Heliologue
neologist
it burns me up inside that mikael smokes... if he dies early, i'll never forgive him: every pack he smokes is one less song he might write!
smoking
- Thread starter Kötöny
- Start date
luke
Messianic Subliminal Mind
Have you ever read Mein Kampf? Or any Hegel? I'm not suggesting that you are Nazi, please don't get me wrong...
But a lot of "existentialist" philosophies bear a striking resemblance to post Kantian Platonic thought. I am reading a book called "The Ominous Parallels" by Leonard Peikoff. It outlines the similarities of pre-war Germany and present day America. Basically he contends that it was the collectivist school of thought that became the ideology of the intellectual community which allowed the Germans to act in such a zealous manner under Hitler.
You obviously don't submit to the theory that the state takes precedence over the individual, but it is interesting to note the similarities in your writings.
Just curious as to whether or not you were aware.
Sullen Jester
Corporate Executive
Satori
Destructosaur
That's pretty interesting. There are so many different ways of interpreting/using something, the minds of people are so varied, the point of views are so numerous.
That's pretty cool. I think the similarities are only the surface of the discussions though, it's in the interpretation and application of the ideas that the real weight of a philosophy is felt.
I imagine from what you wrote that they used existentialist and selfless ideas to degrade the individual/ego to make the state and it's "betterment" the ultimate goal for everyone. (?)
People are so fucked and so inherently 'evil' me thinks.
No I wasn't aware at all, thanks for sharing
Satori
Satori
Destructosaur
I feel that someone not smoking around you because you said something IS positive, don't you?
Part of the job of a governing body is to protect its constituents. There are also laws which prohibit people from burning car tires in their back yards, should we do away with this law as well? Where do we draw the line in regard to pollution? Should be bring back crop dusting with DDT or nicotine? or maybe anthrax?
And if the business owner decided he wanted to release nitrous oxide into the air would this be ok? How about lining the establishment with asbestos?
Laws regarding air quality must fall in the realm of government, the general public cannot be trusted with something so important.
I don't think this makes any sense. Business owners already have the right to make their establisments non-smoking and they are choosing not to.
Here's something a lot of people don't realize: The laws regarding no smoking in bars/restaurant have been in place for a very very long time, they just haven't been enforced. The laws don't explicitly state tobacco as the problem, they just provide legal limits for very many toxic gases within a place of business. If a place allows smoking inside it, the legal limits for a whole lot of toxic gases are greatly exceeded.. for example, it's not uncommon for a bar which allows smoking to have 100 times the legal limit for carbon monoxide. 100 times. That's just insane. But somehow society thinks this is acceptable. It's not.
The laws regarding air quality in businesses have been neglected far too long and I think it's time they were enforced for the good of everyone. Business owner are obviously completely clueless about this or just don't give a shit so the government has to step in a do something. Laws don't work on the "honour system", they have to be enforced.
Satori
Satori
Destructosaur
Originally posted by Soul4Raziel
Lest we forget they had some help from Uncle Sam, a little money goes a long way. I suggest we allow the tobacco fucktards
I agree. The world needs less nicotine and more thc!
Satori
Bah, pot is just as bad as ciggs, maybe even more so. And don't tell me it's "from the earth" or "it's not a drug." Shrooms are from the earth and their toxic poison is what gives you the high. It's all poison I say!!!
Satori
Destructosaur
Considering that the vast majority of smokers start smoking at a very early age for the prime reason of "looking cool" I don't think it's that unreasonable to call them posers.
I'm not suggesting that all smokers ARE posers, I'm suggesting that at some point in their lives most smokers WERE posers, which is what lead them into smoking in the first place. Nicotine is a "social" drug, people generally do it in groups and that's how most people start when they are kids, as part of a crowd that they want to fit in to, to be accepted by others by childishly rebelling against what society wants by actually conforming to some silly addiction. Unfortunately, when they finally get a little older and outgrow their poser phase they remain hopelessly addicted to this drug and as such sometimes look like posers to others even though they probably haven't been posers for many years. I think the reason why non-smokers often still regard regard adult smokers as posers is cuz they are thinking back to when they were in elementary or high school and certain kids would defiantely stand 6 inches outside of school property puffing away while doing their best impression of a "cool" person. Personally, I don't see them that way, that's how I see young smokers, but adults aren't like that. I think the word "addict" is much more applicable than "poser" to adults.
