jackson64 #fundie

jackson64 #fundie rr-bb.com

[In response to "I wish more people would realize that we could shut these cartels down permanently with nothing more than a stroke of a pen. All we need to do is legalize the drugs they derive their profits from."]

image you're kidding right? I guess we could end murder too by making killing legal and calling it by a different name..

Drugs directly and indirectly kill up to 350,000 Americans per year ( with a tripling of deaths in the past 5 years from LEGAL drugs like oxycodone, morphine, percocet etc) According to the US Dept of Labor and Statistics drug usage leads to billions in loss of productivity............I could go on like this all day, but it seems redundant to belabor the point--evil and sin lead to death and misery...it doesn't matter if it's a stroke of a pen by a human saying it is okay...sorceries and pharmaceuticals destroy lives..

73 comments

old comment by Anon-e-moose

"you're kidding right? I guess we could end murder too by making killing legal and calling it by a different name.."

But you already have. Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay ring any bells? One word: Rendition. I hear Al-Qaeda does the same, re their POWs, constantly moving them so as to evade recapture; so that makes it alright. Amirite, Buzzardnuts? (PROTIP: the Japanese in WWII and Vietcong waterboarded captured US troops, Buzzy).

'He who fights with monsters should take care lest he becomes a monster. And if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you.'

-Friedrich Nietzsche

Not for nothing is your God Emperor of Fucking Up, George Dumbya Bush, known as 'Daddy's Little War Criminal' eh, Ruptured Retards?!

"Drugs directly and indirectly kill up to 350,000 Americans per year ( with a tripling of deaths in the past 5 years from LEGAL drugs like oxycodone, morphine, percocet etc)"

Now if only that hypocritical right-wing blubberbag Rush Limburger could join those statistics...

"I could go on like this all day, but it seems redundant to belabor the point"

As you lot do re. abortion, but Roe vs. Wade ensures your continued butthurt will avail you naught (PROTIP: Why haven't your GOP repealed* RvW & banned abortion before now? Since Nixon, they've had plenty of time to do so. You do the maths). Also your claims that 'America is a Christian country' when the Constitution and the Treaty of Tripoli says otherwise. And your continued reiterateration that 'Biblical Creation' is so because God says so in the Bible, despite your denial of Kitzmiller vs. Dover proving otherwise. Evolution is fact. Creationism is lies. The law says so.

"evil and sin lead to death and misery..."

As proved by the continued interference in peoples' lives by you fundies & the GOP. Matthew 6:6 ring any bells?

"it doesn't matter if it's a stroke of a pen by a human saying it is okay...sorceries and pharmaceuticals destroy lives.."

You fundies refer to we Atheists as sorcerors, as we're in the thrall of Satan & his demons. Yet, I, an Atheist, have never taken anything stronger than what my physician has prescribed me (and even then, the worst that happened was some slight drowsiness; certainly not anything that'd get me addicted). But then, like I say:

If only the one life destroyed by pharmaceuticals was that of Rush Limburger.

*- And if you're so concerned about murder becoming effectively legal, why aren't you & your fundie ilk lobbying your GOP to repeal the 2nd Amendment, hmmmmm?! There's far more people being killed every year in the US than by drugs - and not just by the legal drugs alcohol & tobacco (PROTIP: Nicotine is the most addictive substance on the planet; I'm glad I never took up smoking; the best way to give up something is not to start in the first place). So why not ban said biggest killer: firearms? Aye, there's the rub...!

Enjoy your paradox. And your hypocrisy, Ruptured Retards.

old comment by GodotIsWaiting4U

Someone doesn't understand that part of the draw of illegal drugs is in their illegality.

Now, personally, I don't advocate legalizing ALL drugs, but the less harmful stuff like marijuana? Go for it. Really. Teach people to treat that stuff responsibly rather than acting like every little bit of it is horrifyingly irredeemable. Keep the really hard stuff like cocaine and heroin illegal, by all means (well, perhaps not cocaine), but weed really doesn't merit the restrictions placed upon it.

Now, that said, regulating a substance like marijuana is perfectly reasonable and necessary. It should be legal, but there should totally be strings attached. Here's why: when you regulate a substance instead of banning it entirely, the government is suddenly muscling in on the action, and the black market for the drug fades away. Why should people bother with obtaining the thing illegally when there's a perfectly legal method, unless they're going for some sort of stupid "stick it to the man" ideology (in which case they practically deserve to get caught).

old comment by Mudak

I am personally of the opinion that if there is any illegal "industry" that brings in more than a certain dollar amount per year (and we can certainly debate the actual numbers), then we should at least explore the possibility of decriminalization. By allowing it to be sold and consumed under the proper conditions, properly regulated to ensure safety of all parties involved, and taxed, we would both save a lot of money from the costs of keeping it illegal (police, courts, jails) and also bring in more income (tax revenue).

As I said before, we can debate the actual dollar amount but there's little doubt in my mind that marijuana and prostitution would be the first two industries that become legal.

By the way, I personally would be dead right now if it weren't for cocaine. I was born with an obstruction in my nose and had surgery when I was 14 years old to correct it. Two weeks after the surgery, I hemorrhaged and lost more than half of my blood. The only way they could stop the bleeding was with cocaine, which is apparently a very good coagulant.

old comment by dionysus

you're kidding right? I guess we could end murder too by making killing legal and calling it by a different name..

