Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply puritysourcelabs US-PHARMACIES
UGL OZ Raptor Labs UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAKUS-PHARMACIESRaptor Labs

Marijuana - no long term memory effects, and can improve cognitive function!

Lestat

Lestat

MVP
EF VIP
This one is for you mrplunkey. I am sure you are long past changing any of your viewpoints (the more irrational a viewpoint the less likely it is to change) but here can you see that there are some positive cognitive effects as a result of marijuana and many of the things you hold as truth about this sacred herb are simply unfounded.

Does Marijuana Make You Stupid? | Wired Science| Wired.com
 
Lestat said:
This one is for you mrplunkey. I am sure you are long past changing any of your viewpoints (the more irrational a viewpoint the less likely it is to change) but here can you see that there are some positive cognitive effects as a result of marijuana and many of the things you hold as truth about this sacred herb are simply unfounded.

Does Marijuana Make You Stupid? | Wired Science| Wired.com
Click to expand...

ololololol!

I :heart: you


yes homo
 
There are plenty of studies that show pot doesn't damage your brain long-term.

And congratulations on finding one obscure test (semantic priming) that might improve while stoned.

Here was my favorite part of the article: "This study builds on previous work by Harvard researchers demonstrating that the learning and memory impairments of heavy marijuana users typically vanish within 28 days of “smoking cessation.” (The slight impairments still existed, however, one week after smoking.)"

Think about what that means. Even a weekend stoner will experience learning and memory impairments throughout the week. So some poor kid who only smokes on he weekend is still going to lose weeks, months or even years of education. These kids will never have a chance.

I just can't get over libs promoting such a selfish drug. You'd think hard-core conservatives would push for legalization, while libtards would be trying to get it banned.
 
Lestat said:
This one is for you mrplunkey. I am sure you are long past changing any of your viewpoints (the more irrational a viewpoint the less likely it is to change) but here can you see that there are some positive cognitive effects as a result of marijuana and many of the things you hold as truth about this sacred herb are simply unfounded.

Does Marijuana Make You Stupid? | Wired Science| Wired.com
Click to expand...

Then would you be willing to have open heart surgery from a doctor who's high on weed?

Lots of information out there that is conflicting. The only thing that's important at the end of the day is what corporations and billionaires think. Cuz they're the ones who own the government and the people.

c
 
Here's what I know about weed. One of the smartest kids in my HS started burning and his grades went to crap. When I asked him about it he said "weed doesn't make you dumb, it just makes you not care. BUT I DON'T GIVE A SHIT!"

So ladies and gentlemen, the anecdata is clear and unequivocal, weed makes ya dumb!
 
JAKE-PATRIOTS said:
Here's what I know about weed. One of the smartest kids in my HS started burning and his grades went to crap. When I asked him about it he said "weed doesn't make you dumb, it just makes you not care. BUT I DON'T GIVE A SHIT!"

So ladies and gentlemen, the anecdata is clear and unequivocal, weed makes ya dumb!
Click to expand...

Mayhap the kid had other things going on in his life to trigger his sudden change, and the weed is an easy target so why not go with it, the kid i mean...just thinking that's i would do to keep pple from butting in too much, let them think what they will and let assumptions satisfy their curiosity....pretty efficient, no?
 
*ebony* said:
Mayhap the kid had other things going on in his life to trigger his sudden change, and the weed is an easy target so why not go with it, the kid i mean...just thinking that's i would do to keep pple from butting in too much, let them think what they will and let assumptions satisfy their curiosity....pretty efficient, no?
Click to expand...


I don't know about any of that, I've just always found it funny. FTR that was ~25 years ago. Damn I am getting old. :xeye:
 
*ebony* said:
didja like it?
Click to expand...

I concede that it has a nice drug effect. It's nice for just staring at the TV or vegging out.

What I never cared for was the aftereffect. I'm certainly functional the next day, but there's definitely an effect on the highest level cognitive and analytical skills.
 
mrplunkey said:
I concede that it has a nice drug effect. It's nice for just staring at the TV or vegging out.
Click to expand...

lolz

mrplunkey said:
What I never cared for was the aftereffect. I'm certainly functional the next day, but there's definitely an effect on the highest level cognitive and analytical skills.
Click to expand...

Does taking lunesta wear off immediately after you wake up with no impairment to these highest levels of cog and anal skills?
 
mrplunkey said:
I concede that it has a nice drug effect. It's nice for just staring at the TV or vegging out.

