problem of the state, thus there's no real reason why drugs should be illegal--the people who want them will get them in the end, as they have always done. Thus, the legalization would be for economic reasons purely--to protect those who are victims of the success of the illegal drug trade (kidnapped women and children who are forced into sex slavery and hard labour, etc.), and of course, to get government hands in some of those billions which drug traffickers rake in every year. So, that's the bulk of the appeal of that decision--I never cared about people's individual problems, as the state is neither a therapist nor a babysitter, so personal matters shouldn't be its problem.

As for the specific scenario you painted, I would have to say that my brother would be quite the idiot for making such a decision, and his fate is thus well-deserved. If we lived in a world where the majority of the population was composed of illiterates who had no access to information, nor means to comprehend it if they somehow stumbled upon it (what illiteracy implies), then I could perhaps harbor some sympathy/pity for those who choose to do drugs. However, we live in no such world--most people are fairly literate, and we have this wonderful thing called the Internet, where information flows like water from a fountain. Thus, there's really no reason why anyone should claim ignorance in regards to their decisions, for the information has always been there, and they are more than capable to find it if they so desire. Again, it's a matter of choice--if you were too stupid to research what you were injecting yourself with, I daresay your fate is well-deserved. In the natural state of things, no one blinks an eye when an idiot dies--it is rather expected, actually, and some may argue that it was perhaps for the greater good (but then you get into natural selection, survival of the fittest, and all this other scientific stuff.) I recollect saying before that, if we were to sell drugs the same way we do alcohol and cigarettes--they would have to carry a warning label attached to warn potential users of the possible risks of using the drug. If they choose to proceed with it in any case--yeah, that's very much their problem, and it's hard to feel sorry for a person like that. You assumed I felt something in particular for my brother--which I don't, but even if I did, my stance would remain unchanged. I look at things from a wholly objective perspective. When judging his decision, he would cease to be my brother (personal attachments tend to create bias) and would be just one man who chose to do drugs despite the widely available information serving as a word of caution--so, no pity, no anger, and certainly no ill will towards the drugs or the people who sell them (no one forced him to do it.)

I find that often people will choose to project whatever emotion a loved one's drug use causes in them towards the people who distribute the drugs, or even the drugs themselves, as if they were at fault for their loved one's problem. The truth of the matter is, it was his/her decision which led to his/her ruin, and thus only one person is at fault. It's a harsh truth for many to face, but in the end, it remains the truth. Anything to avoid breaking the previous image of that person--thus, an antagonist must be found, even when there isn't one.

The only reason I included my personal stance on drugs in the arguments as of late is because you keep accusing me of being selfish--when the truth is far from that. Like I said, I don't have an interest in doing drugs, or in selling them for personal profit, so I gain nothing by having them be legalized. The point I was attempting to illustrate is that I am looking at the issue objectively, analyzing it by logic alone, and thus having no emotional attachment to it. Drugs aren't in and of themselves bad, the people who choose to use them aren't bad--they're just stupid. Ignorant by choice, not circumstance (we don't have a fascist state, the Internet and libraries are not censored, thus, information is free.) So, in truth, wholly incomprehensible, however--it remains at the end of the day their right to choose to do as they will with their bodies and minds.

I believe that I would tell my brother, as he was dying from his overuse of cocaine, that it was wholly his decision, and that I hope it was all worth it.

Drugs are a mistake not because they're bad--they aren't in and of themselves bad. However, it's no secret that those who use them don't fare off too well. If, even while knowing all that, some idiot desires that for himself--who am I to tell him otherwise, and why?

Since you asked, I will answer--the reason I don't do them is because they serve no purpose to me. I can't see how they would help me do anything aside from maybe dying a rather painful and untimely death, after selling all my stuff in order to get those overpriced illegal drugs. So, it's not a moral decision for me--but rather one of convenience. It's simply not convenient for me to do that. It serves no purpose, it's damaging to the pocket, so it's not worth it. There's no emotion involved--I just have better use for my money and my time.

As for the one I "love" dying, well, suppose such a person and such a feeling exist. Let us create a hypothetical scenario, according to your descriptions. Were he to be dying in his bed from doing too much crystal meth, I would still not blame either the traffickers or the drugs. I would blame him--he sought the drugs out, he did this to himself. I would try to understand why he chose such a thing for himself (although, it'd be kind of useless with him dying in a few anyway, but good for informative purposes, I guess.) My supposed emotions for him would not affect the fact that he made an idiot decision, which cost him his life. He is still wholly to blame for his own downfall--he had the master hand, he was in control, and so with that he falls. I would tell him the same thing I would have told my hypothetically coke-addicted brother, "I hope it was all worth it."
 
Last edited:
...

