USA Today posted a “shocking” article about a 19-year-old who ate a pot cookie and jumped/fell from a balcony to his death. In Colorado, of course. This is just one story in a million sprinkled like kief all over the media concerning the fallout from marijuana legalization—Colorado kids getting in to mom and dad’s marijuana edibles, pot at Colorado schools, underage pot use on the rise, etc. But the wrong drug is getting demonized here. The real problem drugs don’t even get a mention.
For instance, consider the number of deaths that have occurred because of alcohol. Think about how many drunk driving incidents resulted in fatality last year or last month or just yesterday. But USA Today and other “news” organizations pick up on this solitary story about some teenager eating a pot cookie and falling from a balcony. That’s frustrating to me. Especially considering what happened at Fort Hood yesterday.
Big Pharma will tell you differently, but they make and sell the most dangerous drugs available in the world today. Kids are getting into their parents’ pot brownies? How about parents being forced to give their kids meth because of a false diagnosis of ADHD? How about kids being given anti-depressants because they “seem sad.” And did you notice the common link between the Fort Hood shooter and the shooter at the Navy Ship Yard? Anti-psychotic drugs.
In fact, I think a large-scale investigation into Big Pharma is in order. It’s definitely the case that these brain-damaging crazy pill drugs need to be taken off the market. And it can’t happen too soon. Just take a look at this article detailing how many shooters in recent memory were on anti-psychotic prescriptions. It’s pretty crazy.
This is not any more of a causal fallacy than the picture painted by the mainstream media concerning Colorado and pot legalization. People want to feel like government regulation is safe. They have a hard time trusting that a de-regulated private agreement would actually be safer. But that is in fact the case. We need to stop listening to civil government shills about drugs (or anything else, for that matter). The civil government is obviously in the pocket of Big Pharma. And we’re paying the price.
I’m sure we can find a story out there about a kid who fell to his death during a hike shortly after drink H2O. Dangerous stuff that H2O, leading problem in drowning victims, major ingredient in acid rain, main factor in all mud slides, Helps rust out our cars, will cause holes in concrete and so much more damage it is ridiculous. It is by far the most dangerous chemical on the Earth. So, we better destroy it all before it kills us. I personally do not care for pot, but I see no reason to keep it illegal. Furthermore, not convinced it does any more damage then any legal drug out in today’s market place.
I’m not for pot. Tried it but all it did was make me realize how boring the other people were. Conversation is nil other than the occasional wow or oh man this is great s–t. I guess if one is into contemplating their navel it’s fine. Legalize it and tax like the do tobacco and liquor. But I digress. The so called legitimate drugs are far worse. Just ask what statins have done to some people. And the Blood Pressure medicines and steroids and a whole host of sleeping aids and drugs for depression. And the doctors are the biggest drug pushers. My husband had only passed about a month or so and I made the mistake of shedding a tear when talking to my doctor about him. First thing was “let me give you an anti-depressant”. I told her no thanks that it takes a good 2 years for most people to feel “normal” and I if I took drugs then when I came off of them I would still have to deal with it. She just gave me a funny look.
PS I do believe you were displaying some fine sarcasm.
The medical industry kills up to 200,000 yearly – hear that MSM? How about doing a story on that. Truth is the world would be a better place if pot was the choice of recreational drugs instead of alcohol. Alcohol kills at least 12,000 yearly – killed my son. I have nothing against pot – lot against alcohol.
The only law needed for drug control is the Biblical lex talionis and related statutes:
“…Because Yahweh’s law does not altogether prohibit alcohol or drugs, the answer is not to make them illegal as the Eighteenth Amendment (and church edict) did. Just as Amendment 18 was inept at controlling alcoholic consumption, so are current drug regulations. Responsible use should be promoted by punishing only those who cause harm to another erson or his property. For example, instead of attempting to curb drunk driving by prohibiting excessive alcohol consumption, any drunk driver convicted of causing or contributing to the death of an innocent person should be put to death or forced to pay whatever the next of kin
requires as ransom for his life. If the injured or disabled party does not die, the convicted felon (instead of an insurance company) should be compelled to pay for medical expenses and financial compensation for lost wages during convalescence. This compensation should be in addition to an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth [lex talionis], or the required ransom. If the perpetrator cannot pay the required compensation, he is to be indentured until his debt is paid. Lex talionis not only promotes personal responsibility, it eliminates the need for the insurance industry.
