EPTPrejudice Against Drug Use? - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
aka_star
United Kingdom1546 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
Was it wrong for them not to associate with my risky life style? No. Did I blame them? No. But prejudiced is just the most god awful word you could choose to describe it. How can you blame someone for not wanting to be around dangerous and usually illegal drug use. Victimless crime my ass. The only times you read that about heroin or cocaine is when it's the user trying to justify it for themselves. | ||
|
ShamTao
United States419 Posts
Drug use is something that is incredibly integrated into our society. I can understand that, just how I wouldn't want to hang around somebody who skateboards a lot (because it's a pastime I don't enjoy), somebody who doesn't use drugs (and when I say drugs I mean "oh, those drugs") wouldn't enjoy the company of one who does use them for recreation. A lot of the adverse affects are from a combination of the drug's function and the personality of the person using them. There are some people with very seriously addictive personalities - they allow themselves to become VERY dependent on a drug. Mix that personality with cocaine, a drug with high reinforcing properties, and you have what some may define as an addict. People are going to judge whomever they like - stereotyping is a natural, human phenomenon. But, as somebody who smokes more marijuana than your average bear, I consider myself to be much more functional that may meet the eye. I study Biochemistry at undergrad, have aspirations of attending graduate school, and am in a very stable relationship with a girl who doesn't smoke. But people who use a fair amount of everyday drugs, consume alcohol like the majority does, and then paints other "drug users" in an unfriendly light is very naive and unaware of the nonsense bias they've created in their head. I'm splurging a lot, and here's what I'll say: I think prejudice against drug users can be very warranted on a case-by-case basis, but I don't think enough responsibility lies on the user rather than the drug. People say that their friends and loved ones are captured by drugs, but a drug is a drug is a drug. It's what the person who uses it does when under the influence, and how often they use. Some drugs are addictive, but one has to acknowledge what brought the user to that point. | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:27 trainRiderJ wrote: A truly dangerous drug addiction should absolutely be cause to terminate an employee, end a relationship, refuse to do business with, etc. Of course, what constitutes a "dangerous drug addiction" is open to interpretation. It shouldn't be. I've met enough heroin addicts to know that anyone addicted to the stuff is bad news. Either because they are constantly putting themselves in bad situations, showing up to your apartment with incredibly sketchy people, or trying to steal your shit, all in the name of shooting up. Only drugs powerful enough to cause that kind of addiction should truly be regarded as dangerous. This applies to alcohol, opiates, amphetamines, benzos, and cocaine. Nicotine is honestly as addictive as many of the things listed above, but available in every corner store. | ||
|
dupshflayh
Norway49 Posts
But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". | ||
|
Playguuu
United States926 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:35 UmiNotsuki wrote: But does that decision give me right to discriminate against them anymore than their decision to, say, go to the bathroom at precisely 12:00 noon, or play with LEGO's at age 40? Absolutely depending on the context. Not hiring someone because they do drugs is very different from not hiring someone because they play with legos. It can affect job performance (and you don't want someone bringing drugs into the office) and your business image, so in that context it's absolutely fine to discriminate, infact correct to. | ||
|
UmiNotsuki
United States633 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:37 roofs wrote: You're grouping all drugs together. I suggest doing more research before generalizing the fact that they all decrease perception/critical thought and the like. I could easily just make the same claim on religion. All drugs are different, some do cause a lot of harm, while others do very little. Look at any primary research being done on marijuana, ecstacy, shrooms, lsd and compare them to alcohol, heroin, cocaine, ketamines. You'll see a huge difference, where in some research papers will say taking marijuana/lsd/shrooms in moderate doses will actually improve some aspects of life (e.g. intelligence and happiness). And in your situation I'd like to know if the person she's dating is actually 'addicted' to pot and whether or not it is causing harm to others in that partner's life. Otherwise you're basing your choice on a very biased poll that isn't related to your specific situation. The science is there to say that all drugs (or almost all drugs, there are some off the beaten path counterexamples) cause harm to some degree; I don't think we can really disagree on that. As for religion... I don't want the thread to be derailed by this, but I think religion is just as bad as drug use (i.e., just as foolish,) but I don't discriminate against people for that because it's almost never their choice; instead, they were told that was the truth by their parents since birth and it's become a part of them, something they cannot change. Not their fault. I would prefer no one reply to that in this thread, PM me if you have something to say to me. In my case, she's dating someone who's in a troubled situation and it's my personal opinion that he would not be able to deal with the withdrawal of stopping pot because he has a troubled life. I don't know if it causes harm because frankly it makes me so uncomfortable that he smokes that I'm not willing to find out. It's not like I can get her to stop dating him even if she really is in danger. Lastly, I'm not basing a decision off the poll, I'm just curious what the TL community thinks. Polls are cool :D | ||
|
darthfoley
United States8004 Posts
I think i suffer from the Holden Caulfield complex. There are often times where i'm like, i could see myself smoking, then i think later, smoking is fucking stupid. I wouldn't class it as a prejudice equal to racism or sexism | ||
|
MrDudeMan
Canada973 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:42 dupshflayh wrote: Am I the only one that thinks this is a way too open question to be able to debate it properly? There's all kinds of drugs, from the one you get from your doctor to the ones you buy in shady parts of town. But all in all, I don't like beeing prejudiced at all. However, you do flash some warning labels in my mind of you use something like methamphetamines "recreationally". No, it isn't too open. The thread isn't about whether drug use should be tolerated. Its about whether judging someone based on their drug use is considered prejudice. And it's not. Its just judging someone based on their lifestyle choices. Choices they have complete control over. | ||
