Marijuana

[Socrates]

[quote name='tgoldson' timestamp='1296157724' post='2205169']
That being said, I think [b]everything[/b] should be legal and very highly regulated. Why not turn criminals into tax-payers?
[/quote]
Yeah - prostitution, even child prostitution, abortion, all murder . . .

After all, the enrichment of the state is a much more worthy goal than petty concerns like morality.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1296162400' post='2205232']
Yeah - prostitution, even child prostitution, abortion, all murder . . .

After all, the enrichment of the state is a much more worthy goal than petty concerns like morality.
[/quote]

By "everything," I'm sure he meant "drugs." The context was "drugs."

~Sternhauser

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' timestamp='1296161449' post='2205215']
it used to be militantly opposed even here on phatmass. just in the years i've been here, those who are opposed to it are now the ones who dn't speak up as much, caue the majority who says 'legalize' speaks up. that's even on a conservative board and people like here.

but what about that bottomline arguement that those conservatives always made that the catechism says recreational drug use is a mortal sin?
[/quote]

Alcohol is a drug. Recreational drug [i]abuse[/i] is and always will be wrong. Deliberately using any drug (without serious reason, such as morphine for an injured person) in a way that greatly diminishes or destroys the use of reason is and always will be gravely immoral.

~Sternhauser

[AudreyGrace]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1296162671' post='2205236']
Alcohol is a drug. Recreational drug [i]abuse[/i] is and always will be wrong. Deliberately using any drug (without serious reason, such as morphine for an injured person) in a way that greatly diminishes or destroys the use of reason is and always will be gravely immoral.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Well said. It's the abuse of the drug that is the sin. Jesus drank wine at Cana. Heck, he MADE wine at Cana. But, I'm sure he was responsible himself. I hope. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img]

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='AudreyGrace' timestamp='1296163165' post='2205241']
Well said. It's the abuse of the drug that is the sin. Jesus drank wine at Cana. Heck, he MADE wine at Cana. But, I'm sure he was responsible himself. I hope. [img]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/public/style_emoticons/default/blink.gif[/img]
[/quote]
It is necessarily impossible for Jesus to have sinned, so yea, pretty sure He was responsible.

[Guest]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1296162671' post='2205236']
Alcohol is a drug. Recreational drug [i]abuse[/i] is and always will be wrong. Deliberately using any drug (without serious reason, such as morphine for an injured person) in a way that greatly diminishes or destroys the use of reason is and always will be gravely immoral.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
you're good at this.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Delivery Boy' timestamp='1296163408' post='2205246']
you're good at this.
[/quote]

Thanks. I've had practice.

~Sternhauser

[rkwright]

I don't have much of an opinion on whether it should be legalized or not - I've seen plently of people whose lives MJ has ruined; but I've seen more people whose lives have been ruined by alcohol.

I will say this: given the drug war, that is fueled by the fact that the drug is illegal, I would find it highly immoral, at this time, to buy or sell MJ. IMO, those that do buy or sell are directly funding the murders in Mexico.

I understand those who wish to have it legalized, but for now it is illegal - for now the Cartels are the real "supply" and the money is going towards them. Of course the morality could be very different if people were buying at wal-mart vs. the street corner. I just don't like comments like "I'm not hurting anyone by my MJ use..."

[kujo]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1296162400' post='2205232']
Yeah - prostitution, even child prostitution, abortion, all murder . . .

After all, the enrichment of the state is a much more worthy goal than petty concerns like morality.
[/quote]


[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1296162447' post='2205234']
By "everything," I'm sure he meant "drugs." The context was "drugs."

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

Context never gets in the way of a Socrates (Socratic?) argument.

[Nihil Obstat]

It should also be considered that in legalizing drugs, the people harmed most are going to be the drug dealers. They only get by because of artificially high prices due to government restrictions. Remove those restrictions and we have corner stores run by small business owners selling cheaper, high quality marijuana. Guess who goes out of business? Yea, drug dealers and drug cartels. Nobody sells $100 bottles of crappy wine out of the back of their cars in dark alleys. Guess why.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='rkwright' timestamp='1296163729' post='2205252']
I don't have much of an opinion on whether it should be legalized or not - I've seen plently of people whose lives MJ has ruined; but I've seen more people whose lives have been ruined by alcohol.

I will say this: given the drug war, that is fueled by the fact that the drug is illegal, I would find it highly immoral, at this time, to buy or sell MJ. IMO, those that do buy or sell are directly funding the murders in Mexico.
[/quote]

The State that prohibits the production and importation of a substance makes it so lucrative that such violence is "worth it" to those doing the production and distribution. People who used alcohol during prohibition weren't responsible for the violence that was so prevalent. You don't see manufacturers of Jim Beam doing a drive-by on a liquor store that sells Jack Daniels. There's a reason for that.

~Sternhauser

Edited January 27, 2011 by Sternhauser

[Guest]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1296163981' post='2205258'] You don't see manufacturers of Jim Beam doing a drive-by on a liquor store that sells Jack Daniels. There's a reason for that.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
lol

Edited January 27, 2011 by Guest

[rkwright]

[quote name='Sternhauser' timestamp='1296163981' post='2205258']
The State that prohibits the production and importation of a substance makes it so lucrative that such violence is "worth it" to those doing the production and distribution. People who used alcohol during prohibition weren't responsible for the violence that was so prevalent. You don't see manufacturers of Jim Beam doing a drive-by on a liquor store that sells Jack Daniels. There's a reason for that.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]

I understand the state is making it "worth it" - but the user is funding it.

Perhaps the "state" is at fault (although not sure how any moral culpabilty can be assiged to an entity), but I can't see how the user, especially given the news coverage and general knowledge of where their money is going, is not in some way responsible.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='rkwright' timestamp='1296164278' post='2205261']

Perhaps the "state" is at fault ([b]although not sure how any moral culpabilty can be assiged to an entity[/b]), but I can't see how the user, especially given the news coverage and general knowledge of where their money is going, is not in some way responsible.
[/quote]
Good call. The guilty are the ones who formally support The State, and especially the ones who support the violence of The State.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='rkwright' timestamp='1296164278' post='2205261']
I understand the state is making it "worth it" - but the user is funding it.

Perhaps the "state" is at fault (although not sure how any moral culpabilty can be assiged to an entity), but I can't see how the user, especially given the news coverage and general knowledge of where their money is going, is not in some way responsible.
[/quote]

And if they arbitrarily outlawed the manufacture and distribution of chickens, leading to chicken cartel wars, would you feel the same way?

~Sternhauser

Edited January 27, 2011 by Sternhauser