what are you getting at.
Im pretty sure what weska is trying to say is cannabis gives so much more to us than any other medicine out their currently.
Had cannabis just been discovered it would be a
"wonder plant".
here in america cannabis was made illegal because the man was racist and didn't want petrol and fossil fuels(iirc are the same thing) to go out of buisness.
cannabis has alot of uses other than recreational uses.

marijuana should be legal due to the chemical and medical greatness it does for us. it's filled chemicals to help with whatever cancer treatments, you can use it in foods for its proteins and amino acids which are great for you. but also for the fact that, what is bad? who says that it's wrong, what is wrong. you can do two things with a hammer correct; build a house, or beat yourself over the head. but that doesn't mean we're making hammers illegal. every object has a good and bad way it can be used. weed can develop people's moods, help them physically and socially to be better, or in a sense right at whatever it does for them. i'm not saying i'm gunna go around smoking a joint all day but it should be up to the people to decided what they want to do. all other arguments are invalid and really it's not to discuss. marijuana is there, it's illegal at the time, but who cares since if you're 18 and younger you couldn't give a fuck who tells you what you can't and can do. you'll do whatever you want. addictions aren't a thing it's all mental and or physical. just because you smoke doesn't mean you like smoking. just because you drink doesn't mean you're an alcoholic. my dad smokes for physical fixation of doing it. and he drinks as need be in social situations. being stuck on marijuana or whatever drug is your mental set and no one can say it's real or not. that part is just for the people saying it's bad cause you'll get addicted or whatever bull.

snip

ok oracle and immortalpig

but
a subpopulation of current cancer/disease patients dont react well to the medicines available giving them the only choice to smoke marijuana.

snip

Some of us already did that, but some of you just don't seem to pay any attention to it. No matter how objectively right an argument can be, you will deny it. Why should we bother trying to convince some people that will obviously never change their minds.

If you want to be proven it's good/not bad, you have the whole internet to do your own research, this is a discussion forum in which people share opinions. Google your own shit and stop acting like all marijuana users are irresponsible kids.



Maybe it does argue some points, or maybe you haven't quite grasped the entirerity of nature itself.

Yep, that's exactly what I was pointing out, there's no point posting here.

Because that's all it comes down to :


Citation please

Arglax Moderated Message:

Citation? This isn't some fact you can look up somewhere and cite here. This is a logical clause that can easily be refuted. Next time you ask for a citation, bother reading the last post: "Argument from nature is the strongest argument the affirmative side can muster. Unfortunately it is an extremely weak and flawed argument. It does not stand up to scrutiny when you consider what else nature has given us; 1000's of types of poison, rampant murder and rape, cannibalism and theft, etc." -Gorman.

People are entitled to their opinion. If that is one of their fundamental principles or ideas it's just as valid as arguing that no-one should cause another human harm. And just because there are one million ways to support it and because the general opinion is on your side your argument is not any more valid than that of the other side. I do not question peoples morals if I do not find that they tip-toe on their own, in one occasion saying that something is okay and the next going back on that claim.

If people believe that we should be free of all laws what so ever and it is up to every free man to act in accordance to his own will then that is an opinion he or she is entitled to have, and you saying that people are not allowed to argue such a point is quite dumb as even you have to accept that just like you being entitled an opinion, perhaps united with the rest of mankind you stand against one individual, he or she is still entitled to his or her beliefs, and he or she is still entitled to speak his or her mind on the subject.

And no, don't even try to argue that majority rule is a good thing.
I said don't try to argue that majority rule is a good thing; still don't get it?
Damn it, you still want to argue for majority rule?

Look at Germany 1930-sh; look at any society where a majority of a population disagrees with you; look at any western society where women are portrayed as objects.

The problem here is that people are entitled to their view. Did I just say problem? The problem is not their opinion, nor their belief. The problem is the conflict that arises from our disagreement; it's just as much your fault as theirs, and neither of you wishes to come to an agreement, right?

Now I'm not saying that I agree with anyone arguing for that stand (exemplified above) but anyhow they are still entitled to their opinion, and I may argue against it, but I cannot claim that they are having "the wrong beliefs", that they may not have any such "beliefs" nor that they are twisted. I may believe that they are twisted, and I am entitled to hold any opinions of my own, and I am in most cases free to speak my own opinion. However neither of us speaks for any universal truth, we merely speak for ourselves and our beliefs.


EDIT: And for all of you debaters in here; THIS IS A DISCUSSION FORUM, NOT A DEBATE FORUM: THERE IS NO JUDGE NOR ADJUDICATOR IN HERE!

Arglax Moderated Message:

Citation? This isn't some fact you can look up somewhere and cite here. This is a logical clause that can easily be refuted. Next time you ask for a citation, bother reading the last post: "Argument from nature is the strongest argument the affirmative side can muster. Unfortunately it is an extremely weak and flawed argument. It does not stand up to scrutiny when you consider what else nature has given us; 1000's of types of poison, rampant murder and rape, cannibalism and theft, etc." -Gorman.

Things that are poisons for the human body aren't necessarily poison for other elements of the eco-system, rampant murder & rape aren't things given by nature, they're behaviours adopted by certain species in certain situations, it's the result of one's developpement in a certain environment, that's not what "natural" means.
We're not the most important thing nature has done, we're just a tiny part of the eco-system, something being bad for your body doesn't mean it's not important for the balance of the rest.

