On October 18 2011 03:45 Twistacles wrote: Woah a lot of squares on teamliquid...guess I shouldn't be suprised.
Usually, if I know someone does drugs from the safe group {MDMA, THC, DMT, LSD, whatever} It positively affects my opinion of them because they can see through the lies and bullshit they get force-fed through their life, AND they can look stuff up on their own. They tend to be more outgoing and less easily manipulated. Obviously, there's always just idiots, but yeah.
From the other group, though... they're either rich or have some severe character flaws and so it probably would negatively effect my opinion of them (depending on what, and how frequent)
Yeah, this is the reason i negatively look at drug users, implying that the world is "lies and bullshit, and that existentialism can only be reached through taking pills or smoking, or drinking for that matter." I don't care if you fuck up your life with weed, don't look down on me because you think you're superior for reaching a higher sense of the world. It's a lot like religion now that I come to think of it, everything through moderation.
plus your 'squares' statement is prejuduce as it is, oh boy forgive us for not liking drugs, lets all go hold hands and jerk off to teletubbies and sunday school.
Wow so much anger... you need a joint, man!
Seriously though! Not everyone who uses drugs 'fucks up their life.' In fact, the vast majority people who use drugs don't fuck up their life. Chill out. Do what you want to do, its your life and I respect your decision to not use drugs.
All drug users want is for everyone else to let us do what we want to do, without spitting in our faces or throwing us in prison just for toking up or tripping balls in the safety our own homes.
On October 18 2011 00:51 TheGlassface wrote: Wow @ responses. I mean, wow.
There are good and bad people of all kinds. Everyone uses drugs, from caffeine to alcohol to meth to opiates to ADHD medication. I personally have met meth addicts who maintained a 6 figure income and family. I've met an alcoholic who graduated cum laudi, who happened to write all of his finals on mescaline. I've also seen a man robbed over a 20 sack of weed and personally been at the hands of several bad encounters with addicts.
Don't blame the drug, blame the person. Wow. I really did not expect what I saw here.
Not everyone uses drugs/alcohol of some kind.
Aspirin is a drug. Caffeine is a drug. Any kind of medication for disorders, also drugs.
So, you're right but it's a minority. A very small minority. Most people don't even know they're using some kind of drug every day.
Semantics.
TheGlassFace is 100 percent correct here. Every single person who works in an office in this country can tell you how addicted people are to caffeine, which happens to be... a psychoactive stimulant! Hypocrites and fools.
Nobody can figure out any more whether it's important or not, so society and its lawmakers are basically just letting disagreement play itself out. There are worse things that could happen actually. Eventually, we will arrive at something more or less like the correct answer and Social Hypocrisy will not be necessary. About 200 years from now.
On October 18 2011 03:45 Twistacles wrote: Woah a lot of squares on teamliquid...guess I shouldn't be suprised.
Usually, if I know someone does drugs from the safe group {MDMA, THC, DMT, LSD, whatever} It positively affects my opinion of them because they can see through the lies and bullshit they get force-fed through their life, AND they can look stuff up on their own. They tend to be more outgoing and less easily manipulated. Obviously, there's always just idiots, but yeah.
From the other group, though... they're either rich or have some severe character flaws and so it probably would negatively effect my opinion of them (depending on what, and how frequent)
Yeah, this is the reason i negatively look at drug users, implying that the world is "lies and bullshit, and that existentialism can only be reached through taking pills or smoking, or drinking for that matter." I don't care if you fuck up your life with weed, don't look down on me because you think you're superior for reaching a higher sense of the world. It's a lot like religion now that I come to think of it, everything through moderation.
plus your 'squares' statement is prejuduce as it is, oh boy forgive us for not liking drugs, lets all go hold hands and jerk off to teletubbies and sunday school.
Wow so much anger... you need a joint, man!
Seriously though! Not everyone who uses drugs 'fucks up their life.' In fact, the vast majority people who use drugs don't fuck up their life. Chill out. Do what you want to do, its your life and I respect your decision to not use drugs.
All drug users want is for everyone else to let us do what we want to do, without spitting in our faces or throwing us in prison just for toking up or tripping balls in the safety our own homes.
it's all a sliding scale of 'fucking up your life.' and no, what some drug users want is to push their beliefs that i'm ignorant for not using drugs onto me, which is why i equate it to religion. some people are fine, others are annoying as fuck.
On October 18 2011 04:13 N3rV[Green] wrote: Is a person who has crippling chronic pain that takes pain medication every day a drug user who would be looked down upon?
