Michael Phelps, hypocrisy and American Drug Policy

I've contacted skyfloating to fix the multi-posts. It's not an apples to apples for the reasons previously given.

[edit on 13-2-2009 by saint4God]

reply to post by saint4God


i saw that and changed my post to something more on topic.

[edit on 2/13/2009 by nasdack24k]

seriously though.

you did lose the debate when you dismissed the perfectly appropriate peanut argument.

If you can't see just how apt the peanut comaprison is, i suggest you smoke some pot. may open your mind a bit.

I promise it won't kill you.

Originally posted by nasdack24k
seriously though.

you did lose the debate.

This isn't about winning or losing a debate (for me anyway). I don't care about a debate. I care about people getting jacked up on drugs that members of society seem to think are 'cool' but actually have very real and harmful ramifications to their lives.

reply to post by saint4God


you can't get "jacked up" on pot.

It's not speed.

Originally posted by saint4God
.... drugs that members of society seem to think are 'cool' but actually have very real and harmful ramifications to their lives.

and this is the point.


It's THEIR life.
THEIRS to do with as they please.
THEIRS to introduce chemicals as THEY see fit..



NOT YOURS TO GOVERN

Since this thread has gotten rather long and there is so much good information here, I went ahead and compiled every study and source cited. This is the entire meat and potatoes of the argument, all the studies and information compiled by the ATSers, neat and tidy in one post:

Studies against Cannabis (2)

Government website against Cannabis

Deaths by Cannabis (with study admitting there could have been alcohol use involved)

Studies supporting Cannabis (21)

The LD-50 for Cannabis

The LD-50 for Cannabis (different source)

Cannabis found not addictive

Why Cannabis is Illegal

Health Benefits of Cannabis

Cannabis use side effects are not permanent

No definitive link between Cannabis and Psychosis

Relation between Heart Attacks and Cannabis Use Inconclusive

Cannabis Use Supported by the Bible

Why Prohibition Doesn't Work

Nearly Half the United States smoked Cannabis

Monetary Cost of Prohibition in the state of Mass.

Cannabis Cuts Tumor Growth in Half

Cannabis is Anticarcinogenic

Cannabis Suppresses Tumor Cell Invasion

18 of Nature's Most Powerful Medicinal Plants (Cannabis is #1)

UCLA Study finds no connection between Cannabis and Cancer

Cannabinoids promote new brain cell growth

Cannabis and the Brain - A User's Guide

Documentary on Cannabis containing interviews with Physicists, Medical Professors, Authors, Politicians on Cannabis

Smoking cannabis can not kill you

The best study of all... done by US Government and ignored by Richard Nixon... The Schaffer Report

A total of 21 sources of information have been researched and found by members of ATS supporting the idea that what Michael Phelps did was harmless, and that the only conspiracy in this matter is the prohibition of Cannabis.

A total of 2 sources of information, with one of the two sources involving the combined use of Cannabis and Alcohol, making only 1 legitimate piece of information stating why what Phelps did was harmful.

21 impartial studies by PhD's, Universities, the US Government, and scholars ... against 1 study by the US Government

Enjoy the reading

What, no argument?

perhaps that's all that needed to be said...

Originally posted by saint4God

Originally posted by nasdack24k
seriously though.

you did lose the debate.

This isn't about winning or losing a debate (for me anyway). I don't care about a debate. I care about people getting jacked up on drugs that members of society seem to think are 'cool' but actually have very real and harmful ramifications to their lives.

We're well aware you don't care about an intelligent debate, you made that obvious at the very beginning of the thread. Luckily this place cries DENY IGNORANCE and 21 sources of information from all facets of Academia have found their way to this thread to prove that you are wrong. Don't argue with us, argue with the 21 individual studies that say so

Good luck with that.



[edit on 13-2-2009 by ImaNutter]

reply to post by saint4God


In regards to your belief that people should conform to what you, your morals, or your religion think is right. Please read the article in the below thread and take it to heart.

You respect my rights and I'll respect yours.

Even if Pot were more harmful to me than alcohol or tobacco (which it is not) If I choose to use said substance and harm no one, what is the problem?

Originally posted by nasdack24k
you can't get "jacked up" on pot.

It's not speed.

Slang:

Of course, there's always the slang term applied when something is really messed up: "This thing is really jacked!"

- archives.buffalorising.com...

This was the intended application to the venacular used.

Originally posted by nasdack24k
and this is the point.

It's THEIR life.
THEIRS to do with as they please.
THEIRS to introduce chemicals as THEY see fit..

NOT YOURS TO GOVERN

I'd never implied otherwise but will provide testimony and supporting data in the hopes people will make an informed decision. I cannot post more now, I have to find out why I'm getting continuous multi-posts.

[edit on 13-2-2009 by saint4God]

Originally posted by nasdack24k
reply to post by saint4God

 

the thing is, no matter how you look at it, apples are not harmful to the non-apple-allergic vast majority of people

[edit on 2/13/2009 by nasdack24k]

Not true. Too much of anything is bad for you. Even good things like apples and air can harm the healthiest person in excessive quantities.

Originally posted by alaskan

It's very convenient that your "multi-post problem" lasts eight/nine posts, just enough to bring the thread to a new page.

People need to stop replying to this guy, and the mods need to treat him just like they do normal trolls/blatant disinformists.

I read every post, even when I have to catch up from a day of inactivity and it doesn't matter how many pages either.

Come on everyone, let's stay on topic... in case you forgot, here is a reminder:

Since this thread has gotten rather long and there is so much good information here, I went ahead and compiled every study and source cited. This is the entire meat and potatoes of the argument, all the studies and information compiled by the ATSers, neat and tidy in one post:

Studies against Cannabis (2)

Government website against Cannabis

Deaths by Cannabis (with study admitting there could have been alcohol use involved)

Studies supporting Cannabis (21)

The LD-50 for Cannabis

The LD-50 for Cannabis (different source)

Cannabis found not addictive

Why Cannabis is Illegal

Health Benefits of Cannabis

Cannabis use side effects are not permanent

No definitive link between Cannabis and Psychosis

Relation between Heart Attacks and Cannabis Use Inconclusive

Cannabis Use Supported by the Bible

Why Prohibition Doesn't Work

Nearly Half the United States smoked Cannabis

Monetary Cost of Prohibition in the state of Mass.

Cannabis Cuts Tumor Growth in Half

Cannabis is Anticarcinogenic

Cannabis Suppresses Tumor Cell Invasion

18 of Nature's Most Powerful Medicinal Plants (Cannabis is #1)

UCLA Study finds no connection between Cannabis and Cancer

Cannabinoids promote new brain cell growth

Cannabis and the Brain - A User's Guide

Documentary on Cannabis containing interviews with Physicists, Medical Professors, Authors, Politicians on Cannabis

Smoking cannabis can not kill you

The best study of all... done by US Government and ignored by Richard Nixon... The Schaffer Report

A total of 21 sources of information have been researched and found by members of ATS supporting the idea that what Michael Phelps did was harmless, and that the only conspiracy in this matter is the prohibition of Cannabis.

A total of 2 sources of information, with one of the two sources involving the combined use of Cannabis and Alcohol, making only 1 legitimate piece of information stating why what Phelps did was harmful.

21 impartial studies by PhD's, Universities, the US Government, and scholars ... against 1 study by the US Government

Enjoy the reading