“Man’s efforts to control alcohol and drug abusers have been wholly ineffective. When Yahweh’s law is enforced and convicted murderers are put to death, society never suffers from repeat offenders after someone is killed as the result of drunken carelessness. If someone is killed, injured, or disabled as the consequence of another person’s irresponsible use of drugs, the
punishment should correspond to the death, injury, or damage to the victim and their property. Today’s ineffective drug and alcohol laws have, in many instances, made criminals out of people who have hurt no one but themselves. This has forced innocent taxpayers to pay for the housing, feeding, and entertaining of people who should never have been imprisoned. Yahweh’s law makes people personally responsible for their actions, and His judgments substantially reduce both premeditated crime and careless
disregard for the lives and property of others. A downsized and smaller government is an additional benefit of lex talionis. Federal agencies such as OSHA, the FDA, and the FAA are superfluous under Biblical law….”
For more, see online Chapter 27 “Amendment 18: Prohibition: Repealed For Good Reason” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt27.html.
I don’t want to kill someone for killing my daughter so that they don’t kill my son too, I don’t want them to kill my daughter at all. This is a frightening kind of approach.
The costs of drunkenness are far more diverse than maiming and taking lives. Verbal abuse, outbursts of anger, fights, broken families, divorce, lost income, unpaid debts and much more, lex talionis has proven to be ineffective at handling things like these.
No one harms “only himself.” I’ve been working for years to help a family recovering from a man who committed suicide after drugs and alcohol ruined his life. I can’t resurrect him to kill him again.
tgsmith: “I don’t want to kill someone for killing my daughter so that they don’t kill my son too.”
NO offense intended, but this statement is right out of la la land. In reality, regardless what YOU want (what’s important is what your GOD wants), you’re daughter may be killed and if the murderer is not brought to justice and executed, he may very well kill your son as well. If I were your son, I would question your love for me.
You’re correct that lex talionis doesn’t address many of the things you mentioned. It’s not supposed to. It’s for more grievous problems. That said, government regulations and intervention is not going to fix those issues either. Government controls in such areas only create compounded problems.
People are going to do what they’re going to do and hopefully the consequences of their foolishness will drive them to the foot of the cross and the empty tomb for life-altering born again (from above) experience.
My God does not want drunken drivers to kill people or for drunks to ruin their lives and those of their families. He doesn’t even want people to get drunk. Of course, it can be hard to establish what “drunk” means, so that is part of the problem we face.
Drunks do not want to harm or kill people either, but they do. Often they are gentle people (often full of self-pity), who just happen to get carried away with a few too many drinks. If we can stop them from drinking too much so that they don’t harm others or themselves we have the responsibility to do so.
I’ve never thought about giving the death penalty for someone who accidentally kills people because he drunk too much. Perhaps you could make a Biblical case for it, but I can’t see even the slimmest possibility of passing it as law, even if a majority of people in a State were Bible believing.
I am happy for anyone and everyone to come to the cross and be saved, even one who “killed my daughter” by having one too many drinks. But if I can spare lives by finding ways to cut back on drunkenness, Before God, I have the responsibility to do it.
Before making a case, first things first, do you unequivocally believe the following? If you don’t, there’s no need for me making a case for anything related thereto:
“The law of YHWH is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of YHWH is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of YHWH are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of YHWH is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of YHWH is clean, enduring for ever: the [civil] judgments of YHWH are true and righteous altogether.” (Psalm 19:7-9)
Amen. All that, all of Psalm 19, and more (except by adding “civil” you decrease the meaning of what I believe).