If a loved one died from an overdose/or from medications that interracted badly with each other, though he didn't tried to take his own life, but he sunk in that because of Endless problems in his life, and because others things he tried, therapy, Whatever, Failed to help him feel better (say he was suffering from severe ongoing back pains for whom only meth would help ease those terrible pains, for back pains are excruciating), would you feel sympathy/empathy for that person, since, again, Nothing helped relieve his many serious issues? Supposing he tried everything, conventional or not, and his pain-killers only worked for him for a short while. Would you still call that person an idiot for the above?

And I'm still trying to understand how, aside from your plain robotic rationale, you're still saying you are not a selfish person?.. Given all the previous scenarios in this thread about the legalization of drugs? Or careless, indifferent, or plain neutral? No matter what, or is there One human being in this world that you care for (no names needed)? You can say that's irrevelant, but I'd still like to know.
 
Alma said:
...

If a loved one died from an overdose/or from medications that interracted badly with each other, though he didn't tried to take his own life, but he sunk in that because of Endless problems in his life, and because others things he tried, therapy, Whatever, Failed to help him feel better (say he was suffering from severe ongoing back pains for whom only meth would help ease those terrible pains, for back pains are excruciating), would you feel sympathy/empathy for that person, since, again, Nothing helped relieve his many serious issues? Supposing he tried everything, conventional or not, and his pain-killers only worked for him for a short while. Would you still call that person an idiot for the above?
Click to expand...

An overdose implies misuse of medications, hence going past the dose--so that would be a choice, and very much their fault. As for having a cocktail of drugs--it would be whoever prescribed the cocktail's fault. If a doctor prescribed it, he would be at fault. Like I said, it's no secret that it's not a good idea to mix drugs/medications. If the person attempted to self-medicate instead of seeking professional advice, yeah, it's pretty much their fault.

Like I said, I've had a less-than-pleasant life, therapy was by and large a bunch of bollocks in my personal experience (I know others have found it helpful, but that's beside the point)--and yet I never have done a single drug. The only thing I have to say to the people who feel that way, is the same thing I told myself: Get over it. Plain and simple.

As for the meth addict with the back pain--well, legalizing drugs would help his situation because meth would be cheaper. :p

If nothing else helped him, and he was suffering with so much pain, would he not be better off dead? That's an entirely different question, though. He'd still be an idiot because he'd be frying his brain, thus making an already serious problem even worse, but I still think he has the right to do that. If not feeling the back pain is more important to him than the preservation of his mental faculties, then by all means--he can be my guest and do as much meth as he likes. Like I said, I'm no one to come between anyone and their right to do as they will with their bodies.

Alma said:
And I'm still trying to understand how, aside from your plain robotic rationale, you're still saying you are not a selfish person?.. Given all the previous scenarios in this thread about the legalization of drugs? Or careless, indifferent, or plain neutral? No matter what, or is there One human being in this world that you care for (no names needed)? You can say that's irrevelant (sp.), but I'd still like to know.
Click to expand...

Selfishness implies there's something in it for you--some sort of interest, to better your situation, etc. Neutrality would be closer to the mark--because there's nothing in it for me, either way. Therefore, I am neither selfish nor altruistic--the self as a whole is taken out of the equation, thus leaving only neutrality.

As for your question--I do hold him in the highest of esteems (he who served as my hypothetical meth addict in my previous post.) However, I value the concept of logic more than I value his life.
 
Last edited:
Bloodnofsky said:
An overdose implies misuse of medications, hence going past the dose--so that would be a choice, and very much their fault. As for having a cocktail of drugs--it would be whoever prescribed the cocktail's fault. If a doctor prescribed it, he would be at fault. Like I said, it's no secret that it's not a good idea to mix drugs/medications. If the person attempted to self-medicate instead of seeking professional advice, yeah, it's pretty much their fault.

Like I said, I've had a less-than-pleasant life, therapy was by and large a bunch of bollocks in my personal experience (I know others have found it helpful, but that's beside the point)--and yet I never have done a single drug. The only thing I have to say to the people who feel that way, is the same thing I told myself: Get over it. Plain and simple.

As for the meth addict with the back pain--well, legalizing drugs would help his situation because meth would be cheaper. :p

If nothing else helped him, and he was suffering with so much pain, would he not be better off dead? That's an entirely different question, though. He'd still be an idiot because he'd be frying his brain, thus making an already serious problem even worse, but I still think he has the right to do that. If not feeling the back pain is more important to him than the preservation of his mental faculties, then by all means--he can be my guest and do as much meth as he likes. Like I said, I'm no one to come between anyone and their right to do as they will with their bodies.
Click to expand...