Drugs directly and indirectly kill up to 350,000 Americans per year

Not even comparable. Murder actively harms others against their will whereas drug users dying is their own damn fault and more importantly, they consented to taking that risk. You might as well outlaw driving too if that's going to be your logic. In fact, driving is MORE dangerous than drugs as there exists a strong possibility of harming others when you wreck your car.

According to the US Dept of Labor and Statistics drug usage leads to billions in loss of productivity

I'm sure the internet reduces productivity by a lot too. I often hear of people that go online at work. Not only that, but you can buy the aforementioned dangerous cars on the internet. So lets outlaw the internet.

evil and sin lead to death and misery

Sin doesn't exist and evil doesn't always lead to death. That said, we should strive to avoid evil, which is why I avoid fundamentalist Christianity.

it doesn't matter if it's a stroke of a pen by a human saying it is okay...sorceries and pharmaceuticals destroy lives

Again, so do cars and the internet. Life has risks and you can either deal with them or you can ban everything that has any chance of causing damage and be treated like an infant that can't be trusted to make choices. And since when are pharmaceuticals evil? They keep people alive!

old comment by TB Tabby

Drug users should not be REWARDED with Legalization.

So you're against it because you want to stick it to the junkies? How petty of you.

Cocaine, Meth, Opium, anyone who thinks that legalizing them will fix everything is an idiot.

It won't...but it'll fix something, which is better than nothing. Legalization is just the first step. to solving the drug problem.

As the cocaine suppliers will be the SAME farmers and such... The dealers will set up front companies and turn to white collar crime. That or they'll start killing legit dealers.

And they'll also have to start applying for licenses and paying taxes on their crops and having their products inspected to keep them as safe as possible...just like the breweries did when alcohol was legalized. Legalization means regulation. Regulation means making it safer. Making it safer means fewer people die from it.

And lastly if the drugs get "Dumbed down" to be weaker, the people will just go to the Cartels for the "Good drugs". No one wants "Mild Cocaine".

Legalized drugs won't necessarily be "weaker" in that sense. They will, however, be safer. Again, I refer you to the legalization of alcohol. Did people keep going to the moonshiners for bathtub gin? No. They went to the legitimate businesses because they were cheaper, easier to find, safer, and legal. And really, which dealer would you trust more: the legitimate businessman with a license who just passed inspection, or the shady back-alley dealer selling out of his trenchcoat?

old comment by Mrs. Antichrist

The fact that they're illegal is a huge contributing factor to those deaths.

A) If it's illegal, it's not regulated. A dealer gets the same sentence for trafficking regardless of the quality of the product he sells, meaning that he has zero incentive to make sure that he's not selling tainted or improperly mixed batches. Legal medications and drugs are safer because the government can regulate them by sending in safety inspectors and creating a health/safety code, leveling fines against those who break it.

B) Making it illegal causes addiction to be treated as a crime, rather than a medical problem. Throwing an addict in jail only makes the problem worse. These people need treatment, not prison time.

C) Gangs and mafias thrive on the sale of illegal drugs. Legalizing drugs wouldn't magically make these groups go away, but it would knock out a good chunk of their income, since most people would prefer to by from legit dealers instead of risking jail time. The truth of the matter is that outlawing alcohol and drugs creates more crime, it doesn't slow it down -- look at what liquor prohibition did for the mafia in the 20s.

D) It's easier for underage teens to get their hands on illegal substances than legal ones. Ask any kid which is easier: Finding weed, or finding alcohol. They'll tell you that it's the former, by a long shot. The people who peddle illegal drugs don't ask for ID, and rarely have any qualms about selling drugs to teenagers because, again, they have no incentive to card their buyers. Conversely, legit sellers DO ask for ID, in order to avoid fines and jail time.

old comment by ANALH

How does the US Dept of Labor and Statistics calculate this statistic? Unless it goes back in time and makes sure those people stay sober and watches them it can't have 100% certainty in that statistic.

Any valid calculation would have to factor in that many people who wouldn't be doing drugs would've spent all their time gambling, addicted to video games, addicted to the internet, etc. An addictive personality predisposes drug addiction so assuming that if it wasn't for drugs all of these people would be working and not completely absorbed in something else is foolish.

Furthermore, if the government can make laws against personal lifestyle choices on the grounds that people who make them are less productive then it follows that the government would have the authority to ban unemployment or even "slacking on the job" itself. It makes no sense to say the government can ban an activity that indirectly leads to a loss of productivity but can not ban something (unproductivity) that directly causes unproductivity.

old comment by katie5000

Pharmaceuticals have saved many lives, probably many more than they've taken. And look at how you've instinctively associated them, as chemical substances, with "evil" and "sin", so that this whole thing basically becomes another iteration of "science = bad". Why, oh, why do you guys hate science?? ><

That said, you had a pretty legit argument until you introduced the religion at the end. The stuff about the "evil" and "sin" is the type of personal sentiment that you want to leave out of a public discussion and keep to yourself when you debate.

By the way, perhaps you Christians wouldn't feel so "persecuted" if you didn't constantly throw your beliefs out into the public forum, where they can and do get ridiculed by those who think they are ridiculous. Basically, anything put out into the public sphere is fair game for criticism, so it would logically follow that if you won't feel comfortable with having a thing criticized, then don't put it into a place where it could be.

jackson64 #fundie rr-bb.com

73 comments

Confused?