Closure for the marijuana thread.

[cooltuba]

[quote name='Lil Red' date='Dec 13 2004, 12:27 AM'] thanks...i had a youth present a hypothetical situation, and i honestly didn't know what to say...now i do...

btw, your tat sounds sweet, can't wait to see it...i have three tats, but i want to either get the Sacred Heart of Jesus or the Immaculate Heart of Mary. or both. [/quote]
Yes, I remember you have tattoos, (that's why I mentioned mine) I think we discussed it in an earlier thread about tattoos.

I'd like to eventually get the Immaculate Heart of Mary on my left calf (mirroring the Sacred Heart of Jesus on my right calf). The Cross around the Sacred Heart took about three hours, so I'm good for a while. That was probably the most amount of pain I've ever felt.

Glad I could help with your situation.

Peace,

Tim

[Guest]

willie nelson smokes
i mean, come on

" im never smoken weed with willie again "

lol i dont like country music, although I like that song...I cant remember who sings it.....

[Winchester]

We are called to obey just laws. Governments do not enjoy unlimited rights to ban and not ban activities.

[cooltuba]

[quote name='Winchester' date='Dec 13 2004, 01:35 AM'] We are called to obey just laws. Governments do not enjoy unlimited rights to ban and not ban activities. [/quote]
Yes, they do. That's why marijuana is banned. Using your logic, it would be ok to smoke marijuana whenever I feel like it because I don't think it's a just law.

We cannot buck authority in the name of God unless it is a situation that directly defies the Will of God.

Peace,

Tim

[Dreamweaver]

[quote name='Winchester' date='Dec 13 2004, 01:35 AM'] We are called to obey just laws. Governments do not enjoy unlimited rights to ban and not ban activities. [/quote]
What exactly is a just law? Someone may decide they should murder someone for saying something bad about them. There's also a large group of people that are wanting to lower the age of consent for minors. Or, maybe I feel the drinking age isn't just, that I should let a 6 year old drink.

We need to determine what the Church's stance of marijuana use is to determine if it is sinful or not (if the prohibition on MJ was overturned for whatever reason).

How many prohibitory laws are unjust? Obviously if it was something along the lines of "one cannot go to church", it is unjust and we musn't obey the government over that particular law.

But if it is something minor, such as "one cannot do jumping jacks on Tuesday mornings", how could it really be called unjust? Silly, definately, but not really unjust.

[cooltuba]

[quote name='Dreamweaver' date='Dec 13 2004, 10:37 AM']We need to determine what the Church's stance of marijuana use is to determine if it is sinful or not (if the prohibition on MJ was overturned for whatever reason).
[/quote]
I agree. With that being said, the topic has been adressed in the Q&A forum. BLAZEr answered the question, and since I am not able to respond to that thread my response shall go here:

BLAZEr declared that since marijuana causes "cognitive deficits", then it hinders your ability to make moral choices, therefore it is always and forever immoral.

When I was reading the post, I recognized some of the language as coming from a NIDA (National Institute for Drug Awareness) study I've read. While the NIDA is quite biased, and I don't trust their research, for the time being we'll assume all of their research is beyond reproach and factual to the highest degree. Since we're assuming it's true, I can use their research as well. In volume 18, number 5 (dec. 2003) NIDA breaks down each of the "cognitive deficits" it has found that marijuana causes, and published charts showing the performance of heavy marijuana smokers (94 joints per week), light marijuana smokers (10 joints per week), and a control group. The heavy smokers showed cognitive deficits in the areas of verbal memory, visual memory, psychomotor speed, and manual dexterity. The light smokers (which I would still consider heavy, daily is way too much; much less more than one joint a day) showed no impairment compared to the controls.

Now, did BLAZEr address the fact that light marijuana smokers show no impairment? No. Did he even have a decent understanding of what cognitive deficits actually are in the context that the term was being used? No. Cognitive deficits do not affect your ability to make a moral decision any more than forgetting were you left your keys hinders your ability to make a moral decision. He simply read the words, applied the dictionary definition to the word cognitive, and went to town. The error was that what the NIDA refers to as cognitive is not the textbook definition. We would call it short term memory loss and decreased motor skills. The other error was quoting a study that gave 94 joints a week to ONE person. That's 13 joints a day, people!!!! How does that research apply to the person who smokes occasionaly? That's like taking the effects of alcoholism and telling someone if they drink ANY alcohol, they will experience those effects.