Out curiosity, would you argue for the death penalty for people who kill someone while going over the speed limit, or making an “aggressive” driving move, perhaps out of anger?
Under Yahweh’s law, there would be no speed limits. The Chapter above will answer the remainder of your question.
Okay, I think I get your point a little. No speed limits. Everyone decides for themselves and we execute the people who later we decide were irresponsible. Sounds like chaos and pretty frightening to me.
I take then you’re Jewish?
That is a TOTALLY unwarranted ASSUMPTION, and would to irrelevant in any case. It is also ANTITHETICAL to your alleged belief in the Bible.
Ted is correct in his comments. Secondly, all roads are to be privately own, and the speed limits, etc. determined by the private owners. Government duty by God is only to punish evil doers (as defined by the bible), and praise those who do good (as defined by the bible), nothing more or less. On more about privately owned roads go to Youtube, and in it search engine type “The Privatization of Roads and Highways Walter Block ” do the search, and look at the videos. They are very informative.
Romans 13 does not say “defined by the Bible.” I wouldn’t have a problem with “defined by the Bible” if we could agree on what that would mean, but it seems there is a commitment to seeing the Bible in a certain way, defined by a certain group of people, who want complete control of the way the Bible is interpreted from their own perspective.
The problem with utopias is that not only that they do not exist (by definition). That wouldn’t be so bad, and it might be exciting to try anyway, but the real problem with them is that millions and millions of people die seeking them while absolutely no progress is gained in the process.
What theonomists propose will make the French Revolution seem like a tea party.
First will be the stage of the “extermination of the Canaanites.” That should include the killing of at least half the population.
Then comes the “fun” part. The remaining people will begin to argue for their particular interpretation of Sabbath breaking (and other commands that are difficult to apply and harder yet to enforce) and slowly, but surely, begin getting enough control to execute those who disagree with them. Group by group will be slowly annihilated as they disagree with what the Bible means and see each other as heretics.
The tiny group that remains (lets say it is a splinter group of theonomists who happen to agree enough with each other not to kill each other over interpretation over various laws in the Pentateuch that demand the death penalty), will have so much blood on their hands that even the slightest degree of humble conscience from doubt about their superior interpretations will lead them to drink, and drink more to keep conscience at bay. Eventually in a drunken rage they will turn on each other and one will remain. He then will eventually begin to have a small doubt that he was right about everything and take his own life.
The meek will then inherit the earth.
No teaching of scripture in based on one verse in the bible, and proper reasoning is to be used which you are not doing. The bible say don’t go beyond what is written in it 1 Cor. 4:6, don’t lean on your own understanding Prov. 3:5, and that the bible has all the knowledge and answers that we need 2 Tim. 3:16-17. So when it come to interpreting the bible since the bible has all the answers then only the bible can properly interpret the bible, and all we need to do is just agree with, and teach the interpretation it gives to itself. So the bible defines itself, its words, in its own way. So what is good, evil, praise, crimes and the punishments to be applied are all defined in and taught by the bible. When we don’t let the bible interpret itself then we are going beyond the bible (which you are doing) and thus we are leaning on our own understanding which the bible condemns. Interpreting the bible correctly is a good work, and the bible has all the answers for every good work 2 Tim. 3:16-17 thus only the bible can correctly define, and interpret itself. And when one truly let the bible does that to itself then and only then one is prevented from putting their own interpretation and definition on the bible.
In Romans 3:4 it states “By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.” – English Standard Version. The bible in many places say when ruled by God’s law that will bring God blessings, and when God’s law is disobeyed it brings God curses. But you say its the other way around, its vice versa according to you, thus Romans 3:4 , and Isaiah 5:20 “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!” – English Standard Version, fully applies to you.
The context of Psalm 19 is not referring to Yahweh’s judgment upon us as individuals, but His triune moral law (as described by Moses, for example, in Deuteronomy 6:1)–that is, His Ten Commandments and their respective statutes that explain them, and His civil judgments that enforce them.