Honestly the ignorance and lack of any real information makes this thread kinda silly.....
This is the blight of the whole 'war on drugs' debate.
Ignorance and lack of any real information is the reason drugs like marijuana are illegal in the first place (that and the early 1900s timber industry.)
On October 18 2011 04:16 beachbeachy wrote: There's honestly NO CORRECT ANSWER for drug use.
Nobody can figure out any more whether it's important or not, so society and its lawmakers are basically just letting disagreement play itself out. There are worse things that could happen actually. Eventually, we will arrive at something more or less like the correct answer and Social Hypocrisy will not be necessary. About 200 years from now.
On October 17 2011 19:34 rhmiller907 wrote: I smoke pot occasionally and that hasn't stopped me from going to school or work. In my mind if someone can use drugs and still be a "productive" member of society then who cares. My friends dad smoked crack but he also owned his own business ran it quite successfully. My parents used to smoke pot and both of them are very successful. I myself drink alcohol smoke cigarettes and pot. I also go to school have two jobs and still find time to play SC2. It's all about moderation.
People that keep making this argument need to keep one thing in mind: The thing that is 'bad' about pot are the symptoms of its addiction, and addiction is SPECIFICALLY a genetic condition that applies to all such behaviors, and is qualified by the associated negative symptoms.
If you don't have the genetic addictive condition, you won't get addicted (though you can still develop a dependency) and if you personally suffer no ill effects in your personal or professional life for smoking pot, then there's no problem.
There's a lot of people out there who both have the addictive biology and suffer all the major consequences for extended pot use, and those are the ones that are 'addicts' in the literal sense.
Sorry but you really need to provide a SOURCE to back up what you say. Because I'm fairly certain that you are wrong. On top of that, addictiveness is a much more complicated phenomenon than what you suggest.
to the 500+ people voted no on this poll; are you aware coffee/energydrinks/cigarets/alchool are all behaviour changing drugs? personally all those drugs bring a more invading behaviour then weed for example.
On October 17 2011 19:34 rhmiller907 wrote: I smoke pot occasionally and that hasn't stopped me from going to school or work. In my mind if someone can use drugs and still be a "productive" member of society then who cares. My friends dad smoked crack but he also owned his own business ran it quite successfully. My parents used to smoke pot and both of them are very successful. I myself drink alcohol smoke cigarettes and pot. I also go to school have two jobs and still find time to play SC2. It's all about moderation.
People that keep making this argument need to keep one thing in mind: The thing that is 'bad' about pot are the symptoms of its addiction, and addiction is SPECIFICALLY a genetic condition that applies to all such behaviors, and is qualified by the associated negative symptoms.
If you don't have the genetic addictive condition, you won't get addicted (though you can still develop a dependency) and if you personally suffer no ill effects in your personal or professional life for smoking pot, then there's no problem.
There's a lot of people out there who both have the addictive biology and suffer all the major consequences for extended pot use, and those are the ones that are 'addicts' in the literal sense.
Sorry but you really need to provide a SOURCE to back up what you say. Because I'm fairly certain that you are wrong. On top of that, addictiveness is a much more complicated phenomenon than what you suggest.
Really? I'm glad I asked for a source because I would have never guessed who you were using for a "reliable source". You do realize that "Dr. Drew" is about as much as a legitimate doctor or scientific mind as Dr. Drew from TV or Howard Stern. He is a radio personality...
FROM THE ARTICLE YOU LINKED: "The opinions expressed herein are the guest's alone and have not been reviewed by a WebMD physician. If you have questions about your health, you should consult your personal physician. This event is meant for informational purposes only."
On October 18 2011 03:45 Twistacles wrote: Woah a lot of squares on teamliquid...guess I shouldn't be suprised.
Usually, if I know someone does drugs from the safe group {MDMA, THC, DMT, LSD, whatever} It positively affects my opinion of them because they can see through the lies and bullshit they get force-fed through their life, AND they can look stuff up on their own. They tend to be more outgoing and less easily manipulated. Obviously, there's always just idiots, but yeah.
From the other group, though... they're either rich or have some severe character flaws and so it probably would negatively effect my opinion of them (depending on what, and how frequent)
Yeah, this is the reason i negatively look at drug users, implying that the world is "lies and bullshit, and that existentialism can only be reached through taking pills or smoking, or drinking for that matter." I don't care if you fuck up your life with weed, don't look down on me because you think you're superior for reaching a higher sense of the world. It's a lot like religion now that I come to think of it, everything through moderation.
plus your 'squares' statement is prejuduce as it is, oh boy forgive us for not liking drugs, lets all go hold hands and jerk off to teletubbies and sunday school.