Yea, it's not as bad, definitely the lesser of 2 evils, cigarettes are by far the worst form of nicotine dependence. That's the big water pipe thing right? They use this in india too, if that's what you are talking about. They light coal thing and lay it on top of the tobacco and it kinda just slowly smokes the tobacco instead of completely incenerating it like cigarettes. This prevents a lot of the nasty shit that cigarettes give off. The tobacco used for this is typically not so laced with chemicals and shit too, and quite often the chemicals they add to the tobacco to make it less irritating and more addictive are worse than the tobacco itself (which is saying quite a lot).
That reminds me of something, here in Canada a few years ago there was a big stink between the gov't and big tobacco. This all came about because it was discovered a few years before that the company Rothmans Inc. was using old and used fibreglass insulation from old buildings as "filler" in their tobacco products. I'm not kidding, I'm not mistaken.. fibreglass! That's just fucked up. Talk about lack of corporate ethics, geesh.
Anyway, in Canada the attention was turned to tobacco additives. The gov't said that all tobacco companies have to provide a list of all the addictives and quantities they were using. Of course the companies didn't want to provide it and dragged it out in court for a while, but eventually they lost and had to give in (fuck, even kool-aid has to provide their ingredients to the food and drug administration, why not tobacco?). Fearing public back-lash, many cigarette companies completely changed their additives before providing the list to the gov't, they were putting shit in there that the didn't want ANYONE to find out about, scary eh? The US companies who were exporting to Canada did this too. There was one company in the US (I don't remember which) that refused to change it's additives to comply with canadian law and they absolutely refused to provide the list of current additives so they pulled their cigarettes from canadian shelves rather than reveal their terrible secrets. What the hell are the putting in there? Whatever the fuck it is, it's awfully fucking scary. I read that light cigarettes are the worse by far in terms of lethal additives. Light's claim to have less nicotine but more of it is absorbed because smokers inhale deeper and there's more "catalyst" type chemicals added to it to increase the amount of nicotine absorbed by the lungs and chemicals added to increase the impact of nicotine on the brain and central nervous system (which of course increases it's addictive hold over people, and it's already addictive enough as it is without all this crap added to it to make it far worse). I even read that some companies add chemicals to fool the machines that measure the nicotine content into thinking there is less nicotine than there is so that they can use the light or mild labels and make people think they are inhaling less toxic crap than they actually are. Of course, NONE of these chemicals were tested on humans prior to being put into the tobacco. Pleasant thought, eh?
The situation is much much worse in the US and most other parts of the world where no such additive laws exist, so maybe your brand of cigarette contains filler made from fibreglass insulation, garbage, wood from old buildings, whatever, no body can say for sure. There is one thing we can say with certainty however, it's that tobacco companies are extremely unethical and could care less about the health of their customers, the lure of the quick buck takes precedence over the lives of humans.
If I have put a little anxiety into the minds of cigarrette smokers by saying all this shit then never fear, just go have a smoke and you'll feel much better. Luckily for smokers the fear of tobacco-related illness/death can be temporarily/effectively treated with nicotine. Now don't you feel better?
Satori
Satori
Destructosaur
I see you are not very informed on this issue, and that's ok, not everyone knows everything, nor should they be expected to be. I suggest you read up on this stuff. Marijuana is by far the most studied drug in existence so if there was something lethal/harmful about it we'd know about it by now. The reason we don't know of any major negative side effects of pot (aside from temporary degradation of short-term memory and upper respiratory problems in long term 30 or 40+ year pot-heads) is because none have been found. In fact, caffiene has been shown to have much more negative impact on the body than pot ever did, and alcohol even more so. Tobacco is even worse than caffiene and alcohol. Tobacco causes more deaths and illnesses than accidents, murder, suicide, and all other illegal drugs combined. Therefore, I don't see your theory that pot is as bad as tobacco being at all justified or even remotely logical.
Everything is from the earth, and it is a drug, but then, so is garlic. A drug is defined as any substance that enacts some sort of measureable bio-chemical change on human physiology and many foods fall into this category, and certainly all herbal health products too. The fact that it is a drug does not mean it is "bad". Chamomile tea is a drug too, but it's actually very good for you.