That said, if you truly believe in this passage, then you’ll agree that Yahweh’s immutable morality as found in His commandments, statutes, and judgments is THE STANDARD by which everything is to be ethically determined. If you agree, then I would recommend our online Chapter 17 “Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt17.html for a more exhaustive case for the death penalty (with some exceptions) for drunks who accidentally kills someone.
I’m please that you believe Deuteronomy 22:8. It is key to what we’re discussing. However, please consider that it does not have anything to do with government intervention, except when it comes to the judgment for the injury or death of someone at the hands of someone who has failed to build the “parapet.”
I’m sorry I don’t have time, or even the desire (no offense, I don’t know who wrote it), to research the article.
The Psalm ends with…
Moreover by them Your servant is warned, And in keeping them there is great reward. Who can understand his errors? Cleanse me from secret faults. Keep back Your servant also from presumptuous sins; Let them not have dominion over me. Then I shall be blameless, And I shall be innocent of great transgression.Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart Be acceptable in Your sight, O LORD, my strength and my Redeemer. (Psalm 19:11-14).
The Pentateuch is structured in such a way that it is clear that not every specific law and application is described and enumerated. The book(s) of Moses is structured to show that the more laws God gives, the more laws we disobey. It is not given to explain every law or application of law. This doesn’t mean as laws are added that they are wrong, it just proves our sinful human nature loves to find loopholes and make excuses.
Sorry for the non-sequitur between the verses and the comments about the nature of the book(s) of Moses. I didn’t intend for those to be read together.
YOU are evading the issue. Based on you posting history, I believe you are INTENTIONALLY avoiding the issue.
tgsmith’s last post proved your comment missed the point, so you ATTEMPTED to change the subject.
Here a story about the dangers of drug use among the over-eating, over-privileged overlord class…
Rush Limbaugh Arrested on Prescription Drug Charges
Rush Limbaugh turned himself in on prescription drug charges this afternoon, CNN reports.
Rush Limbaugh was arrested Friday on prescription drug
charges, law enforcement officials said. Limbaugh turned himself in to
authorities on a warrant issued by the state attorney’s office, said
agency spokeswoman Teri Barbera. The conservative radio commentator came
into the jail at about 4 p.m. with his attorney Roy Black and was
released an hour later on $3,000 bail, Barbera said. The warrant was for
fraud to conceal information to obtain prescription, Barbera said.
As I noted when the story first broke, taking desperate measures to
obtain prescription drugs to which one has become addicted after
legitimate use is a far different animal than criminal use of
recreational drugs. I say that even though I think both should be legal.
Update (4/29): A much different spin in the AP version this morning.
A three-year investigation into drug use by Rush Limbaugh ended abruptly
when the conservative commentator was booked on a single charge of
prescription fraud in a deal his attorney says spares him a trial. The
charge will be dropped if Limbaugh continues treatment, attorney Roy
Black said Friday. “He feels that a great burden has been lifted from
his shoulders,” he said. “What he told me is that this is the first day
of the rest of his life.”
Limbaugh surrendered at the Palm Beach County Jail and was booked on a
warrant charging him with “doctor shopping,” when a patient illegally
deceives multiple physicians to receive overlapping prescriptions. The
55-year-old commentator left an hour later, after he was photographed
and fingerprinted and he posted $3,000 bail, said Teri Barbera,
spokeswoman for the Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office. Under the terms of the
deal with prosecutors called a pretrial diversion, to be filed Monday,
Limbaugh will be cleared of the charge if he stays clean for 18 months
and doesn’t violate any laws, Black said. Limbaugh has publicly
acknowledged being addicted to pain medication.
[…]
As a formality, Limbaugh entered a not guilty plea to the charge,
spokesman Tony Knight said. The radio giant has maintained his innocence
throughout the investigation. “He was in high spirits,” Knight said.
“It was all a formality. It’s a concluded deal.”