|
The_Piper42
United States426 Posts
| ||
|
altered
Switzerland646 Posts
In a way its the same with the prejudices people have with gamers. Not every gamer is addicted to games and not every gamer is antisocial. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
I guess I would be wasting my time trying to swim against the current... | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:39 jdseemoreglass wrote: Prejudice mean to pre-judge. It doesn't matter whether the characteristic is chosen or not, you can still judge someone for it. Personally, I don't find anything wrong with any kind of prejudice. Most prejudices have quite a lot of truth to them, which is why they exist in the first place. Prejudice doesn't say that 100% of X people are a certain way, just that statistically they tend to be a certain way according to a criteria. For example, science has firmly established that there are distinct advantages that each sex has over the other. To be prejudiced, or "sexist" as it is incorrectly called, is absolutely rational, and in many cases prejudice is necessary for survival. Are you going to assume that berry is going to make you sick just because a similar looking berry made you sick in the past? I sure hope so, otherwise political correctness has completely eradicated common sense. Prejudice: Preconceived opinion not based on reason or experience. It's based on reason and/or experience. Therefore it's not prejudiced. | ||
|
Headlines
United States482 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:35 UmiNotsuki wrote: But does that decision give me right to discriminate against them anymore than their decision to, say, go to the bathroom at precisely 12:00 noon, or play with LEGO's at age 40? Going to the restroom at precisely 12:00 noon and playing with LEGO's at age 40 aren't harmful. I plan on playing LEGO's with my children if I have them at age 40. I steer clear of drug users because they become unpredictable when under the influence. Would I rather be in a car with a driver who does the above examples you mentioned, or a guy who took illegal substances just a few minutes ago? Honestly, I think you're under the influence of something right now, OP. All of your counter-arguments are throwing wild examples of, "Yeah... but what if... [insert an example that covers maybe 0.1% of illegal substance users]." Merry-Go-Round. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:47 Chargelot wrote: Prejudice: Preconceived opinion not based on reason or experience. It's based on reason and/or experience. Therefore it's not prejudiced. Oh, I see... So if a ginger robbed me, and I proceeded to assume that all gingers are thieves, it wouldn't be considered prejudice, because I have experience to back it up? This is the problem with this thread and every discussion using these terms... everyone disagrees with what the terms actually mean! | ||
|
Offhand
United States1869 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:47 Headlines wrote: Honestly, I think you're under the influence of something right now, OP. All of your counter-arguments are throwing wild examples of, "Yeah... but what if... [insert an example that covers maybe 0.1% of illegal substance users]." Merry-Go-Round. The majority of illegal substance users would be pot smokers, most of which have normal functional lives. Off topic, LEGOs are awesome no matter what your age is. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45221 Posts
Poll: When an acquaintance tells you that he/ she uses illegal drugs... It negatively affects your opinion of him/ her. (649) It depends on certain circumstances (explain in post). (224) It does not affect your opinion of him/ her. (214) It positively affects your opinion of him/ her. (65) 1152 total votes Your vote: When an acquaintance tells you that he/ she uses illegal drugs... (Vote): It negatively affects your opinion of him/ her. | ||
|
UmiNotsuki
United States633 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:47 Headlines wrote: Going to the restroom at precisely 12:00 noon and playing with LEGO's at age 40 aren't harmful. I plan on playing LEGO's with my children if I have them at age 40. I steer clear of drug users because they become unpredictable when under the influence. Would I rather be in a car with a driver who does the above examples you mentioned, or a guy who took illegal substances just a few minutes ago? Honestly, I think you're under the influence of something right now, OP. All of your counter-arguments are throwing wild examples of, "Yeah... but what if... [insert an example that covers maybe 0.1% of illegal substance users]." Merry-Go-Round. I think that's very fair, saying that it usually causes unpredictability; but unfortunately for me I know many people who smoke pot and are no different (at least outwardly) while under the influence, or are in fact less dangerous because of the calming affect. Sadly that doesn't serve to reduce my discomfort. I smiled at you thinking I was on drugs xD I was just trying to provide some simple arguments for both sides of the story. I'm trying to refrain from having an opinion for now. But, FYI, I don't smoke, I don't drink, I don't do drugs. Ever. | ||
|
UmiNotsuki
United States633 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Here, this should be the poll imo: Poll: When an acquaintance tells you that he/ she uses illegal drugs... It negatively affects your opinion of him/ her. (649) It depends on certain circumstances (explain in post). (224) It does not affect your opinion of him/ her. (214) It positively affects your opinion of him/ her. (65) 1152 total votes Your vote: When an acquaintance tells you that he/ she uses illegal drugs... (Vote): It negatively affects your opinion of him/ her. Fantastic idea, adding to the OP now. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On October 17 2011 11:49 jdseemoreglass wrote: Oh, I see... So if a ginger robbed me, and I proceeded to assume that all gingers are thieves, it wouldn't be considered prejudice, because I have experience to back it up? This is the problem with this thread and every discussion using these terms... everyone disagrees with what the terms actually mean! If I had a dollar for every time a TL user invoked the slippery slope argument.... If I judge someone for their ACTIONS, such as drug use, I am judging THEM, not EVERYONE LIKE THEM. A Ginger on drugs is someone I don't wish to associate with. A Ginger not on drugs is some random person I don't know. If he says hi, I'll say hi. We may even become friends. Judging someone based on looks lacks reason, and although could be linked to experience, there is a good chance you haven't been robbed by EVERY SINGLE Ginger you have ever seen. But every single drug user is intentionally breaking a law to intentionally harm their body in one way or another. Even the drugs listed earlier which were compared to cocaine and heroin have drastic negative effects, especially when taken over time. If I saw a guy stabbing himself I'd fucking judge the hell out of him. It's not the same thing. Start being logical, or start posting when you're sober. One of the two. | ||
| ||