Poison means it is "toxic", and THC (the active ingredient in pot) is NOT toxic in the least, not one bit. Nicotine on the other hand is extremely toxic and extremely lethal. If an average human ate just a few cigarettes they would certainly die of nicotine poisoning. You see, burning tobacco destroys most of the nicotine and it's a very inefficient way of ingesting the drug. Fortunately tobacco has so much nicotine that destroying most of it doesn't make a difference, the smoker still gets way more than they need to get a buzz and ward off withdrawal symptoms.
In fact, marijuana is so harmless and presents such a small health risk and such a small impact on society that the laws which punish pot smokers do far more harm to them and society in general than the drug itself. This means that the laws prohibiting marijuana are unconstitutional and counter-productive, they create more problems than they solve.
Here in Canada we have something called the Canadian Medical Association (the canadian equivalent of the AMA, just far far less corrupt and idiotic). I've posted several articles about what they say about this issue here before. Basically, the CMA (which is there to protect and help people) says that the laws prohibiting possession of marijuana are completely backward and unconstitutional. The gov't only has the right to ban something when it presents a detriment to people's health and/or society. The occassional/recreational use of pot has NO known negative side effects (dispite all the research performed) and therefore there is no basis for outlawing it. Add to this the fact that pot is non-addictive and what you have is a justifiable basis for decriminalization, which is exactly what the CMA is suggesting.
Pot isn't illegal because it is harmful, or even because it gives you a buzz (alcohol gives you a much harsher buzz than pot and it's not illegal). Anyone interested in this can read about it on the net, there's loads of information out there on it. Basically, pot was outlawed because hemp was greatly threatening the pulp and paper industry and they had it outlawed by suggesting that pot was akin to opium or cocaine (known problematic substances). It was the only way they could attack the hemp growers because hemp is far superior to wood in every way imaginable.
Outlawing marijuana was a political move based in lies, greed, and money, and we are still feeling the effects of this bullshit campaign today. Many people today are still under the misconception that marijuana in harmful based on these money-driven lies which were started over 100 years ago even though these lies have been proven absolutely false over and over and over again. When I was in school for example we learned that marijuana was as bad as cocaine! Fortunately now in schools they are finally teaching kids the truth about this and if you look at a recently printed school "health" text book (particularly in Europe and Canada - the US is still kinda behind the times in this) you'll find that marijuana is not given a very bad rap at all, it is classed well below alcohol and tobacco on the "harm" scale. The biggest problem with marijuana is that it makes you lazy and unmotivated while you are stoned on it, but alcohol shares this side effect as well so it's hardly justification for prohibition. I'm happy the truth is finally coming out about this stuff. The wool has been pulled over our eyes for far too long regarding this relatively harmless substance.
It just goes to show, if someone says something (ie. marijuana is harmful) and they are in a position to financially gain from saying it (like the paper industry was/is), chances are they are full of shit.
Satori
Orchid
Nonchalant Onlooker
I smoke, menthol Marlboro (the green packs) is my preferred flavor.
I don't remember exactly why I started smoking, but today I smoke mostly because it's a habit. I don't think I'm addicted to the nicotine, it's really just a bad habit for me. In January '00 I quit smoking for three months just to support a friend of mine who tried to quit and I had no problems at all. Then for some reason I started smoking again.
If you smoke, a cigarette will calm you down, it lets you focus your thoughts, or just move your attention away from something that might be stressing you at the moment.
If I'm in a company of a single non-smoker (or possible one, say, some stranger) I always ask if (s)he minds if I smoke. I know people are disgusted by the stench of tobacco. I don't like the smell either.
Oh, don't bother telling me about the dangers of smoking: I have a deathwish.
J/K
I don't remember exactly why I started smoking, but today I smoke mostly because it's a habit. I don't think I'm addicted to the nicotine, it's really just a bad habit for me. In January '00 I quit smoking for three months just to support a friend of mine who tried to quit and I had no problems at all. Then for some reason I started smoking again.
If you smoke, a cigarette will calm you down, it lets you focus your thoughts, or just move your attention away from something that might be stressing you at the moment.