What I never cared for was the aftereffect. I'm certainly functional the next day, but there's definitely an effect on the highest level cognitive and analytical skills.
Click to expand...

if i'm hungover from drinking, i can't even get out of bed
 
calveless wonder said:
if i'm hungover from drinking, i can't even get out of bed
Click to expand...

I keep coming back to this glaring fact from my own personal empirical data. If I intake weed and alcohol in amounts comparable to giving me the same "wasted" effect for each, the hangover from alcohol is almost unbearable, while weed I feel virtually nothing within a half hour or so after getting out of bed the next morning. The hangovers, or "crashes" from hard drugs like X, Coke, Heroin, Speed, Meth, etc are much more similar to alcohol than anything weed would produce. Just using common sense, alcohol is more damaging to the body as evidenced by how the body reacts once the effects of the intoxication wear off. Isnt this common sense?
 
*ebony* said:
Does taking lunesta wear off immediately after you wake up with no impairment to these highest levels of cog and anal skills?
Click to expand...


1) I have no "anal skills"

2) The trick with lunesta is to take it on a dead-empty stomach. If I do, it's out of my system in four hours. If you eat a big meal then take it, you'll be in a fog until noon the next day (or longer).
 
mrplunkey said:
1) I have no "anal skills"

2) The trick with lunesta is to take it on a dead-empty stomach. If I do, it's out of my system in four hours. If you eat a big meal then take it, you'll be in a fog until noon the next day (or longer).
Click to expand...

1) No problem! I know someone who can make you a pro in no time!

2) So you have found a way to make lunesta work for you without you feeling like your under its influence and feeling perfectly functional?
 
mrplunkey said:
1) I have no "anal skills"
Click to expand...

^^^
knot what the men's room walls says @ Cutter's

mrplunkey said:
2) The trick with lunesta is to take it on a dead-empty stomach. If I do, it's out of my system in four hours. If you eat a big meal then take it, you'll be in a fog until noon the next day (or longer).
Click to expand...

if I showed up at work knot in teh fog my boss woodn't recognize me


just sayin'
 
mrplunkey said:
There are plenty of studies that show pot doesn't damage your brain long-term.

And congratulations on finding one obscure test (semantic priming) that might improve while stoned.

Here was my favorite part of the article: "This study builds on previous work by Harvard researchers demonstrating that the learning and memory impairments of heavy marijuana users typically vanish within 28 days of “smoking cessation.” (The slight impairments still existed, however, one week after smoking.)"

Think about what that means. Even a weekend stoner will experience learning and memory impairments throughout the week. So some poor kid who only smokes on he weekend is still going to lose weeks, months or even years of education. These kids will never have a chance.

I just can't get over libs promoting such a selfish drug. You'd think hard-core conservatives would push for legalization, while libtards would be trying to get it banned.
Click to expand...
Alcohol abuse permanently ruins your brain though, have you seen the long term effects? Its very sad. On top of that you've got liver damage that can kill you (I know someone personally who died due to this). On top of that how many domestic abuse calls involve someone who is intoxicated? How many fights in public can be attributed to alcohol use? How many vehicle deaths?

So why isn't the debate about that? Why do people continue to grind the axe against something with tremendous capacity to alleviate suffering, something that has empirical evidence leading it to enhanced creativity and among other things.

I am not saying children should smoke pot. And yes I'd go to a doctor or a surgeon that used pot, in fact, I do.
 
Lestat said:
Alcohol abuse permanently ruins your brain though, have you seen the long term effects? Its very sad. On top of that you've got liver damage that can kill you (I know someone personally who died due to this). On top of that how many domestic abuse calls involve someone who is intoxicated? How many fights in public can be attributed to alcohol use? How many vehicle deaths?

So why isn't the debate about that? Why do people continue to grind the axe against something with tremendous capacity to alleviate suffering, something that has empirical evidence leading it to enhanced creativity and among other things.

I am not saying children should smoke pot. And yes I'd go to a doctor or a surgeon that used pot, in fact, I do.
Click to expand...

Why do foggers always cycle back to the evils of alcohol? You do realize that has absolutely nothing to do with pot-related issues, don't you?

Let's try your fogger to alcohol logic on another pair of drugs:

Alcohol use in certain amounts and frequency is definitely bad for you.

Huffing toluene and toluene-containing compounds is most definitely worse (irreversible brain damage, even at modest amounts).

But toluene-based compounds are readily available to anyone of any age. Ergo, alcohol should also be readily available to anyone of any age.
 
mrplunkey said:
Why do foggers always cycle back to the evils of alcohol? You do realize that has absolutely nothing to do with pot-related issues, don't you?

