War on Drugs
- Thread starter Xorv
- Start date
Kenneth R.
Cináed
perhaps the types of film that are popular in theaters now have little thought provoking value, but they do not represent the whole. but i believe the main discussion is drugs
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
Silent Song said:
Not directly, but have you never seen a news report of someone imitating something they saw in a movie and hurting themselves?
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
The Devil's Steed said:
Again, show me ONE case of cancer caused SOLELY by the use of marijuana. These people you speak of with their so-called "fucked up minds" must have had other stimuli to cause the degeneration of their brain.
NeverIsForever
Member
Isn't it impossible to prove that cancer is caused "solely" by anything? You would have to expose a person to only one type of potentially hazardous material, and keep them carefully shielded from everything else (including anything that COULD be hazardous, even if it hasn't been proven, so in other words EVERYTHING) to prove that a particular substance is solely responsible if the test subject develops cancer. Such a test would be difficult if not impossible to conduct, because there are so many things in life that *can* cause cancer if used inappropriately, used for prolonged periods of time, or in some cases even used at all.
Silver Incubus
Dead Hands Justin
I dont' know if any of you hear this on the new, but a 3 year study in Italy proved that aspartame is very dangerous, can cause tumors and other growths, degenerate muscles and can actually kill you.
My question is then, do you really think the government cares about you? Why hasn't the FDA made it illegal if so many people have gotten sick from aspartame? One simple answer. Coke and Pepsi.
My question is then, do you really think the government cares about you? Why hasn't the FDA made it illegal if so many people have gotten sick from aspartame? One simple answer. Coke and Pepsi.
The Devil's Steed
Member
ZoMb!M@N said:
Yes, they had other stimuli, because marijuana couldn't have done it. Denial gets you nowhere.
I have a friend who's pretty near the cancer stage at this point, who's smoked one hell of alot of weed. She's smoked some cigarettes, too, but not near as high of an amount, and certainly not a cancerous amount. What does this leave to account for most of the degeneration? The pot. That's only one example.
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
NeverIsForever said:
I'm agreeing with you. To even suggest that marijuana is a direct cause of cancer is ridiculous because it's impossible to know what other variables have been encountered by the user.
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
The Devil's Steed said:
The Devil's Steed said:
What exactly am I denying? When I read something credible that THC is carcinogenic, I'll adjust my life accordingly. And, for your information, one cigarette is "a cancerous amount". How susceptible someone is to carcinogens is a purely individual chemical reaction.
I'll ask you this, who is dumber? Someone you smokes cigarettes that have been for years studied and proven to cause lung, liver and kidney damage, or someone who smokes pot --- a substance that has never been proven to cause any physical damage?
Who exactly is in denial here?
Kenneth R.
Cináed
and you blame movies for the stupidity of people? that's like blaming guns for shootings. the gun didn't pull the trigger.ZoMb!M@N said:
i'd reconsider being a music fan then...infoterror said:
someone you smokes? hmmm. who is dumber, you ask?ZoMb!M@N said:
i say both are equally stupid- smoking anything will blacken their lungs in the long run, and cause health issues, cancer or not.
hell, diseases aside, its an asinine waste of money as well.
The Devil's Steed
Member
ZoMb!M@N said:
You're in denial about the possibility of it causing brain damage. For which one is stupider..let's see: One uses a substance that carries the risk of brain damage, memory loss, and cancer, while the other one uses one that carries only the risk of cancer. The one taking more risks, obviously.
NeverIsForever
Member
The risk and expense people will go to so they can inhale fumes from burning plant matter has never ceased to amaze me...
Demiurge
This user has no title
As far as I know, marijuana is not physically addictive in the way that heroin or cocaine are. Its addictive property is that you may like its intoxication and want to keep doing it. If this destroys your life, you're a fucking weakling and should really get lost anyway.
I actually think Silver Incubus is right here about what pot does to the brain.
It damages my brain to see so much whining. I'm usually the first one to point out a person being in a particular context, being limited by facticity, etc., but it's getting to be too much. Virtually everything is bad for you if you have the self-discipline of a 3 year old.
It's really weird to see Christians who're the first to tell us to blame ourselves and only ourselves for what we've done because we have full moral responsibility say "you can't be exposed to this that or the other thing because you're not strong enough to be responsible."
I actually think Silver Incubus is right here about what pot does to the brain.
It damages my brain to see so much whining. I'm usually the first one to point out a person being in a particular context, being limited by facticity, etc., but it's getting to be too much. Virtually everything is bad for you if you have the self-discipline of a 3 year old.
It's really weird to see Christians who're the first to tell us to blame ourselves and only ourselves for what we've done because we have full moral responsibility say "you can't be exposed to this that or the other thing because you're not strong enough to be responsible."
Indeed, but I was making allegories to the moral nature of smoking marijuana. If marijuana is illegal, it is inconsistent that cigarettes, alcohol, and salvia are legal: cigarettes are far more addictive and more likely to cause lung damage, due to the presence of tar and various synthetic carcinogens, as opposed to the partially combusted chemicals and occasional CO molecule that enter one's lungs while smoking weed; alcohol has a considerably more drastic effect on the liver and brain than weed since it is a poison - it is far more harmful than marijuana; and salvia has a much more powerful mind-altering affect than marijuana.
It's funny that the only part of my post you addressed was a loose comparison. I believe I asked you a specific question.
THC does not cause cancer. However, if smoked, the method is what may increase risk of cancer. In that case, they should have outlawed smoking it (and cigarettes too, since those are far more carcinogenic), since it can be ingested orally. It's funny how useless an exercise this is, since if you were worried about cancer, you'd have to take into account also the frequency of smoking something - if I smoke 200 menthol lights in one day, I sure as hell am more likely to get cancer than if I smoke a few cigars or a few bowls of marijuana. Also, good luck outlawing excessive sun-tanning.
I still have not encountered one good argument for the prohibition of marijuana that is consistent with current laws.
Kenneth R.
Cináed
i assume this is pointed to zombie. i support the full accountability associated with each and every action a man (or woman) takes. nobody makes you do anything, nor do decisions make themselves.Demiurge said:
as NeverIsForever suggested, i find it queer that some people believe that just because the plant exists, they should be compelled to "enhance" their lives by smoking it.
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
Silent Song said:
This is the ignorance that is so difficult to deal with. You know what I meant, but you choose not to address my comments in the correct context. I will no longer be responding to your posts. You are a child, with child-like responses. It is difficult to have an intelligent conversation when only one of us has an objective opinion.
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
The Devil's Steed said:
Ok, you are just as ignorant as NIF. The only thing that you are correct on in the above is that THC does cause short-term memory loss. There is no proof that it causes cancer or brain damage. I will no longer respond to your posts either.
ZoMb!M@N
Old-School Headbanger
Iridium said:
Attention NIF, Devil's Steed, etc.... the above represents a well thought out post with intelligent points being made. Try to emulate this style in your own posts instead of spewing your thoughts with no facts to reinforce them.
Similar threads