If I'm in a company of a single non-smoker (or possible one, say, some stranger) I always ask if (s)he minds if I smoke. I know people are disgusted by the stench of tobacco. I don't like the smell either.
Oh, don't bother telling me about the dangers of smoking: I have a deathwish.
J/K
Claire's Horror
sperm monster
hey, smoking increases your ability to concentrate; that's why so many scientists, artists and writers have the habit. well, that's about the only argument in favor of tobacco that exist. but I do smoke, and a lot. I suppose I would have to quit some day, but not for now. I don't have a favorite brand, so I usually smoke Marlboro Reds, Kamel Red, Camel, and More.
Obyeybyeogone
New Metal Member
About the Truth commercials. I don't care if they are right or not, I know I don't need to smoke to seem cool or to calm me down or whatever. I think the Truth commercials are so incredibly obnoxious, people are going to smoke anyways, it's not as if people that start smoking think it's good for them, and I don't think making the tobacco companies look evil will stop people from smoking either, just my opinion though, maybe it does help.
benny
Artifact Of Chaos
I have been around 2nd hand smoke my whole life. It doesn't even phase me I usually don't even notice it if its in the air. My grandpa has been smoking since he was 14 and is 83 right now and can still do a lot of things normal people can do at that age. My whole family smokes and I have lost a few loved ones to lung cancer. I have decided not to smoke because of the money it takes. It would be mind boggling if I could see how much money my parents have put towards cigarette's in their life. I really don't see how 2nd hand smoke can bother people that bad but I guess thats because I have lived with it for so long.
Claire's Horror
sperm monster
a 13 or 14 year-old kid may get a "cool" impression of a smoker, but that's about it. it is pretty stupid to think most people smoke just for the image.
Why should I? It's still a drug, and it's a drug that makes you act like an idiot, giggling like a mental patient, or makes you munch on everything in the fridge. Besides, I'm more interested in reading other, more important things than "the pros and cons of pot."
I didn't think I had to be overly specific on my use of the word "drug," and I didn't think I'd get an ostentatious definition of the word.
This SIMPLY was directed towards all those people who think that pot is not a drug, simple as that.
Geeeeez, all that because I stated a fact about shrooms? You can break it down to a science - I prefer the more simpler approach. Pot is bad - I don't do pot. And I don't do ciggs, RARELY drink wine if that, or otherwise pollute my body with crappy substances that alter your mind or mess up your body. And since pot gives me the flu (I stated this elsewhere), it's a shitty, stupid DRUG that holds absolutely no benefit for me.*
*stated in less than 1000 words
Obyeybyeogone
New Metal Member
That's fine if you don't want to do it, if it doesn't do anything for you. A lot of people enjoy it, and it's less dangerous than cigarettes and alchohol, so it's Satori's (And a lot of other people, inlcuding me) opinion that possession, growing, and selling of pot shouldn't be considered a criminal offense.
<--pickets against the possession, growing and selling of pot. 'NO MORE POT, POT IS NOT' 'NO MORE POT, POT IS SNOT' (since it gives me the flu) and......
POT IS BAD, RATHER GET CRABS, POT IS SAD, NOT BEING A SMOKER I'M GLAD!!!!!!!!
POT SUCKS, RATHER GET HIT BY A BUS!!!!! POT'S CRUD, IT'S A DUD!!!!!
Obyeybyeogone
New Metal Member
I don't exactly understand why you'd be against it
Why do you care what drugs other people use? (Especially ones that aren't bad for you much at all)
Why do you care what drugs other people use? (Especially ones that aren't bad for you much at all)
Oyo, I am against anything that pollutes the body, that alters the mind, and that can otherwise reduce your quality of life. I don't care for drugs, I hate that so many people glorify drugs like they're a good thing. It's a fact that your awareness with pot is not the same as when you're not smoking (I know, I've tried). I HATED the feeling when I tried pot. You feel like you're losing control of your body, you don't see straight, you giggle for no reason, and you get the munchies, which can wreck havoc on a healthy body, since you're not eating right. Pot sucks, and any other drug sucks. I've seen people blow their entire paychecks on drugs, and that's just not cool! Just because pot is not, say, heroin, doesn't mean a thing to me. It's still a drug, it causes a reaction in the body that is not normal, and I don't like it.