Let's try your fogger to alcohol logic on another pair of drugs:

Alcohol use in certain amounts and frequency is definitely bad for you.

Huffing toluene and toluene-containing compounds is most definitely worse (irreversible brain damage, even at modest amounts).

But toluene-based compounds are readily available to anyone of any age. Ergo, alcohol should also be readily available to anyone of any age.
Click to expand...
I agree that as a compound, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other, but its interesting to me to see different people's approaches to controlling them.

I personally do not drink alcohol at all. I used to, but I don't anymore. For me personally it has far more negative effects than positive. It has has measurable negative effects on me.

I don't for a minute want to stop other's from using it. I do want to stop people from using it and driving. I want there to be stiff penalties for alcohol related violence (especially domestic) and I don't want to see it in the hands of kids (although I support lowering the drinking age to 18).

One of the points I will continually try to drive home is this. Millions of dollars have been spent to try to paint the worst picture possible about Marijuana. Millions have been spent on a fraudulent scientific study. Millions have been spend on public ad campaigns. Propaganda movies, etc.

With alcohol, millions are spent glamorizing it. Driving home I see 5 billboards per day advertising it using attractive women and other traditional marketing tricks.

Again I am totally ok with this, but why when it comes to the sacred green herb marjuana do so many supposedly intelligent people fall prey to well funded marketing machines?

The cost to society for marijuana is so great, I am sure you and I both agree on that and would love to see an end to it. We have prisons full of people in there for possession, low level trafficking ($10 and $20 bags, come on). All that aforementioned propaganda was paid for by someone (the public). Lets just put a stop to this madness and let people live their lives the way they choose (given that huge caveat that they don't negatively impact others).
 
Lestat said:
The cost to society for marijuana is so great, I am sure you and I both agree on that and would love to see an end to it. We have prisons full of people in there for possession, low level trafficking ($10 and $20 bags, come on). All that aforementioned propaganda was paid for by someone (the public). Lets just put a stop to this madness and let people live their lives the way they choose (given that huge caveat that they don't negatively impact others).
Click to expand...

Yet we disagree on how to put an end to it.

If you're really worried about the costs associated with marijuana, here's a simple solution. Make possession a civil offense with absolutely no jail/probation component. Instead let it be a flat $10,000 fine per violation. So then, there's no downstream costs and enforcement could be self-funding.
 
mrplunkey said:
Yet we disagree on how to put an end to it.

If you're really worried about the costs associated with marijuana, here's a simple solution. Make possession a civil offense with absolutely no jail/probation component. Instead let it be a flat $10,000 fine per violation. So then, there's no downstream costs and enforcement could be self-funding.
Click to expand...
The costs of marijuana do not come from simply possessing it, they come because of our reaction to people possessing it which is irrational and illogical.

I say we fine local municipalities $10,000 per possession arrest/citation given and use those funds to pay for any downstream costs (public defender fees, jail/prison costs, loss of productivity).
 
Lestat said:
The costs of marijuana do not come from simply possessing it, they come because of our reaction to people possessing it which is irrational and illogical.

I say we fine local municipalities $10,000 per possession arrest/citation given and use those funds to pay for any downstream costs (public defender fees, jail/prison costs, loss of productivity).
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's a great idea!

Odd how foggers want the government out of their business when it comes to that magical plant, but don't have a problem with government getting in the middle of every other aspect of life.

Let's both become hard core libertarians.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

"The right to life, liberty and happiness ends where the other man's wallet begins."
- Mr. Plunkey
 
I don't want government involved in many areas of my life, I think government should be as minimal as possible. I think the goal of private and government run programs, rules, laws, regulations is to increase overall opportunity, productivity, and happiness for all.
 
Lestat said:
I don't want government involved in many areas of my life, I think government should be as minimal as possible. I think the goal of private and government run programs, rules, laws, regulations is to increase overall opportunity, productivity, and happiness for all.
Click to expand...

So you'd be fine with massive scale backs in the departments of education, energy, health and human services, labor, etc. etc.?

Are we gonna lead the charge to revoke ObamaCare together?
 
mrplunkey said:
So you'd be fine with massive scale backs in the departments of education, energy, health and human services, labor, etc. etc.?

Are we gonna lead the charge to revoke ObamaCare together?
Click to expand...
Of course not. We've been over this before, but I wouldn't want to live on a street where trash, fire, or police service was voluntary. Imagine you pay for trash, fire, and police but your neighbors don't. What happens when they have 3 months of trash piled up and their home catches on fire taking your's with it?

