Jennifer,
When I started reading your reply, I really wanted to agree with you. I
remember reading how the tobacco growers pressured the politicians into
making marijuana illegal. But then you lost me.......
Your argument fails when you compare legal prescriptions with recreational
drugs. Can you honestly say if you have the right to take a drug for a major
surgery then you have the right to take the same drug whenever you want?
If we lived life by your logic, many strange things would happen:
1) Soldiers wouldn't get parades, they would be imprisoned upon their return
from war. (murder is murder right?)
2) 4 year olds would be given driver licences.... If someone has the right
to drive, everyone should have the same right
3) I think you see what I'm getting out......
-george
>From: Jennifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Subject: Let's talk about drugs [was:RE: Violent education]
>Date: Tue, 22 May 2001 19:34:21 -0500
>
>At 04:52 PM 5/22/2001 -0500, you wrote:
> >Just to clear things up - I did NOT write the quoted text. It was quoted
> >from another source. I wholeheartedly agree with any and all efforts to
> >thwart drug use. Usually the ones who don't are the ones using them...
>
>I've been ignoring this thread since day one, but this is one of the
>silliest things that I've ever heard. So let's talk about drugs...
>
>Tylenol is a drug. Vitamins are drugs. If you really want to get picky
>about it, food is a drug. Sucrose is a physically addictive, mood-altering
>chemical that is not produced by our bodies. Muffins are the scourge of the
>world, but they're so yummy and crumbly that we simply don't mind.
>
>So let's just assume that you meant illegal drugs. Of course, I am going to
>completely ignore the biassed system under which some drugs have been made
>illegal. If you know anything about the drug schedules and in what ways the
>scheduling rules were broken to make certain drugs illegal, then feel free
>to argue with me on whether or not the system is biassed. Let's just
>imagine that all illegal drugs are illegal because they are so horrible and
>not for political reasons nor due to pressure by Big Business nor due to
>any profit to be made by anyone in the world. Let's say they are illegal
>because they are bad and that all things that are as bad are illegal. This
>is actually pretty far from the truth if you take marijuana and nicotine
>into account. But for the sake of argument, we'll just pretend.
>
>Illegal drugs are bad. "Any and all efforts to thwart drug use" would
>include discontinuing the legal uses of these illegal drugs. They are
>drugs. We can't use them. They are bad. So let's eliminate all opium based
>pain killers. People using opium based pain killers are using illegal
>drugs. Well, they may be using them by prescription in which case it's
>technically legal for them to take them, but they are still using drugs.
>Heroin, morphine, codeine, hydrocodone-- bye bye. These drugs aren't even
>painkillers because they kill pain-- they just make you high until you
>forget the pain. That is their drug action.
>
>Next time you have a kidney stone or you are coughing up blood, don't call
>me. Next time you accidentally chop off a finger and end up in the
>emergency room, they won't be able to use liquid cocaine on contact at the
>site of the wound, because, well, it's a drug. It's cocaine. It is bad bad
>bad. Never mind that it's standard treatment for this type of injury. It's
>a drug. In fact, it is one of the most dangerous drugs that we have found
>so far, according to the drug scheduling rules.
>
>Now amphetamines... well, those are weird. But let's skip the weird bits
>and go for the gusto. No AD(H)D meds (although I think this might be a good
>thing, since better, albeit less convenient treatment exists). No medicine
>for Parkinson's disease. No diet pills for obese people who really will die
>if they don't lose weight.
>
>My point is that you comment tells us some things. It tells us that you
>should think before you say something. OK, ignoring that obviously
>sarcastically persnickety comment (hey. My spell-checker likes
>persnickety), it tells us that you really haven't thought this through.
>There is a lot of propaganda about drugs that is misleading or incorrect
>and people in the US get exposed to that pretty much more than they get
>exposed to the science that debunks it. Taking it at face value when all
>arguments to the contrary are automatically disregarded as "made by people
>who take drugs" isn't thorough or fair, especially when you don't even know
>if the drug-taking assumption is correct. It also shows that you think that
>people who have only read the propaganda knows more about the effects of
>drugs than the people who have read the propaganda and actually taken
>drugs, which is a pretty silly thing to think, quite frankly.
>
>Whether or not I've taken drugs is irrelevant to whether or not I know more
>about them than someone hasn't studied them-- I have studied them in school
>for several years and as a hobby for over ten. And on that basis, I have to
>tell you that some illegal drugs do not meet the necessary requirements for
>their classification as an illegal drug and other substances that do meet
>the requirements are not classified as illegal drugs. Treating all illegal
>drugs the same is ludicrous and condemning the use of illegal drugs can be
>pretty short-sighted as well. The drug war is a futile farce of a one-sided
>propaganda machine with military support.
>
>If anyone would like to become informed on a scientific basis about illegal
>drugs and then discuss them with me, please read this book:
>Drugs and Behavior: An Introduction to Behavioral Pharmacology
>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0130831468/o/qid=990576465/sr=2-1/002-6582464-2705610
>
>You could also opt for a neuropsychopharmacology class that centers around
>the issue of drug use, but that was my textbook for such a class and it was
>very informative. A little dry for some, maybe, but I'm a sucker for brain
>stuff. Besides, those neuropsychopharmacology classes tend to have some
>prerequisites.
>
>Talking drug wars in front of a girl who was a chem major with a psych
>minor for three years for the sole purpose of going to neuropharmacology
>grad school (before opting for earlier graduation and then just becoming a
>CF coder instead). Sheesh.
>
>Time for some muffins.
>
>
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/cf-community@houseoffusion.com/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