One of the substances I can think of that hinders inhibitions, which can hinder your ability to make moral decisions is alcohol. I've known many a pot smoker, and I've never heard "Man, I got so stoned last night that I had sex with some chick I don't even know." I have heard people say that about alcohol, though.

*slaps his own hand* Disreguard that last paragraph. Personal experience doesn't count.

Peace,

Tim
*edit* the "Personal experience" I was referring to was having heard people say that, not having done it myself. I was re-reading the post, and that didn't sound so good.

Edited December 13, 2004 by cooltuba

[cooltuba]

[quote name='Delivery Boy' date='Dec 13 2004, 12:53 AM'] willie nelson smokes
i mean, come on

" im never smoken weed with willie again "

lol i dont like country music, although I like that song...I cant remember who sings it..... [/quote]
Honestly, what was the point of that post? Willie Nelson also doesn't pay his taxes; should we all stop paying taxes?

[Guest]

ha i was just jokeing around
i remember who it was, its Toby Keith

and Willy Nelson is the mannnnnnnn
Him and Jimmy Carter are boys
they had a awsome special on cmt about the two
Willies awsome

Edited December 13, 2004 by Guest

[jasJis]

I apologize cooltuba, for taking so long to reply. I am almost done with my response. You will find it interesting, scientific, reasonable, and WELL documented. Truthfully, there are serious flaws in your reasoning, which I will point out, but will also provide scientific evidence of the harmful effects of marijuana. For example, the 'Gateway Effect' is a reality. Almost 100% of other hard drug users, used marijuana first. One simply has to put it in the same perspective. One also has to consider the population in sub-sets that are prone to certain behaviours. Once 100% percent of a sub-set is incorporated, one has to search all other sets to add members to the original sub-set. For example, if all adults smoked ciggarettes, you would have 100% of the adults who were genetically susceptible to get cancer and 100% of the adults who could smoke 60 years and not get cancer. But, if young people started smoking before they were adults, you would add the sub-set of adults who were susceptible to cancer only if they smoked 65+ years and started at pre-adolescence.

n-e-ways. I should finish my response tonight. As an interesting note, I will include Emergency Doctor statistics for patients who came in for marijuana caused problems. These are just the instances where the people either willingly told they were there for pot, or circumstances actually caused testing for marijuana (which are very, very few because of the characteristics of marijuana). Though nobody has probably died from THC overdose, many, many people have died and been injured BECAUSE they were under the influence of marijuana. This is statistical fact and is quite logical. Just consider the effects of THC which makes us want to be high and apply them in the wrong circumstance. Just like alochol overdose is rare, many people are killed or injured while under the influence of alchohol.

More to come later...

[JesusSaves1000s]

We all know that the government lets the drugs into the country because it brings in a lot of money. It's like what England did in Hong Kong. The British got 1/3 of the Chinese addicted to opium and pressed communism on them. Our laws are being taken away while our government is letting us puff the weed.

[cooltuba]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Dec 13 2004, 08:39 PM'] For example, the 'Gateway Effect' is a reality.  Almost 100% of other hard drug users, used marijuana first. 

One also has to consider the population in sub-sets that are prone to certain behaviours.  Once 100% percent of a sub-set is incorporated, one has to search all other sets to add members to the original sub-set.  For example, if all adults smoked ciggarettes, you would have 100% of the adults who were genetically susceptible to get cancer and 100% of the adults who could smoke 60 years and not get cancer.  But, if young people started smoking before they were adults, you would add the sub-set of adults who were susceptible to cancer only if they smoked 65+ years and started at pre-adolescence.



n-e-ways.  I should finish my response tonight.  As an interesting note, I will include Emergency Doctor statistics for patients who came in for marijuana caused problems.  These are just the instances where the people either willingly told they were there for pot, or circumstances actually caused testing for marijuana (which are very, very few because of the characteristics of marijuana).  Though nobody has probably died from THC overdose, many, many people have died and been injured BECAUSE they were under the influence of marijuana.  This is statistical fact and is quite logical.  Just consider the effects of THC which makes us want to be high and apply them in the wrong circumstance.  Just like alochol overdose is rare, many people are killed or injured while under the influence of alchohol.