Lets be smart about things, meaning, actually think about them! Not just knee jerk reactions, rhetoric, and toe-ing the partly line.

Its in our best interests both as a country and individuals to have a highly educated populace. Public safety is a concern of mine, is it not of your's? Healthy workers are for more productive to my company than sick ones (especially if they can't make it in to work!).

Minimum government involvement doesn't mean bury your head in the sand and ignore there is a world around you, or in some fortunate people's cases, build a wall around you and shut everyone but who you explicitly choose, out.

I say lets start with the low hanging fruit first, this is common in many facets of life. Choose the things that have the most bang for your buck with the least amount of upfront cost and effort. Start there. Don't ignore the bigger issues, we'll tackle those too, but maybe a few small wins would help get things on the right track.

My optimism about our current government is low though. I give Obama credit for trying. He's alienating some of his core by actually does what a good leader should and compromising, but he's compromised on some of the wrong things (think early on with how he handled financial dealings, putting the crooks (Goldman Sachs) into positions of power).
 
Lestat said:
Of course not. We've been over this before, but I wouldn't want to live on a street where trash, fire, or police service was voluntary. Imagine you pay for trash, fire, and police but your neighbors don't. What happens when they have 3 months of trash piled up and their home catches on fire taking your's with it?

Lets be smart about things, meaning, actually think about them! Not just knee jerk reactions, rhetoric, and toe-ing the partly line.

Its in our best interests both as a country and individuals to have a highly educated populace. Public safety is a concern of mine, is it not of your's? Healthy workers are for more productive to my company than sick ones (especially if they can't make it in to work!).

Minimum government involvement doesn't mean bury your head in the sand and ignore there is a world around you, or in some fortunate people's cases, build a wall around you and shut everyone but who you explicitly choose, out.

I say lets start with the low hanging fruit first, this is common in many facets of life. Choose the things that have the most bang for your buck with the least amount of upfront cost and effort. Start there. Don't ignore the bigger issues, we'll tackle those too, but maybe a few small wins would help get things on the right track.

My optimism about our current government is low though. I give Obama credit for trying. He's alienating some of his core by actually does what a good leader should and compromising, but he's compromised on some of the wrong things (think early on with how he handled financial dealings, putting the crooks (Goldman Sachs) into positions of power).
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want to live on a street with a bunch of pot foggers either, so I guess busting hippies goes on the list of essential services I expect from the government.
 
mrplunkey said:
I wouldn't want to live on a street with a bunch of pot foggers either, so I guess busting hippies goes on the list of essential services I expect from the government.
Click to expand...
How would that negatively impact you?
 
Lestat said:
How would that negatively impact you?
Click to expand...

Hippies running up and down the street don't exactly enhance property value. Plus think about how many crimes are done simply for drug money. I'll pass on having a stoner hangout next door to me.

i-hate-hippies.jpg
 
My friends who smoke weed are amazingly intellgent; high IQ's, but below average EQ's. I almost smoked the other night after 7 yrs, but thought I would rather not get the munchies since I am trying to keep my girlish figure! ;-)
 
mrplunkey said:
Hippies running up and down the street don't exactly enhance property value. Plus think about how many crimes are done simply for drug money. I'll pass on having a stoner hangout next door to me.

i-hate-hippies.jpg
Click to expand...
how many crimes are done for marijuana money? Really, think about it? Now of what you could manage to put together, how many of those would be eliminated if (in most states)producing and obtaining it was not illegal?

I'd prefer to live in a neighborhood without a lot of things I don't find desirable, but just as I want freedom to live my life the way I choose, I extend that to others. I'd prefer to live in a neighborhood with no pets, no cigarette smokers, no fat people, no people with foul body odor, no people who listen to music loud after 12am, no people who are unattractive, the list goes on.

I think we are making progress here though, you are realizing that living in a tightly controlled authoritarian state may be more to your liking (assuming that government was 100% in line with your view). I am sure many people share this view too so don't feel bad about it, just realize that a country that values individual freedom very highly may not always feel great for you. You've got a lot of people to commiserate with, surely all of us can find individual freedoms we don't enjoy and wouldn't mind seeing taken away from others for our own convenience.
 
Lestat said:
how many crimes are done for marijuana money? Really, think about it? Now of what you could manage to put together, how many of those would be eliminated if (in most states)producing and obtaining it was not illegal?