Wow so much anger... you need a joint, man!
Seriously though! Not everyone who uses drugs 'fucks up their life.' In fact, the vast majority people who use drugs don't fuck up their life. Chill out. Do what you want to do, its your life and I respect your decision to not use drugs.
All drug users want is for everyone else to let us do what we want to do, without spitting in our faces or throwing us in prison just for toking up or tripping balls in the safety our own homes.
it's all a sliding scale of 'fucking up your life.' and no, what some drug users want is to push their beliefs that i'm ignorant for not using drugs onto me, which is why i equate it to religion. some people are fine, others are annoying as fuck.
By that reasoning, everything is a sliding scale of fucking up your life. Posting on teamliquid isn't as productive as tending a food-bearing garden. Guess I'm fucking up my life right now. Guess you are too.
Yeah, some people are annoying as fuck. Get used to it. There are infinitely more non-drug users who try to push their beliefs on drug users. Many would have all of us locked away indefinitely or even executed. Some of them are fine, but others are outright destructive to the lives of we who choose to use.
On October 18 2011 00:51 TheGlassface wrote: Wow @ responses. I mean, wow.
There are good and bad people of all kinds. Everyone uses drugs, from caffeine to alcohol to meth to opiates to ADHD medication. I personally have met meth addicts who maintained a 6 figure income and family. I've met an alcoholic who graduated cum laudi, who happened to write all of his finals on mescaline. I've also seen a man robbed over a 20 sack of weed and personally been at the hands of several bad encounters with addicts.
Don't blame the drug, blame the person. Wow. I really did not expect what I saw here.
Not everyone uses drugs/alcohol of some kind.
Aspirin is a drug. Caffeine is a drug. Any kind of medication for disorders, also drugs.
So, you're right but it's a minority. A very small minority. Most people don't even know they're using some kind of drug every day.
Semantics.
TheGlassFace is 100 percent correct here. Every single person who works in an office in this country can tell you how addicted people are to caffeine, which happens to be... a psychoactive stimulant! Hypocrites and fools.
Like I said, semantics. The only thing that 'drugs' such as caffeine and medication have in common with the real deal is the name and the fact that they do something to your brain.
The actually relevant part is what that 'something' is, though.
In caffeine's case, it makes you feel more awake, active. In aspirin's case, it dulls the pain senses. In shrooms' case, they make you trip balls. If your argument is that those commonplace drugs are remotely comparable in effect to 'real'-drugs taken for entertainment, I think you might think again about throwing words like "fools and hypocrites" around.
I'm not gonna bother explaining all that again, I already did some pages back.
On October 17 2011 11:34 Antoine wrote: people don't choose to be black or female. they choose to use drugs/smoke/drink etc
this is the critical difference.
to address your above post, at some point the person made the choice to start.
You fail to address that one also can't choose in which socio-economic class or geographical area they grow up in. By being trapped in an environment with prevalent drug use, it is often tempting to engage in the often lucrative industry which is that of drugs and other 'black' markets. I can also say with a high level of certainty that engaging in the drug distribution market, contains the highest amount of potential income for someone without education, etc. Sometimes even well-educated and high-esteemed individuals participate in drug distribution because it can make them even richer.
On October 17 2011 19:34 rhmiller907 wrote: I smoke pot occasionally and that hasn't stopped me from going to school or work. In my mind if someone can use drugs and still be a "productive" member of society then who cares. My friends dad smoked crack but he also owned his own business ran it quite successfully. My parents used to smoke pot and both of them are very successful. I myself drink alcohol smoke cigarettes and pot. I also go to school have two jobs and still find time to play SC2. It's all about moderation.
People that keep making this argument need to keep one thing in mind: The thing that is 'bad' about pot are the symptoms of its addiction, and addiction is SPECIFICALLY a genetic condition that applies to all such behaviors, and is qualified by the associated negative symptoms.
If you don't have the genetic addictive condition, you won't get addicted (though you can still develop a dependency) and if you personally suffer no ill effects in your personal or professional life for smoking pot, then there's no problem.
There's a lot of people out there who both have the addictive biology and suffer all the major consequences for extended pot use, and those are the ones that are 'addicts' in the literal sense.
Sorry but you really need to provide a SOURCE to back up what you say. Because I'm fairly certain that you are wrong. On top of that, addictiveness is a much more complicated phenomenon than what you suggest.