And it's a cruel thing to still call sick people, people with real excruciating physical and/or emotional pains an idiot. I am sorry to know your life is less than pleasant, but is someone called you an idiot for whatever reason, for, say, not loving anyone or just 1 person in your life, would you keep quiet and show no offense? Or if you took dangerous drugs (again, using the hypothesis), would you like it if your family called you an idiot? For, although you are trying to sound impartial, emotionless, neutral, and you even are lot of times, you do harbor some hatred or at least resignation within precisely because of your parents, of your miserable life. That still doesn't give you the right to be hateful of others who contributed with nothing to your misery in the first place. Sort of like admitting, "I was shown zero love in the family, so I'mma treat others with how I was treated, showing concern etc or caring for others would make me irrational" You may deny all that, if you wish, but one's personal experience is very much decisive, or at least, significantly influences one's outlook on life and behavior. It's like a savage kid that was thrown in the woods, raised by animals, so he can't display more than savagery. .. How could I even insinuate on that your brother is worth some discussion time with regards to yourself? When you said you'll stop calling him a brother if he's being dumb/real dumb. Sounds more like vengeance, at times, your perception of things. [/QUOTE]

Bloodnofsky said:
Selfishness implies there's something in it for you--some sort of interest, to better your situation, etc. Neutrality would be closer to the mark--because there's nothing in it for me, either way. Therefore, I am neither selfish nor altruistic--the self as a whole is taken out of the equation, thus leaving only neutrality.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I knew I shouldn't include the word 'self', much less selfishness. As you don't care about yourself. Would you agree, though, that besides being neutral, you are part nihilist, part gnostic, part hedonist, part sentient...? Or something synonimous to those, don't know... Or that you like ideas, activities, leisure activities, like watching porn or whatever, more than a human being? You said so, though, before, that you do... so, I don't even know why I'm asking this.. if you were experiencing/already have experienced horrible physical pains, and someone came to you and said "Get over it. Plain and simple". And nobody calls 911. Or nobody in the street tries to help. Would you accept that, wouldn't you show any emotion at all? And, if you can, please try to separate your personal experiences/life from this answer. You say you don't care, or don't value yourself, or sth along those lines, I don't even know, yet you did try to ask some for help with respect of your chest pains, and considered your eventually seeing your doctor for that...

[/QUOTE]
As for your question--I do hold him in the highest of esteems (he who served as my hypothetical meth addict in my previous post.) However, I value the concept of logic more than I value his life.[/QUOTE]

... Sad... what else can be said about this than sad?... Would it then be a stretch to ask that you value/love porn (you admitted to loving porn) more than someone's life? Since you say about the one you hold in the heighest of your esteem that you don't value him the most, or his life, but reason, logic. ?... At least, the robot's excuse is that he was programmed to exist as a robot, and he can't feel anything, not even pleasure or the shadow of respect. And yours would be your background, even your genes, a miserable life, something... that has determined you find refuge in books rather than people. As though all people were alike or mental or something...
 
Last edited:
OK this is going good:yes: but if you want to talk about your own personal problems do it in PM's:yes:
 
Why is marijuana against the law? It grows naturally on our planet, serves a thousand different functions, all of them positive. To make marijuana against the law is like saying that God made a mistake. Like on the seventh day God looked down, "There it is. My Creation, perfect and holy in all ways. Now I can rest. [Gives shocked expression] Oh my Me! I left fuckin' pot everywhere. I should never have smoked that joint on the third day. Hehe, that was the day I created the possum. Still gives me a chuckle. But if I leave pot everywhere, that's gonna give people the impression they're supposed to … use it.


My final point about alchohol, about drugs, about Pornography...What business is it of your's what I do, read, buy, see or take into my body as long as I don't harm another human being whilst on this planet? And for those of you having a little moral dilemna on how to answer this, I'll answer for you. NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS Take that to the bank, cash it and take it on a vacation outta my fucking life. And stop bringing shotguns to UFO sightings, they might be here to pick me up and take me with 'em.

- Bill Hicks


Wouldn't you like to see a positive LSD story on the news? To base your decision on information rather than scare tactics and superstition? Perhaps? Wouldn't that be interesting? Just for once?

"Today, a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration – that we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There's no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we're the imagination of ourselves. Here's Tom with the weather."


Why is pot against the law? It wouldn't be because anyone can grow it, and therefore you can't make a profit off it, would it?
 
I understand you feel passionatly about this but less of the language folks. And this can not turn into a pro drugs threads-thats against vBulletin's rules.
 
MJ~And~Me said:
I did warn you all !!n but you haven't. Got to stop the conversation, just don't get person, :yes:
Click to expand...

Not really. You warned us to not get personal--which I don't believe either I or Alma were doing. However, if arguing for the unpopular stance is somehow against bulletin rules or whatever, what can I do? It seems rather pointless to create a thread about something if everyone is forced to either agree or be silenced.
 
Bloodnofsky said:
Not really. You warned us to not get personal--which I don't believe either I or Alma were doing. However, if arguing for the unpopular stance is somehow against bulletin rules or whatever, what can I do? It seems rather pointless to create a thread about something if everyone is forced to either agree or be silenced.
Click to expand...

Talk about it by all means just dont use bad language:no:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top