I'd prefer to live in a neighborhood without a lot of things I don't find desirable, but just as I want freedom to live my life the way I choose, I extend that to others. I'd prefer to live in a neighborhood with no pets, no cigarette smokers, no fat people, no people with foul body odor, no people who listen to music loud after 12am, no people who are unattractive, the list goes on.

I think we are making progress here though, you are realizing that living in a tightly controlled authoritarian state may be more to your liking (assuming that government was 100% in line with your view). I am sure many people share this view too so don't feel bad about it, just realize that a country that values individual freedom very highly may not always feel great for you. You've got a lot of people to commiserate with, surely all of us can find individual freedoms we don't enjoy and wouldn't mind seeing taken away from others for our own convenience.
Click to expand...

No country that values individual freedom would ever confiscate nearly 50% of a person's income. We discarded that concept a long time ago.

I'm 100% fine with a return to true freedom, but until then it is any taxpayer's moral (and legal) right to influence the system in any way they feel serves their interests or deems appropriate. That's why I really can't blame a lobbyist or anyone else pushing an agenda in Washington -- we created those opportunities by making government too large in the first place.
 
mrplunkey said:
No country that values individual freedom would ever confiscate nearly 50% of a person's income. We discarded that concept a long time ago.

I'm 100% fine with a return to true freedom, but until then it is any taxpayer's moral (and legal) right to influence the system in any way they feel serves their interests or deems appropriate. That's why I really can't blame a lobbyist or anyone else pushing an agenda in Washington -- we created those opportunities by making government too large in the first place.
Click to expand...
50% of the country pays no income tax though! Its those who reap the most rewards from such a well equipped country (amazing infrastructure, educated professional worker pool to source from, stability, etc.) who pay proportionally. I don't really see any problem with that. It'd be impossible for someone like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett to make their fortunes in an isolated desert.
 
Lestat said:
50% of the country pays no income tax though! Its those who reap the most rewards from such a well equipped country (amazing infrastructure, educated professional worker pool to source from, stability, etc.) who pay proportionally. I don't really see any problem with that. It'd be impossible for someone like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett to make their fortunes in an isolated desert.
Click to expand...

That's the fundamental difference between you and me.

You think Gates and Buffett happened thanks to the government.

I believe Gates and Buffett happened despite the government.

But my views of the government are evolving over time. The right answer is to make it as absolutely small as possible, otherwise we'll always have ridiculous examples of abuse. A great example is GE's negative tax rate for 2010. While that seems like a bad thing at first, it should be an object lesson regarding the evils of large government. So if people have the lesson in front of them, but refuse to learn it, whose fault is it really?
 
mrplunkey said:
That's the fundamental difference between you and me.

You think Gates and Buffett happened thanks to the government.

I believe Gates and Buffett happened despite the government.

But my views of the government are evolving over time. The right answer is to make it as absolutely small as possible, otherwise we'll always have ridiculous examples of abuse. A great example is GE's negative tax rate for 2010. While that seems like a bad thing at first, it should be an object lesson regarding the evils of large government. So if people have the lesson in front of them, but refuse to learn it, whose fault is it really?
Click to expand...
whoa whoa whoa!

I don't think Gates and Buffett happened thanks to the government.

I think first and foremost they brought innovative ideas (in Gates case particularly) and had the drive and follow through to make some amazing shit happen! I do not believe that had they not been here, someone else, in this country, would have filled those roles. I take nothing away from them as individuals.

I do know, as they both do, that they benefited from many things that this country provides. Ideally none of them would need any sort of government intervention to create, but sadly, and mostly due to man's selfish nature, we do.

As I have said before, I work for a fortune 500, and before working here I was hardcore conservative. I thought we should have no taxes, poor people can survive on charity!

But my company, just like Gates and Buffetts', needs a LOT of ancillary support in order to make things happen. Now that they have billions they can fund and buy a lot of it themselves, but even with their fortunes I don't think they can single handedly fund a higher education system that will churn out engineers and other genius level professionals in the numbers they need to exist.

Those aren't the people I'm most concerned about though, what about all of the less glamorous jobs that are needed? What about the whole infrastructure that makes getting to work possible, building buildings possible, a place for all that trash and shred bin material to go. People to stock store rooms, make coffee, take notes, clean toilets, wipe the asses of babies who have two professional parents gone 80 hours a week a piece. There is a whole shitload of stuff that is REQUIRED.

Now does the government need to get involved? I want to say no, believe me man, I do, but from what I know and see (and granted I am just 34) without some intervention, wages will go DOWN, benefits will go DOWN. Why do you think there are unions? We shouldn't NEED them, but where is the incentive for employers to pay their people more when their profits are up? That incentive is not there.