Really? I'm glad I asked for a source because I would have never guessed who you were using for a "reliable source". You do realize that "Dr. Drew" is about as much as a legitimate doctor or scientific mind as Dr. Drew from TV or Howard Stern. He is a radio personality...
FROM THE ARTICLE YOU LINKED: "The opinions expressed herein are the guest's alone and have not been reviewed by a WebMD physician. If you have questions about your health, you should consult your personal physician. This event is meant for informational purposes only."
How about Gabor Mate, a physician and addiction specialist. Or Robert Sapolsky, a world-renowned neuroendocrinologist from Stanford?
inb4: "Lol Zeitgeist propaganda" or "Gursh Durn liberal yahoo!"
On October 17 2011 19:34 rhmiller907 wrote: I smoke pot occasionally and that hasn't stopped me from going to school or work. In my mind if someone can use drugs and still be a "productive" member of society then who cares. My friends dad smoked crack but he also owned his own business ran it quite successfully. My parents used to smoke pot and both of them are very successful. I myself drink alcohol smoke cigarettes and pot. I also go to school have two jobs and still find time to play SC2. It's all about moderation.
People that keep making this argument need to keep one thing in mind: The thing that is 'bad' about pot are the symptoms of its addiction, and addiction is SPECIFICALLY a genetic condition that applies to all such behaviors, and is qualified by the associated negative symptoms.
If you don't have the genetic addictive condition, you won't get addicted (though you can still develop a dependency) and if you personally suffer no ill effects in your personal or professional life for smoking pot, then there's no problem.
There's a lot of people out there who both have the addictive biology and suffer all the major consequences for extended pot use, and those are the ones that are 'addicts' in the literal sense.
Sorry but you really need to provide a SOURCE to back up what you say. Because I'm fairly certain that you are wrong. On top of that, addictiveness is a much more complicated phenomenon than what you suggest.
Really? I'm glad I asked for a source because I would have never guessed who you were using for a "reliable source". You do realize that "Dr. Drew" is about as much as a legitimate doctor or scientific mind as Dr. Drew from TV or Howard Stern. He is a radio personality...
FROM THE ARTICLE YOU LINKED: "The opinions expressed herein are the guest's alone and have not been reviewed by a WebMD physician. If you have questions about your health, you should consult your personal physician. This event is meant for informational purposes only."
On October 17 2011 19:34 rhmiller907 wrote: I smoke pot occasionally and that hasn't stopped me from going to school or work. In my mind if someone can use drugs and still be a "productive" member of society then who cares. My friends dad smoked crack but he also owned his own business ran it quite successfully. My parents used to smoke pot and both of them are very successful. I myself drink alcohol smoke cigarettes and pot. I also go to school have two jobs and still find time to play SC2. It's all about moderation.
People that keep making this argument need to keep one thing in mind: The thing that is 'bad' about pot are the symptoms of its addiction, and addiction is SPECIFICALLY a genetic condition that applies to all such behaviors, and is qualified by the associated negative symptoms.
If you don't have the genetic addictive condition, you won't get addicted (though you can still develop a dependency) and if you personally suffer no ill effects in your personal or professional life for smoking pot, then there's no problem.
There's a lot of people out there who both have the addictive biology and suffer all the major consequences for extended pot use, and those are the ones that are 'addicts' in the literal sense.
Sorry but you really need to provide a SOURCE to back up what you say. Because I'm fairly certain that you are wrong. On top of that, addictiveness is a much more complicated phenomenon than what you suggest.
Member question: I have smoked pot for a number of years as an antistressor. Currently I'm having thick sinus congestion and very bad headaches and sore throat. I also have ulcerative colitis. What treatments can help me regain my health as I am very tired and in a lot of discomfort? I want to quit the smoke altogether.
Dr. Drew: You no longer use marijuana as a stress reducer. You are an addict and this addiction will not stop without treatment. I would suggest you look into Marijuana Anonymous. You need careful supervision when you stop this drug. There is an extraordinarily high incident of suicide in the first six months of marijuana abstinence.
The syndrome of marijuana addiction is always the same: A profound euphoria is experienced, usually after the second or third exposure to it, and from that moment on the addict pursues, preoccupies, or uses that drug every day. Somewhere down the line, exactly what you are experiencing develops; the addict gets depressed, has trouble sleeping and being motivated. Of course, the addict's response is to smoke more or better pot to deal with "the stress," which only accelerates the decline into depression.
woa... terrible source. so much wrong in so many ways; all i see his "dr drew" trying to convince people to read his books and go to weed anonymous.
EPT
.
