melensdad for president
. . .
this is a very interesting debate! i’m loving it!
Uh, no thanks to the political nomination.
And I find myself in an odd situation here defending drugs, something that I generally oppose. I’m one of those few folks who actually never inhaled, all my friends did, and it was all over my fraternity house in college so I was certainly exposed to marijuana, its culture, and its consequences.
What I find is that most arguements are very much emotional and based on some sort of bias that seems to make little logical sense when compared to other similar drugs. Again, considering the arguements against guns, people cite all sorts of illogical suppositions and so I see that with arguments regarding marijuana.
Interestingly, the Harvard Law Review just published a new study, MORE GUNS = LESS CRIME. The study pretty much proves that honest citizens with guns are NOT a threat to society and in fact they help to make it safer.
Funny, that fact was NOT plastered all over the news. I wonder why? Perhaps for the same reasons that we don’t see too many logic based discussions about the legalization of marijuana?
Why is a
BLACK rifle bad and called an assault weapon while a
PINK rifle is perfectly acceptable, even it is the same gun with only cosmetic differences? The gun laws, and the drug laws are often based on emotion and not fact!
Again, I’m in no way saying that marijuana is a safe, or good for you. But my friend, and parish priest, Fr. Peter and I have tipped back more than a few beers at gatherings or when we go out to dinner together. Alcohol, even in moderation, dulls the senses. I believe I am legally drunk if I have 2 drinks inside of 60 minutes according to my body mass and the alcohol laws here.
When I drink beer with my priest am I acting in an immoral way?
Is he?
Tobacco, something I only use when someone gives me a free cigar at a wedding or in celebration of a birth, tends to elevate the heart rate, yet provide a calming and relaxing state. It can also make you somewhat dizzy.
Now look at marijuana and please tell me, in a LOGICAL way, other than the legality, how is it so different from other commonly used drugs? Remove the illegal status and that removes the “gateway” drug stigma. Remove the illegal status and that also removes the criminal element and the inherant profits and violence used to protect the profits. Make it legal, regulate the dosage, tax it, and sell it like you sell tobacco or alcohol, to adults, with 1 “stick” equal to 1 or 2 “drinks” and it strikes me that it would eliminate a whole range of problems.
So, if I smoke a joint with my priest I may be breaking the law, but am I acting in some immoral manner?
Is he?
And all that said, how could it be immoral to use, IN MODERATION, marijuana if it is not already immoral to use other recreational drugs like tobacco and wine.
Also, please don’t throw out silly arguements that people would drive “high” or that they would stink up restaurants, etc. First off, people already drive high; both with alcohol and drugs and it is already illegal. So if they smoked some pot and drove AFTER it was legal then they would be subject to the same DUI laws they are currently subject to. And since cigarette/cigar smoking is already curtailed in public, it would be easy enough to suggest that a marijuana ‘cigarette’ would fall under the same smoking laws.
Imagine the reduced violence and the reduced street crime if marijuana were legal, controlled, taxed and regulated like liquor or tobacco.