The analogy I use is that of a prize winning rose. You can take the seed for that rosebush and plant it in the desert and never tend it again, odds are you will never see a rose, never even knew the potential that seed had. OR you can plant it in fertile soil and tend that motherfucker daily, give it water, ensure it has sunshine, protect it from pests, and guess what, you'll get some championship blooms off that thing. And you can do that over and over and over, and you can take the best and combine it with other stand outs and get even better.

Our country is a fertile flowerbed and we have many championship winning roses in it, I want to keep it that way.
 
Lestat said:
This one is for you mrplunkey. I am sure you are long past changing any of your viewpoints (the more irrational a viewpoint the less likely it is to change) but here can you see that there are some positive cognitive effects as a result of marijuana and many of the things you hold as truth about this sacred herb are simply unfounded.

Does Marijuana Make You Stupid? | Wired Science| Wired.com
Click to expand...

It spurs the creative mind, aka musicians, painters, actors, etc. Technical mind is a completely different story. I wouldn't want doctors or nuclear physicists getting baked before they do brain surgery or develop the next Hadron collider.
 
hanselthecaretaker said:
It spurs the creative mind, aka musicians, painters, actors, etc. Technical mind is a completely different story. I wouldn't want doctors or nuclear physicists getting baked before they do brain surgery or develop the next Hadron collider.
Click to expand...
I'm sure you wouldn't want those people drunk either. how about on xanax or ambien? Ok to fire up the hadron collider after taking a double stack of lunesta/ambien?

but what about after having a cup of coffee and an adderol?
 
Lestat said:
whoa whoa whoa!

I don't think Gates and Buffett happened thanks to the government.

I think first and foremost they brought innovative ideas (in Gates case particularly) and had the drive and follow through to make some amazing shit happen! I do not believe that had they not been here, someone else, in this country, would have filled those roles. I take nothing away from them as individuals.

I do know, as they both do, that they benefited from many things that this country provides. Ideally none of them would need any sort of government intervention to create, but sadly, and mostly due to man's selfish nature, we do.

As I have said before, I work for a fortune 500, and before working here I was hardcore conservative. I thought we should have no taxes, poor people can survive on charity!

But my company, just like Gates and Buffetts', needs a LOT of ancillary support in order to make things happen. Now that they have billions they can fund and buy a lot of it themselves, but even with their fortunes I don't think they can single handedly fund a higher education system that will churn out engineers and other genius level professionals in the numbers they need to exist.

Those aren't the people I'm most concerned about though, what about all of the less glamorous jobs that are needed? What about the whole infrastructure that makes getting to work possible, building buildings possible, a place for all that trash and shred bin material to go. People to stock store rooms, make coffee, take notes, clean toilets, wipe the asses of babies who have two professional parents gone 80 hours a week a piece. There is a whole shitload of stuff that is REQUIRED.

Now does the government need to get involved? I want to say no, believe me man, I do, but from what I know and see (and granted I am just 34) without some intervention, wages will go DOWN, benefits will go DOWN. Why do you think there are unions? We shouldn't NEED them, but where is the incentive for employers to pay their people more when their profits are up? That incentive is not there.

The analogy I use is that of a prize winning rose. You can take the seed for that rosebush and plant it in the desert and never tend it again, odds are you will never see a rose, never even knew the potential that seed had. OR you can plant it in fertile soil and tend that motherfucker daily, give it water, ensure it has sunshine, protect it from pests, and guess what, you'll get some championship blooms off that thing. And you can do that over and over and over, and you can take the best and combine it with other stand outs and get even better.

Our country is a fertile flowerbed and we have many championship winning roses in it, I want to keep it that way.
Click to expand...

You are for a larger government model, but only if that model adheres to your vision. But you don't get it both ways -- a government that can insert itself into wage issues certainly has the power to insert itself into marijuana use.

Being a devout atheist, I don't really click with the bible thumpers. But nothing would please me more to see a Perry/Bauchmann win in 2012. And I'd love to see a cabinet 100% full of the most extreme religious zealots (I have Sarah Palin pegged for Secretary of Health and Human Services). Hopefully they'll use all these wonderful governmental agencies such as Education and Health and Human Service to implement their vision for a proper Christian nation. Know why? Because we might finally get the message to big government types that these social engineering initiatives can swing from liberal to conservative in an instant.
 
mrplunkey said:
You are for a larger government model, but only if that model adheres to your vision. But you don't get it both ways -- a government that can insert itself into wage issues certainly has the power to insert itself into marijuana use.