I’m not sure I’d have used the phrase “high spirits” in this content.
But, yes, I’m sure he’s quite relieved to have this behind him.
Under the deal, Limbaugh also agreed to pay the state
$30,000 to defray the public cost of the investigation and must pay $30
per month for the cost of supervision, during which time he will
continue regular drug tests.
This is an interesting provision and certainly not one available to most of us.
Black said Limbaugh has been drug free for 2 1/2 years. After 18 months, “he will not have any criminal record,” he said.
Interesting.
Prosecutors began investigating Limbaugh in 2003 after
The National Enquirer reported his housekeeper’s allegations that he had
abused OxyContin and other painkillers. He soon took a five-week leave
from his radio show to enter a rehabilitation program and acknowledged
he had become addicted to pain medication. He blamed it on severe back
pain.
“The agreement that we entered into makes good common sense,” Black
said. “The idea is to help the person overcome the addiction … There
should be a recognition that people like Rush really should not be
prosecuted.”
Agreed, although “people like Rush” is a rather vague concept. I
would argue that we should not treat addiction, to any substance, as a
criminal matter. Even if one opposes legalization of recreational drugs,
the emphasis should be on those who distribute them.
Seems like you have an infatuation with Rush Limbaugh. I hear that gay Barack did cocaine and crack cocaine (given to him by rich, older white men in exchange for oral sex and “bottom” service from Queen Barack). You failed to mention this, butt wipe. And yes, Obama was the corn holee.
Your a sick little puke ball… The crap you propose about the prez is bull crap.
Rush had 20,000 hits of OxyContin, an opiate, and through doctor shopping and went deaf because of it.
Everyone else who had done the same would have gotten 20 years in prison.
The “so called crap” that I proposed came from people (gay friends of Queen Bareback Obama) who were intimate with him at the time. I have no reason to think they are lying. As much as Queen Obama lies, I would believe them before I would him. FO, you little butt plugger.
So you going to protect that lying piece of s….
20,000 hits of Oxy? You lie like o. 20,000 hits would kill a bunch of elephants.
30 a day…
When he could no longer keep the news a secret, Limbaugh gave this statement on his radio show:
….I am addicted to prescription pain medication. I first started taking prescription painkillers five, six years ago, when my doctor described them to treat post-surgical pain following spinal surgery…I chose to treat the pain with prescribed medication. And this medication turned out to be highly addictive. Over the past several years, I’ve tried to break my dependence on pain pills. And, in fact, I’ve twice checked myself into medical facilities in an attempt to do so…Immediately following this broadcast, I will check myself into a treatment center for the next 30 days to once and for all break the hold that this highly addictive medication has on me.
But Limbaugh wasn’t arrested for drug addiction, he was arrested for illegally visiting multiple doctors in order to fraudently obtain prescriptions to feed his habit. His housekeeper was more forthcoming than Limbaugh about the details:
Limbaugh’s former housekeeper claims she helped him buy thousands of dollars of prescription pain killers over a four-year period, including the highly-addictive Oxycontin, a potent painkiller known as “hillbilly heroin” because of its black-market popularity in some rural areas.
Thanks for not getting pissed at me, I have to say that 30 a day would still kill an elephant. My addicted friend only took 3 a day and he was in cold sweats. I don’t remember how many days it took to get over his withdraw but I think his dying is related.
I know you are more aware then most about this opiate of the stars.
Rush is “deef” because of this addiction. He’s “deef” in both ways.
He can only read other peoples opinions.
He listens even less then he used to…
Legal medical drugs are addictive, OxyContin to name one. My friend had back pain from sitting too much. OxyContin was prescribed and the pain went away. Soon he needed the OxyContin and the withdraw was very bad. If my friend had money he would have chased for more OxyContin the way Rush did. I don’t blame my friend or Rush, I blame the doctors making money with OxyContin, and the manufactures making addictive prescription drugs. They should have to pay.
legalize it, tax it, and get over it. focus on the hard core drugs instead like crack and heroin and speed.
