Members cooki3monster Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 I used too....but i still listen to them now that I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Lou-Dog Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 It's not. I wouldn't take drugs if they were legal and inexpensive. I'm really not interested in getting overly inebriated in any way. I drink fine ales and wines because I like the taste. The slight, pleasant floaty feeling that I experience when I've had 1-2 (Rarely do I drink more than this in a single sitting) is merely a desirable side-effect...:rawk:Do you live in Utah? no but rly i applaud you and your moderation, members of the clergy aren't supposed to indulge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Snufkino Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 I'm puzzled. What kind of lightweight gets a mild buzz or slight floaty feeling from 1-2 beers? 1-2 beers shouldn't have any noticable effect on a fully grown man.What kind of lightweight? I think you answered your own question Maybe he's underweight or doesn't eat much? And/or if you don't drink all the time, you have less tolerance and so get drunk a little more easy. Although having said that, I rarely drink and recently it took nearly a whole bottle of southern comfort to get me even a little drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rushfan Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Nearly every person who doesn't live in a 3rd world country uses drugs every day. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, and yes sugar are all addictive drugs that change your body's metabolism and affect your brain chemistry.Therefore, every person reading this is a drug user. The only difference between you and those you're calling "druggies" in this thread is a piece of paper somewhere declaring one illegal and the other legal. Rules made by a small group of men & women who want to control your life.And please note, the legal drugs? They're making your politicians billions every year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CrystalLake Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Illegal drugs just aren't my thing at all. I don't knock the people that do them, as it's there life. I just choose not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members hivedestruction Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Nearly every person who doesn't live in a 3rd world country uses drugs every day. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, and yes sugar are all addictive drugs that change your body's metabolism and affect your brain chemistry. Therefore, every person reading this is a drug user. The only difference between you and those you're calling "druggies" in this thread is a piece of paper somewhere declaring one illegal and the other legal. Rules made by a small group of men & women who want to control your life. And please note, the legal drugs? They're making your politicians billions every year. Anyone who reads this and doesn't agree is insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hiwatt Bob Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Nearly every person who doesn't live in a 3rd world country uses drugs every day. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, and yes sugar are all addictive drugs that change your body's metabolism and affect your brain chemistry. Therefore, every person reading this is a drug user. The only difference between you and those you're calling "druggies" in this thread is a piece of paper somewhere declaring one illegal and the other legal. Rules made by a small group of men & women who want to control your life. And please note, the legal drugs? They're making your politicians billions every year. i agree with pretty much everything but the last part. the people getting rich from that are the pharma companies (and associated industries). implying that a politician would be getting rich would mean they are recieving bribes, kick-backs, etc. all of which are illegal and probably NOT happening. the most they would be getting are campaign contributions--which by law must be used for campaign expenditures, not personal things (personal cars, houses, etc).also--my guess would be that many politicians vote for pro-Pharma policies because they have companies (and more importantly VOTERS) in their districts. As cynical as people like to be--it still is a democracy and not everything is some corrupt conspiracy.the defence industry or military industrial complex is a perfect example of this. defense contractors don't OWN policiticians. they own VOTERS. they strategically locate different aspects of their industry chain in different congeressional districts, etc. so if the government wants to {censored} can production of a certain aircraft or tank or something--there will be layoffs affecting voters in many diverse legislative districts. you might be hurting an engineering office in virginia, a manufacturing plant in alabama, a parts supplier in minnesota, etc, etc. It's the VOTERS that are able to really pressure the politicians, not the campaign dollars. Is it still corrupt? Maybe--but it's a flaw of democracy (and i would argue other political systems) more than it is run of the mill corruption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members THAT4301 Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 the most they would be getting are campaign contributions Why is that OK? They don't take the contributions, can't afford the advertising/campaign, they lose. Therefore the big businesses own your entire "democracy". It's not a 'conspiracy', it's just the very nature of the american political system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hiwatt Bob Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Why is that OK? They don't take the contributions, can't afford the advertising/campaign, they lose. Therefore the big businesses own your entire "democracy". It's not a 'conspiracy', it's just the very nature of the american political system. i'm not opposed to public-only campaign financing. but you still won't be able to stop 527 groups, etc. it's free speech. if i want to spend my own money on an ad supporting a candidate--i'm free to do that. a contribution is not a bribe. just ask all the people from the insurance industry who made contributions only to have their reps vote in obama care. I would argue that the influencing of elected officials to vote against their constituency (or conscience for that matter) is more likely to happen because pressure is put on within their party for a certain vote (ie obama care) or horse-trading with other members (i'll give you my vote on a particular issue if you give me one on mine)--not because of campaign dollars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hiwatt Bob Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 my only point is that people throw around statements like the one Rushfan made--and it's kind of irresponsible. there are enough legitimate reasons to be upset with your government--we don't need to further de-legitimize our government based on inaccurate conclusions, speculation, etc. don't misuderstand--i'm all for people questioning their government, but you really shouldn't be accusing people of wrong-doing when you have zero evidence to support it. like oliver stone's JFK--i love that movie btw--but imho, it unfairly shaped the beliefs of many people and was irresposnible in that regard. i'm glad the question got raised--it should be. but to present it as fact and lead an entire generation to thinking that there's no doubt the CIA killed kennedy is {censored}ing irresponsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members CrystalLake Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members melx Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Nearly every person who doesn't live in a 3rd world country uses drugs every day. