How Can You Continue to Deride Drugs When...- Page 2

[smartpenguin78]

Posted: 11/26/05 at 2:08am

Some people using some drugs is really their own business, but there are times and ways in which it becomes a burden on the greater society. The drug laws as they stand currently are based in large part on political temperance imposed in the late 19th century, and established to make money for tobacco companies.

The contention that artists "need" drugs is demeaning to artists and borders on absurd. It is the tendency for artist to be "rebellious" that is actually the important factor.

There is nothing inherently wrong with some people doing drugs, depending on who they are and how they live their lives. As with all things it is a delicate balance, that may require some regulation.

The seatbelt law is one thing I may in fact have no opinion on at all, that is incredibly rare for me but here it is. I do not care if there is a seatbelt law or not.


ETA: Once again I posted far too late while I was far too tired, it makes no sense. Everyone has made very valid points, I was trying to say, to me, the answer is somewhere in the middle.

Updated On: 11/26/05 at 02:08 AM

[wink]

Posted: 11/26/05 at 6:08am

"the individual's responsibility to use a seatbelt? Do some of you really think that more people use seatbelt's because the law tells them to do so? Do you think someone driving home from work doing no harm to anyone whatsoever should get a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt"

People are not responsible, that's why we have laws to protect them from themselves. A person who is sideswiped by another car and is tossed around in his car because he is not wearing a seatbelt has become a hazard to anything in the path of his car. If someone is stupid enough not to wear a seatbelt, he should be fined. He certainly doesn't deserve to die for his stupidity.

Do you really think the Beatles and other artists would have been less creative if not for their drug use? Maybe creativity just takes another form when it's not drug-induced. And maybe drugs just give them the false confidence to create something they would have done anyway.

I've never seen anyone's life made better by LSD, heroin, or meth for that matter. I've seen how destructive these type of drugs are and it's a shame drug laws aren't tighter and jail sentences aren't longer for drug dealers.

[paradox_error]

Posted: 11/26/05 at 7:24am

And Lildogs, extreme anything is not good.

I'm living in a post-communist country, and trust me, if you lived here, I'm sure you might change a few of your views...

My brand of socialism has become much more centre since living in Poland...

[Plum]

Posted: 11/26/05 at 8:00am

*sigh* See, a classic problem with hard-core libertarianism is an atomic view of the individual. To put what amasis said into more cold and concrete terms, when you don't put on a seatbelt, you're not just hurting yourself because when what would have been a minor accident turns out to be a head-through-the-windshield affair, that's a crapload of money spent on medical expenses and insurance, not to mention the productivity lost because you're not at work. When you drink and need a liver transplant, you could be taking a liver from someone who needs one through no fault of their own- a disease or genetic disorder.

Maybe it's not just a problem with libertarianism, but a problem with the way the U.S. Constitution is written, and our constant emphasis on its protection of individual rights. No one exists in a vacuum, and we can't pretend it's so.

*runs off wearing Devil's Advocate hat*

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 11/26/05 at 10:44am

I don't know about anyone else, but I wrote all my best music when I refused to wear a seatbelt.