Screw your “legalize and tax it”. There is no reason to make laws against it, no one ever got hurt, ever. It’s not a drug. They call it a drug to keep it illegal and to keep making money on it, it’s hemp that they don’t want. Who doesn’t want better paper, cloth, stronger fiberglass, stronger cement. Take the fight to their yards as get rid of oil.
one step at a time say I, easy advancements to acceptance allowing for the uses you describe and many more once they open the laws to it, again.
I say close their doors, they lied to get in, now most of them are card carrying Socialists. We are doing the right things by getting rid of the RINO’s and Dems. We are Conservative’s and want to follow the Constitution. There is nothing in the Constitution that says they can tax anything. The capitols of the Capital’s columns are tobacco leaves, all of our great statesman smoked tobacco and pot. I’m tired of the petroleum industry running our government, let’s see some cold fusion and real electric cars. I know the difference between opium and pot, it takes an idiot not to, we have a lot of idiots to remove.
Pot doesn’t make anyone want to do crazy things. Smoking a little weed or eating it is far less intoxicating than say, a couple of beers. Weed doesn’t make people violent. The anti psychotic and anti depressant drugs can make you think you are going crazy, cause arm and leg pain, and fatigue and other side affects. People just need to be responsible and not get gonged out of their minds. Stay in control and be safe.
it is what cbd does not what cbd does not do http://countdowntokannaway.com/CP2/9776605 and God bless you business minded capitalist
Why is it that we had to have an amendment to the Constitution to make alcohol illegal but did not to make certain drugs illegal? The whole act of criminalizing what we can and cannot put into our own bodies is unconstitutional. The Fed. Govt. simply has no Constitutional authority to do so, whether or not they add an amendment.
I am not for abusing alcohol or for using drugs unless a person absolutely needs them for medical reasons, but that does not mean that the Govt. should outlaw them.
I agree 100%, pot hurts no one. Speed, crack, meth do hurt other people as they are addicting which takes money. One is not a producer if one uses downers and is addicted. No one should be allowed to hurt others, stealing hurts.
Not all people who are addicted steal to pay for their addiction. There are many people addicted to alcohol who do not steal to pay for their habit. Punish people when they commit crimes; do not punish people because they might commit crimes.
Ok, how’s this.. I’m against speed, crack and meth. Protect them and I tear you a new one.
Still no good. Not every speed, crack and meth user commits crimes. Sometimes they have enough money to pay for their habit, just like people addicted to cigarettes and alcohol. Or are you saying we should outlaw cigarettes and alcohol, too? We’ve already tried prohibition; it doesn’t work.
“Habit” I’ll go along with, addicted I have trouble with. Addicted has withdraw effects, like hydrocodone. Pot, alcohol, chocolate and cigarettes are not addictive. Of the above, alcohol is the only dangerous one to self and others. I stopped smoking in one day after 60 years, that’s the day I vaped a vitamin oil 3 months ago. Nicotine addiction is a myth.
Now, I would consider speed, meth and crack addictive but I’m not sure. I don’t know what they are made of, I think crack is made of heroin. I also think they are non-productive drugs. Meaning that you can’t make productive money while influenced by them. I am pretty sure that’s the case with heroin. I also think our government is protecting the heroin grown in Afghanistan with our troops. I saw photos. That leaves speed and meth. Speed I don’t know much about but I hear it’s bad physically, meth is cheaper than pot, if pot were legal I don’t think there would be a meth market. Are they addictive by my standards? If they are addictive and you don’t make money what are the chances that you won’t steal to get your addictive drug?
Are the fed and central banks stealing our money? What is the payback for stealing? Is the family responsible for the money stolen by a member?
My father-in-law’s experience is vastly different than yours. He’s tried quitting cigarettes several times, and none of his efforts lasted for long. The nicotine addiction is just too strong, so in order to quit smoking he had to start chewing Nicorette (which means he is still ingesting nicotine). I have several friends who have tried to quit smoking and couldn’t because of the strong nicotine addiction. Perhaps, the nicotine didn’t affect you as much; everyone is different.