More to come later... [/quote]
Take your time, I'm intrigued. Your example of how marijuana is a gateway drug does not hold water. Yes, something like 98% of the people who have tried cocaine have smoked marijuana. But 77% of marijuana users never try another illegal drug.

Source: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Main Findings 1990

To take the figure of hard drug users who have tried marijuana and try to draw a correlation is doing things backwards. What about the 77% of the marijuana smokers that never tried any other illegal drug? To infer that marijuana leads to hard drugs, you would need numbers like 77% of marijuana users move on to hard drugs. Now, you may be able to infer that hard drugs lead to marijuana based on the stats., but that's not the argument, is it?

There are 40 million people in this country (U.S.) who have smoked marijuana for a period of their lives -- why aren't there tens of millions of hard drug users, then? The gateway theory of drug use is no longer generally accepted by the medical community. Prohibitionists used to point at numbers which showed that a large percentage of the hard drug users `started with marijuana.' They had it backwards -- many hard drug users also use marijuana. There are two reasons for this. One is that marijuana can be used to `take the edge off' the effects of some hard drugs. The other is a recently discovered fact of adolescent psychology -- there is a personality type which uses drugs, basically because drugs are exciting and dangerous, a thrill.

On sociological grounds, another sort of gateway theory has been argued which claims that marijuana is the source of the drug subculture and leads to other drugs through that culture. By the same token this is untrue -- marijuana does not create the drug subculture, the drug subculture uses marijuana. There are many marijuana users who are not a part of the subculture.

This brings up another example of how marijuana legalization could actually reduce the use of illicit drugs. Even though there is no magical `stepping stone' effect, people who choose to buy marijuana often buy from dealers who deal in many different illegal drugs. This means that they have access to illegal drugs, and might decide to try them out. In this case it is the laws which lead to hard drug use. If marijuana were legal, the drug markets would be separated, and less people would start using the illegal drugs. Maybe this is why emergency room admissions for hard drugs have gone down in the states that decriminalized marijuana during the 70's.

Data gathered by the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) show a recent increase in "marijuana mentions" by people seeking treatment in hospital emergency rooms. Using a one-page form, emergency-room personnel record "drug abuse episodes," note the presence or absence of alcohol as a contributing factor, and list up to four other drugs recently consumed by the patient.

Although DAWN began compiling data in the 1970s, recent changes in recording procedures, the hospital selection, and methods of statistical estimation prevent comparisons of data gathered prior to 1988 with those gathered recently. Thus, discussion of emergency-room trends is limited to the years 1988 to 1993.

The lowest number of marijuana-mentions, recorded in 1990, was 15,706 (7.1 mentions per 100,000 population). The highest was 29,166 (12.7 per 100,000 population), recorded in 1993.

Using these figures, an increase of 86% has been reported. However, if 1988 is used as the "base year" instead-a year in which there were 19,962 marijuana mentions-the increase is reduced immediately by more than half, to 42%.

Despite marijuana being the most frequently used illicit drug, in emergency rooms, it remains the least often mentioned illicit drug.

In 1993, marijuana accounted for 6.25% of mentions, compared to 15.3% for cocaine and 9.8% for heroin. Even over-the-counter pain medications were mentioned more often than marijuana-comprising 9% of the total.

For youth aged 6 to 17, there were more mentions of marijuana than of heroin and cocaine-not because marijuana is more harmful to them but because these latter drugs are used so infrequently by young people. In this age group, mentions of over-the-counter pain medications were substantially higher than those for marijuana. While marijuana accounted for 6.48% of drug mentions by youth, over-the-counter pain medications accounted for 47%.

For the total population, not only is marijuana mentioned less frequently than other recreational drugs, it is seldom mentioned alone. In 1992, in more than 80% of the drug-abuse episodes involving marijunana, at least one other drug was mentioned; and, in more than 40%, two or more additional drugs were mentioned.

Of 24,000 marijuana mentions in 1992, more than 13,000 involved alcohol and nearly 10,000 involved cocaine.

Despite recent increases in marijuana mentions, hospital emergency rooms are not flooded with marijuana users seeking medical attention. In 1992, of 433,493 total drug mentions, only 4,464 -- about 1% -- involved the use of marijuana alone.

Looking forward to your full post, though.