Being a devout atheist, I don't really click with the bible thumpers. But nothing would please me more to see a Perry/Bauchmann win in 2012. And I'd love to see a cabinet 100% full of the most extreme religious zealots (I have Sarah Palin pegged for Secretary of Health and Human Services). Hopefully they'll use all these wonderful governmental agencies such as Education and Health and Human Service to implement their vision for a proper Christian nation. Know why? Because we might finally get the message to big government types that these social engineering initiatives can swing from liberal to conservative in an instant.
Click to expand...
I see your point, but I disagree with MY vision, I think it should be us as a nation deciding, I know its tough to find a lot we agree on, but that is a good thing, stick to what we agree on (the minority) and the majority of other issues are farmed out to states and local jurisdictions. The end result is smaller government.
 
Lestat said:
I see your point, but I disagree with MY vision, I think it should be us as a nation deciding, I know its tough to find a lot we agree on, but that is a good thing, stick to what we agree on (the minority) and the majority of other issues are farmed out to states and local jurisdictions. The end result is smaller government.
Click to expand...

Most Americans identify themselves as Christian. If they vote for a conservative Christian in 2012, isn't that a mandate for them to broadly implement what "we" seem to want?

Who knows, maybe they'll be teaching kids about a 10,000 year old Earth where man chilled out with the dinosaurs.
 
mrplunkey said:
Most Americans identify themselves as Christian. If they vote for a conservative Christian in 2012, isn't that a mandate for them to broadly implement what "we" seem to want?

Who knows, maybe they'll be teaching kids about a 10,000 year old Earth where man chilled out with the dinosaurs.
Click to expand...
I think issue was thought up at the country's founding. Something about separation of church and state. Even if 100% of the people wanted a theocracy it is not gonna happen unless the constitution is rewritten.
 
Lestat said:
I think issue was thought up at the country's founding. Something about separation of church and state. Even if 100% of the people wanted a theocracy it is not gonna happen unless the constitution is rewritten.
Click to expand...

The constitution prevents religious persecution and prohibits the state from taking-on an official religion. It doesn't stop religiously-motivated laws at all.

A future President Perry could easily leverage the existing administrative agencies to implement his evangelical beliefs just as Barry is implementing his environmental beliefs right now.
 
mrplunkey said:
The constitution prevents religious persecution and prohibits the state from taking-on an official religion. It doesn't stop religiously-motivated laws at all.

A future President Perry could easily leverage the existing administrative agencies to implement his evangelical beliefs just as Barry is implementing his environmental beliefs right now.
Click to expand...
As long as there is clear separation from church and state it wouldn't be illegal I suppose, just as implementing laws based on the zodiac isn't either.

Is that really the world you long for though? Just changing from one dogmatic ruler to the next and obeying their whims.

I always thought we'd continually modify and enhance our world as we learned more and more. That is why I am proud to call myself a progressive, I am a fan of PROGRESS. I don't think we should live today based on how much we knew about the world, ourselves, economy, life, death, war, peace 1000 years ago (or more or less).

We should be able to elect responsible leaders who can put their heads together and make intelligent decisions. We don't see a lot of that anymore, instead we see people pandering to one strong belief or another, and money will guide us the rest of the way.

You can't talk about doing things intelligently and the best possible way without being labeled an idealist either, so there really is no winning. Good thing for myself and others is, just like the fundamentalists, the people who long for a theocracy, the people who would love an authoritative state, we also won't just give up and roll over, we'll continue to blast ignorance with truth, and I do believe truth will ultimately win out in the end, not money, not dogma, not pandering to the lowest common denominator, and certainly not outright lies.
 
Lestat said:
As long as there is clear separation from church and state it wouldn't be illegal I suppose, just as implementing laws based on the zodiac isn't either.

Is that really the world you long for though? Just changing from one dogmatic ruler to the next and obeying their whims.

I always thought we'd continually modify and enhance our world as we learned more and more. That is why I am proud to call myself a progressive, I am a fan of PROGRESS. I don't think we should live today based on how much we knew about the world, ourselves, economy, life, death, war, peace 1000 years ago (or more or less).

We should be able to elect responsible leaders who can put their heads together and make intelligent decisions. We don't see a lot of that anymore, instead we see people pandering to one strong belief or another, and money will guide us the rest of the way.

