Too black and white. People can smoke if it's legal in their state. Period. End. What (you) one person thinks doesn't make that opinion a fact. People these days don't realize that.
Why do you care if people giggle and eat pizza? By the sound of your posts, you can use a few giggles. I've never heard a story about a guy on weed that smoked, beat his wife and kids, blacked out, and woke up with no memory of it. That's the very legal alcohol that does that. Weed does what you said, it makes people giggle and eat. Where's the harm? There is none. You sound like you have a stick up your ass. Fortunately, weed also is showing health benefits for things like depression, pain, and more. How or why it becomes legal is a dumb argument. Legal is legal. Alcohol was illegal for a time and has ZERO health benefits. Why not rant off on that?
My point isn't nullified by your claim that because taxes pay for your health care you get it for free. It's hard to debate points with me, because I am not stupid and your posts are clearly based on nothing but your own personal feelings. And again you insist on claiming the every one and I mean EVERYONE WHO USES IS SELF-MEDICATING. I assume you make that exact same argument for ANY substance, including candy one eats for pleasure right? IMO, you are just using this as yet another troll topic as your arguments make zero sense philosophically or morally. And that, nullifies anything you argue on this topic. And, everyone else can read that your arguments are unfounded. No rules here are preventing you from arguing honestly now, right? Pfffffit...SSDD from you and that will never change.
Then I'll make it simple and generalise: people will rationalise more than justify, because they feel strongly about something. Textbook rationalisation. I always pay attention to a debate, but this is not a debate: SOME people rationalise their personal usage of an illegal drug, and will find anything they can to support their position. Not all, just some. Those are the ones I do not like, because they are using my condition as a proponent of their argument, which is nothing more than to act like muppets. BTW I pay taxes too, quite a lot of tax in fact!
So many words over something so simple. If you like to smoke, then smoke. If you don't then don't. I wouldn't mind it being legal, but its illegality here hasn't stopped me. There are fascinating medical possibilities, but i am sure there are many such plants with undiscovered medicinal properties. Even if there are none....i still like smoking it.
You never fail to provide irony I don't think I've ever seen someone that is more self unaware than you.
The problem is that medical professionals do not do research on remedies that can not be patented. Considering that there was never a valid reason to ban marijuana to begin with, they should not need to argue at all.
They do research, and they get a lot of funding to do it. Drug discovery and research into aliments can overlap, but they also run independently. Yet, their rationalisation exists and I find it disgusting.
True, but I don't really smoke a lot these days. Now that Oklahoma has killer weed when I do smoke I get high as hell! Quantum Break's style, music, action, and insane time shifting graphics are multiplied by 10!
So again, there's no debate. As you EXPLICITLY STATE AGAIN AND I WILL QUOTE YOU AGAIN "Those are the ones I do not like, because they are using my condition as a proponent of their argument, which is nothing more than to act like muppets." This is just you, your opinion of what you think and FEEL others are doing. It's irrelevant, it's your FEELINGS and thank goodness we, for the most part, don't formulate pubic policy on them. Again, anyone reading your post will be challenged to determine if you are serious or trolling as again you vacillate between relative anarchy and nanny state, depending upon your feelings about an issue. It's not everyone else, it is you.
Um, personal feelings on a specific point of a debate so long as they are explolated from fact and applicable in a debate if they are rationally expressed, are acceptable so long as they do not conflate. It's a fine line, I'll admit, but the topic header was clear 'what do you guys think' - so yah, it's fine under those parameters