Peace,

Tim

Edited December 14, 2004 by cooltuba

[jasJis]

I'm at work, so I don't have what I've written so far. But I want to address the logic you have used so far.

If 77% of marijuana users do not use coke, that means 23% do. If we take that sub-set of 23% and discover 90% started off with marijuana and then find that 90% of coke users started off with pot, that is the gateway effect. If society were to greatly reduce the usage of pot to 50% of current users, the largest % to be eliminated would be the casual user who smokes pot only. But we would begin to decrease those who started with pot before coke or crack. It's those who transition from pot to coke/crack that need help and prove the gateway effect. Just as all beer drinkers don't turn into alcoholics, a certain percentage does. During prohibition, alocholism and alcohol related deaths decreased. That is the same 'gateway effect' in reverse.

DAWN has much more current statistics. Over 26,000 people in 2000 sought emergency treatment for marijuana ALONE. That is whithout doing alot of blood testing & stuff becuase THC stays in the system. How many people seek treatment for injureis and stuff that don't volunteer that info or b.s. what helped make them stupid and hurt themselves. At the very least, you have to admit that statistics for injuries or deaths caused by people under the influence of marijuana are difficult to obtain because a blood test is needed and it isn't easy or legal to obtain a blood test to test for pot without the person's permission.

[cooltuba]

[quote name='jasJis' date='Dec 14 2004, 10:04 AM']If we take that sub-set of 23% and discover 90% started off with marijuana and then find that 90% of coke users started off with pot, that is the gateway effect. 

If society were to greatly reduce the usage of pot to 50% of current users, the largest % to be eliminated would be the casual user who smokes pot only.  But we would begin to decrease those who started with pot before coke or crack.  It's those who transition from pot to coke/crack that need help and prove the gateway effect.  Just as all beer drinkers don't turn into alcoholics, a certain percentage does.  During prohibition, alocholism and alcohol related deaths decreased.  That is the same 'gateway effect' in reverse.

DAWN has much more current statistics.  Over 26,000 people in 2000 sought emergency treatment for marijuana ALONE.  That is whithout doing alot of blood testing & stuff becuase THC stays in the system.  How many people seek treatment for injureis and stuff that don't volunteer that info or b.s. what helped make them stupid and hurt themselves.  At the very least, you have to admit that statistics for injuries or deaths caused by people under the influence of marijuana are difficult to obtain because a blood test is needed and it isn't easy or legal to obtain a blood test to test for pot without the person's permission.[/quote]
Look, I've already told you that you're looking at it backwards. Yes, 23% of marijuana users have tried coke, and 90% of coke users started with marijuana. To prove that marijuana inevitably leads to coke, though, you would need a majority of marijuana smokers trying coke. You're using a lof of "if"s and doubletalk. My points are simple to see and I stand by them. I don't have to say "If society were to greatly reduce the usage of pot to 50% of current users" That's like me saying "If we eliminated the 90% of cocaine users who started with marijuana" That's stupid, don't throw out the best 50% (the majority of the ones who don't use other illegal grugs) of the marijuana smoking population.

Your arguments to prove the gateway effect do not convince me, they're too speculative and even accepting the speculation, I still fail to see the logic. "But we would begin to decrease those who started with pot before coke or crack." What do you even mean by that sentance? You're floundering. Your mind tells you that there must be a gateway effect, so you mumble until you've convinced yourself. I'm not convinced. That is not a clear, well thought out argument.

Prove to me that the majority of people who smoke marijuana move on to harder drugs, or admit there is no "gateway". You cannot claim causation unless a majority of users experience that causation. That is a common principle in the scientific community.

"At the very least, you have to admit that statistics for injuries or deaths caused by people under the influence of marijuana are difficult to obtain because a blood test is needed and it isn't easy or legal to obtain a blood test to test for pot without the person's permission."

Yeah, the stats are hard to come by. Have you not read my other posts, though? Do you not see the problem with relying on blood and urine tests? For the last time:

THERE IS NO TEST TO DETERMINE IF SOMEONE IS CURRENTLY UI OR SMOKED IN THE LAST MONTH!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm about done with this thread. People don't listen, and I've yet to see anything of substance from you, Jas.

[Kilroy the Ninja]

Please, please, let's all be done with this thread...soon.

[Socrates]

Ditto!

(The Pot Thread That Will Not Die! ARRRGHHH!)