You can't talk about doing things intelligently and the best possible way without being labeled an idealist either, so there really is no winning. Good thing for myself and others is, just like the fundamentalists, the people who long for a theocracy, the people who would love an authoritative state, we also won't just give up and roll over, we'll continue to blast ignorance with truth, and I do believe truth will ultimately win out in the end, not money, not dogma, not pandering to the lowest common denominator, and certainly not outright lies.
Click to expand...

My first choice is a immense downsizing of government. Constitutionally limit it's revenues to 5% of GDP and require a balanced budget every year.

But if I'm stuck with a big government, I'd much rather find myself in Perry's vision of the world than Obama's.

And no, "truth" (which incidentally, is your view of the truth) isn't winning. Money is winning. Unions give millions at a time to Barry because they expect a return on their investment, as do fossil fuel companies do with Republicans. If you want less government corruption, insure there is less government there to corrupt.
 
Lestat said:
I'm sure you wouldn't want those people drunk either. how about on xanax or ambien? Ok to fire up the hadron collider after taking a double stack of lunesta/ambien?

but what about after having a cup of coffee and an adderol?
Click to expand...


The Achilles heel of pot is its half-life. Individual doses of all those other substances you mentioned clear out of your system in a few hours. A few puffs on a joint hangs in your system for a few days. I think because of this factor the establishment, regulation and enforcement of "acceptable" levels would remain a foggy (no pun) issue if it were ever legalized.
 
hanselthecaretaker said:
The Achilles heel of pot is its half-life. Individual doses of all those other substances you mentioned clear out of your system in a few hours. A few puffs on a joint hangs in your system for a few days. I think because of this factor the establishment, regulation and enforcement of "acceptable" levels would remain a foggy (no pun) issue if it were ever legalized.
Click to expand...

I agree.

And now I'm just speculating, but I think pot has at least two different mechanisms. There's clearly an acute phase of the drug that lasts only hours. But there's also a lingering after-effect (which may be a totally different mechanism) that lasts longer.
 
mrplunkey said:
And now I'm just speculating, but I think pot has at least two different mechanisms. There's clearly an acute phase of the drug that lasts only hours. But there's also a lingering after-effect (which may be a totally different mechanism) that lasts longer.
Click to expand...

way to be "definitive"



just sayin'
 
mrplunkey said:
I agree.

And now I'm just speculating, but I think pot has at least two different mechanisms. There's clearly an acute phase of the drug that lasts only hours. But there's also a lingering after-effect (which may be a totally different mechanism) that lasts longer.
Click to expand...

Now we're back to being in a "fog". I never smoke out before around 7-8p and then go to bed no later than midnight. After a good nights sleep im ready to go in the AM. So i would say the key (just like any other substance) is to have a good nights sleep immediately after use.
 
PICK3 said:
way to be "definitive"



just sayin'
Click to expand...

I didn't want to slip into stoner science where I present something as a fact, then when someone asks where it comes from I'd have to say: "I know this dude who...".

P.S.

You're a huge MO.
 
superdave said:
Homewrecker alert
Click to expand...

pffftt like that even possible. The only person that qualifies having "a long, wide, highly vascular clitoris" is pick3.


and I've only fogged a handful of times last year and you guys know about a couple of them through my foggers thread.:(
 
*ebony* said:
pffftt like that even possible. The only person that qualifies having "a long, wide, highly vascular clitoris" is pick3.


and I've only fogged a handful of times last year and you guys know about a couple of them through my foggers thread.:(
Click to expand...

We should get together, its not terribly far lol
I could enrich yoar fogging experience lolll
 
lololoololol, I just urb dictionaried that. I'll check in the morning, maybe i'll grow one so there is still a chance!
 
Wow. I am totally jealous of how much time you guys have to type out arguments! But I have to say, that was a really entertaining thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Richardbrown
Napsgear: Are Plastics Causing Testosterone Levels to Decline?
Replies
13
Views
3K
Tazz
Tazz
jasonhill800
4 Effective Exercises When You Only Have Time for One
Replies
14
Views
3K
Tazz
Tazz
Richardbrown
Napsgear: Build a V-Taper and Save Your Joints
Replies
14
Views
4K
Tiger Salman Khan
Tiger Salman Khan
Richardbrown
Napsgear:Is It True That Alcohol Slows Your Metabolism? Alcohol's Effect on Your Body
Replies
14
Views
3K
RoySimpson
RoySimpson
Richardbrown
Napsgear: Avoid These Diet Mistakes: Part 1
Replies
15
Views
4K
SteveMobsterG
SteveMobsterG
Top Bottom