Maybe if you had a citation from some illustrous professor in some big university or a serious informative website, a reliable and trustworthy source to back-up your claim other than gorman's previous post... [I'm doing a gorman, asking for citations whenever someone tries to make a point, pretty effective to make a steril discussion, or pretty much what you've all been doing]

Your perception of what's good and wrong is totally subjective.
Your main point against marijuana is : it "dulls the mind", and you find this wrong. But if someone is slower to process an information, doesn't mean the result of his thoughts is inevitably "less right" than someone sober. You judge the substance wrong to be used by healthy people, you've never experienced a long philosophical meditation about the state of the world while being high as fuck.
In fact I don't even know why I'm trying to argue with you, you just don't know what the fuck it is, how would you have any viable point of view on the subject.

Arglax Moderated Message:

Stop the slurs immediately.

Weed grows easily, but that's not "easy to grow weed". Everyone doesn't have the space, dedication, equipement etc...
Also I'd like to remind we're actually in a ubber-consumer society. People prefere buying their stuff they can get and use straight away than "wasting time" doing it. Just like food, most people prefere buying pre-cooked shitty junk food instead of buying fresh products and make the little effort of cooking.



For any legal substance/product, there's a blackmarket choice, that doesn't mean everyone will buy the "illegal product" over the legal one. Plus, something being legal assures a certain quality and control of the product. Like, I could buy cheaper tobacco illegaly imported from nearby countries, but I don't.


But on the other hand the number of prosecutions related to marijuana would drop to nearly 0, which would be WAY LESS expenses from the government. You have to pay people working in court on those trials, the cost of overloaded prisons is pretty high as well etc...



plus :

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3102003.html

That wasn't my point. If an element is poisonous it is for a reason (may it be surviving or protecting another organism) ; that's the point of Life and organisms adapting to survive, the principle of symbiosis. That's what nature is, if something is, it is for reason.


Nothing in particular, just a off-topic moralist point.


Well, I'm gonna start to digress on the "philosophical aspect" of marijuana in society if I continue, which wouldn't be necessarily a bad thing to discuss, but long and boring.

Except from driving under its influence, I don't see any negative effect it could possibly have on society. Issues related to traffic and violence would be reduced A LOT by legalizing it. It's bad for your lungs if you smoke it, but you can brew it or it eat, so it's not necessarily a threat for people's health. Abusing it is bad tho, like everything.

You want to live in a society where as many people are sober as possible, that's the society we've actually been trying to build for decades, and it's not working. We're destroying our environment, we're slaughtering marin wildlife, we're being a cancer for our eco-system, our own pollution gives us cancer, the way we live is non-sense, we're working like dogs, inequalities are still here and kicking etc... and tho we have the knowledge and ressources to make it different. You already have your world ruled by "rationnal sober people".

Weirdly, that's in counter-culture and "underground" culture circles - environments strongly associated with the use of marijuana and other drugs - that you find the more virulents critics of our actual society, where people are creative and thinking in a different manner. Maybe the humanbeing needs to let go its high self-esteem of (self-attributed) smartest-species-on-earth award and accept not being "sober and performant" 100% of the time as a necessary "evil".
The absurd quest of material wealth, perfection and greatness is what's gonna wash us away.
I'll even go ahead and say we're not supposed to be sober 100% of the time. Like cats going rampage on catnip, like animals in the african savana getting drunk with rotten fruits whenever they can, like any living thing being able to get high with natural means. Different experiences give us different points of view and a certain necessary hindsight that you might not understand yet.

In many ancient (and less ancient) civilizations were rituals marking one's entry in adulthood, ritual involving "drugs" (plants) to spiritual ends. Maybe, and I say maybe, those were importants to grasp your own place on earth, to grasp what life is and why we have to fix boundaries to our impact on our surroundings.
Maybe the sobriety our modern world, stained by monotheist religions, claim as being right and good, is just plainly wrong.
Maybe refusing those plants "made" to interact with our brain is a sign that we're actually an autistic species trying to exclude itself from the eco-system that made us. [well actually it's more likely our brain that evolved in order to interact with those plants considering vegetal life was here before animal life]

anyway...



I was being sarcastic when asking for serious scientific proofs. the classic "citation please" that makes the discussion forum generally boring.

So you truely think before youtube and stupid videos people couldn't try and get their own opinion on marijuana ? interesting


He does pass over them pretty briefly but he doesn't "mask them as good", he only enumerates the parts of the brain with cannabinoid receptors. Probably due to its usual video format being short. It doesn't sound at all like there's a positive effect on those function, that's you being hostile to any "cannabis friendly opinion".

Nop, I'm saying your "sober world" is utter shit.


You're not even trying, don't you ?

Spirituality seems out of your reach... I truely hope one day you'll realize.


Yes it does. It doesn't have a divine moral purpose, only trying to keep on living.


Nop, some animals at a precise time of the year precisely go get the fruits that felt down a specific tree (marula) because of its strong concentration in alcohol when it rotts.
I hear your big steps coming from here "but they pick it because it's on the floor and they can't reach the branches", but giraffes, elephants and monkeys go for the drunk party as well... Just because it's good.


I know it's not "made for", that's why I used quotation marks... the shape/structure of lifeforms change depending on their environment, if our brain have canabinoid receptors it's because it's been interacting with canabinoid substances for a long while during our evolution, the only other canabinoid substance I heard of that we naturally consume is in breast milk. [+ the ones our own body secrete ofc]


User received an infraction for this post: ad hominems, I will not tolerate such manners. Your "opponent" is perfectly polite, so I do not see why you need to use such means in a discussion. This is about an exchange of information and opinions, not about winning a debate so quit being so serious about it. -Redundant