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, and yes sugar are all addictive drugs that change your body's metabolism and affect your brain chemistry. Therefore, every person reading this is a drug user. The only difference between you and those you're calling "druggies" in this thread is a piece of paper somewhere declaring one illegal and the other legal. Rules made by a small group of men & women who want to control your life. And please note, the legal drugs? They're making your politicians billions every year. I'm sorry, Sugar is not a drug.. I can't let that fly. I can't think of any circumstances in which sugar or anything in it's chemical structure would be considered a drug, let alone an addictive substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hiwatt Bob Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 I'm sorry, Sugar is not a drug.. I can't let that fly. I can't think of any circumstances in which sugar or anything in it's chemical structure would be considered a drug, let alone an addictive substance.bro you don't even know. big companies like Halliburton make these addictive kinds of sugar and got all the fat kids hooked like big time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RoboPimp Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 we have a lobbyist in out midst Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members scolfax Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Potheads/stoners are the 2nd most hated group only surpassed by hippies. Off-topic (and disagree), but pretty sure Atheists are higher on that list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AnderMocs Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 The government should have zero say in what you can put into your own body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members THAT4301 Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 i'm not opposed to public-only campaign financing. but you still won't be able to stop 527 groups, etc. it's free speech. if i want to spend my own money on an ad supporting a candidate--i'm free to do that. a contribution is not a bribe. just ask all the people from the insurance industry who made contributions only to have their reps vote in obama care.I would argue that the influencing of elected officials to vote against their constituency (or conscience for that matter) is more likely to happen because pressure is put on within their party for a certain vote (ie obama care) or horse-trading with other members (i'll give you my vote on a particular issue if you give me one on mine)--not because of campaign dollars. You can say that; but as a foreigner looking into your country I see so much done by your government that seeks to support big business over the interests of the many. I mean, take AIPAC for instance; do you think the united states would be sending BILLIONS in military aid to them if it wasn't for mere millions of lobby money? Or telecoms companies granted regional monopolies? You're free to spend money on what you want, but politicians should not be free to accept money from whoever they want. Better that all the campaign money comes from a big pot taken from business taxes and politicians have to listen to constituent's concerns instead of lobbyist wallets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Naterel Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 So how about that Mosque, think they like Pink Floyd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members hivedestruction Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Back on topic.. I took acid like 2 weekends ago and watched Live In Pompeii. It was definitely an experience. LSD in general was very life altering for me in the best way. Truly sad that it's illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sethhoroscopes Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 IIT: ALOT of uneducated simpletons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Echoes22 Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 Back on topic.. I took acid like 2 weekends ago and watched Live In Pompeii. It was definitely an experience. LSD in general was very life altering for me in the best way. Truly sad that it's illegal. did that too a few years ago... did you try watching the original 70s version of the concert (it's on the dvd) with the super corny special effects, God I love em . I can definitely understand why acid is illegal however. HPPD is a real thing and acid is NOT completely harmless. There is such a thing as too much acid and it can be tough to gauge a dose (especially if you are taking more once already on it). I have a friend who ate 30 drops at once and went cross-eyed for a good 3-4 months.. I didn't think that going cross-eyed was even a possibility until that happened to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Stratmaster458 Posted August 23, 2010 Members Share Posted August 23, 2010 no Meddle and Animals are drugs themselves man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JRBain Posted August 30, 2010 Members Share Posted August 30, 2010 alcohol is a drug, regardless of how much is consumed. I realise that. When I use the term 'drugs', I am referring to 'illegal narcotics'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JRBain Posted August 30, 2010 Members Share Posted August 30, 2010 I was alluding to organized crime perpetrated by governments, which rely on tax dollars. Of course prohibition funds gangs. Furthermore, decriminalization has been shown to lower drug use, among numerous other benefits. Nothing theoretical about it. Hence... political thread. Oh, and holy {censored}, I just willingly quoted the Cato Institute - twice. Double eek. Well, broken clock and all that... It's an interesting debate, and case studies like that one are compelling... I'm not sure that the current status quo will just roll over to reform, but I am interested to see what the future of such policy will look like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JRBain Posted August 30, 2010 Members Share Posted August 30, 2010 I'm puzzled. What kind of lightweight gets a mild buzz or slight floaty feeling from 1-2 beers? 1-2 beers shouldn't have any noticable effect on a fully grown man. Meh... Works for me. . And it still takes a goodly amount to get me properly wasted, too. The last time that happened was a while ago, though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.