Quote:
Originally Posted by bapoumba  I'm against it because basically addiction destroys life. |
I can destroy my life in a number of very legal ways. Why should the government deem addiction legal? I know people who are addicted to the Internet, games, etc. My friend missed a final exam because he stayed up all night playing WoW. Should the government put a mandatory limit on MMORPGs? How about they cut off your Internet connections for 20 minutes every 3 hours or so? Or how about they make all games illegal?
If you think any of those suggestions sounds ridiculous, rethink your stance on legalization. While I agree with you that addictions destroy lives, every citizen should have the right to make that decision for himself, just as I have a choice to get a degree, a job, or any number of things deemed "good."
To state it clearer,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iandefor Do people own their own bodies?
If yes, who are you to say that they can't put what they please into them? |
Quote:
Originally Posted by ButteBlues I think legalizing it would make those same stupid people - meaning those who got addicted - even more likely to get addicted and shoot themselves in the proverbial foot, yes. |
So what? Stupid people blow themselves up with fireworks, overdose on Tylenol, cut off limbs with power tools, and even shoot themselves in the foot. You can't remove every potentially dangerous thing from society. Governments aren't mothers, and citizens aren't infants.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Extreme Coder Biologically speaking, drugs aren't definitely good, in terms of what they cause to your body, and their addiction. |
What do you mean by "drugs?" Many drugs are prescribed by physicians to
help people's bodies. Many of those same drugs are addictive.
If you're referring to illegal recreational drugs, some are good, some are bad. Some are addictive, some are not.
Biologically speaking, there are thousands of toxic chemicals that are being used in (perfectly legal) foods and household products. The FDA and other government organiations study them, publish guidelines for their use, and make sure people are using them properly. Many (presently illegal) recreational drugs have been found by those same organiations to be much less toxic. They should be regulated the same way other chemicals are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG Society is moving forward so quickly now it's difficult to know what it is we really want. I would settle for "dramatic increases in the quality of life of all people." |
I would have to disagree. The only "goal" any society should have is to allow a large number of very different people to live together while allowing as much freedom as possible to all of them. The role of the government is to step in when one person's actions infringe upon another's.
Everyone's definition of a quality life is different. Again, governments aren't mothers, and they shouldn't be trying to dramatically "improve" people's lives, as laudable a goal as that may be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG Unfortunately, this lifestyle can only currently be supported for a small fraction of our society. While there are certainly trust fund kids whose quality of life is sufficiently high to make that scenario possible, for the vast majority of society - and of drug users - this isn't the case. The simple fact of the matter is that other than as a means of heightening an already high quality of life, recreational drugs don't have a productive role in society. An addict is still an addict whether they are buying off the street or from a clinic. |
What if you're
not an addict? I'll use marijuana as an example, since I know it personally. I have used marijuana heavily and regularly. However, there have been periods of time where I have had to stop my use for various reasons, and not once during those periods have I felt an urge to smoke. They have ranged from a few months to over a year, and although I continue to enjoy it, I can stop immediately without any negative consequences to my body.
Compare this to two legal drugs, nicotine and ethanol, both which are extremely additive and cause incredibly strong physiological withdrawal effects upon cessation of use.
If legalized, marijuana can become cheaper than alcohol or tobacco, both legal drugs. I mean, it's a fucking weed for crying out loud.
And don't tell me that people can't support a lifestyle of drug use. Homeless beggars can afford heavily-taxed alcohol and cigarettes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG Nevertheless, now I just don't understand why we would want recreational drugs to be legal. What does anyone gain from it? Increasing the minimum wage, universal healthcare, public education - these are productive. They make for a more humane, compassionate society with a higher standard quality of life. What does legalization of drugs gain us? |
Increasing the minimum wage decreases economic efficiency in free markets.
Universal healthcare comes at the cost of increased taxes. It's not the government's job to forcefully redistribute wealth.
NCLB.
You might understand why people want recreational drugs to be legal if you'd try them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG There is always the fallback card: personal freedoms. There will always be people who say that the Government has no "right" to regulate what is done on private property. I'm not going to appeal to weak slippery-slope arguments here; I will simply say that Yes, it absolutely does. By sheer virtue of being male and having registered to vote when you were 18 - or at least registering with the Selective Service, which is required by law - then you already gave the Government the power to order you to drop whatever you were doing instantly and to call you out to Military service at any time. Is that "Freedom?"
...
I realized at that time that a Government does not exist to uphold the rights of individuals; societies do not exist for the good of it's members. Like all dynamic entities, governments and societies exist for the sole purpose of their own survival. Adult men do not have the freedom to not be drafted for personal reasons because it is not in the Government's interest to let them do so. Citizens do not have the right to elect a non-US born candidate to president because it was not in Society's interest to allow that. And no, you do not have a 'right' to toke on weekends, because it doesn't help anyone if you do that. |
A lot of things I do don't help anyone else. I have a right to masturbate in my bedroom on weekends, and it doesn't help anyone if I do that.
Certain people thought that governments exist to uphold rights of individuals: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness."
If the sole purpose of a government is to insure its own survival, every government in the world would quickly become totalitarian. It would immediately kill off anyone who disagreed with it, since they could potentially be a danger to its survival. It would mandate all its citizens to become slaves to the government, working until exhaustion on bare life essentials to ensure maximum longevity. I couldn't think of a more ridiculous statement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG Drugs are accessible, but not pervasive |
You've obviously never been a teenager in America or set foot on an American college campus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamG And, of course, less destructive drugs, or more enabling ones (eg, caffeine) are legal. If the destructive/enabling dichotomy is about equal, then the legality comes from preexisting social mores, for example alcohol and marijuana, both of which can inspire some creativity but also have negative effects (stoned/drunkenness). |
I'm pretty sure the negative effects of alcohol and marijuana are
not in any way equal. Alcohol related deaths number in the tens of thousands every year in the US alone, while deaths attributed to marijuana use has stayed at a big fat 0 for the past, oh, I don't know, thousand years or so?
I think the most creative thing I've ever seen a drunk person do was to urinate in the middle of the street.