Here is more information about nicotine withdrawal: http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/understanding-nicotine-withdrawal-symptoms
Alcohol is also addicting, and has withdrawal symptoms. Here is more information: http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/alcohol-withdrawal-symptoms-treatments http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/addiction/alcohol-abuse-and-dependence-when-to-call-a-doctor
Yes, you probably cannot make productive money while under the influence of the aforementioned drugs, but that person can while he is not high. Also, you are assuming that all people who use drugs have to work. There are some who have inherited money or have earned a lot of money over their lifetime to retire early. Not only poor and middle class people use drugs.
Which brings me again to the point: why have the govt. dictate to all of us what we can and cannot put in our bodies when only some people who take drugs steal or commit other crimes against other people?
Sorry, I don’t agree with nicotine being a withdraw substance. There is a habit involved that people like. The drawing in of heaver than air smoke or vapor. The holding in the hand, the use of the mouth. None of this is nicotine exclusive. If your father-in-law hasn’t tried the new Evapor tools he’s not in contention.
Don’t give me cleeshays? Everybody is different, nothing is perfect, etc. “You have several friends”. I’m not buying any of it. Give me names and contact points so I can discern for myself.
Excuse me, I think this is BS. http://www.webmd.com/smoking-cessation/understanding-nicotine-withdrawal-symptoms
I’m not different than my fellow humans, I know more than one person that has dropped cigarette smoking because of Ecigs.
Shell we get your friends and mine into this post or shell we drop it. I want to blow you out of the water and big cig with you.
First of all, the word is “cliches”. Second of all, what is the point of me giving you names of my friends who have had problems kicking the nicotine habit? You wouldn’t know them anyway, and I am not giving my friends’ contact information to you, a complete stranger. What kind of friend would I be if I did that?
Everyone is different. No one has the same chemical make-up. That is why some medications work for some people and not for others.
We can agree to disagree because we are not going to get anywhere.
That looks right, cliches.
Ok, don’t give me their names, I still think you’re lieing?sp.
I guess they can be like you and use an anonymous handle. I would love to speak to them. I’ll give you 2:1 that you won’t bring in these unknowns.
You say everyone is different, I say we are more alike than you think.
Some meds don’t work for some people? How about vitamins? They seem to work for everyone, but that doesn’t stop big pharm. from making synthetics out of petroleum does it? They are working on a ratio of people that don’t have an adverse reaction to their synthetics. You are from the group that protects them. It’s OK if some people have adverse reactions to synthetic vitamins, everyone has a different chemical makeup. BS.
I don’t mind letting you off the hook, you’re too small to keep anyway.
Fine, think I’m lying. You are wrong. I am telling the truth. I am just not willing to betray my friendships in giving out my friends’ contact information.
For some people, Claritin works great, for some people it doesn’t work at all. For some people, Allegra works great and for some it doesn’t work. Some kids get Reye’s Syndrome from taking aspirin and some don’t. I am not talking about vitamins and whether they are made synthetically. I am talking about medications as a whole. AND I am not of the group that protects people that make synthetic vitamins. Your statement, “It’s OK if some people have adverse reactions to synthetic vitamins” actually admits that I am right that certain people react differently to medications.
You have a chip on your shoulder, my friend. For that reason, you can’t be reasoned with on this subject. Best wishes to you. I am done with this discussion with you.
the criminal justice system cannot stop or slow down drug use. drug use is a mental health/social issue and needs to treated as such. prevention education is the best solution, it’s working great for tobacco which is an addictive drug. along with a good rehabilitation program to work with those already addicted. the war on drugs has not stopped or even slowed down drug use, in fact it makes it worse. the war on drugs has also caused an 85% increase in violent and non-violent crime due to the black market and high prices. the war on drugs has also been used to destroy constitutional rights, the only thing it has done.
Exactly!