Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

My new job...with B&W!

Puc said:
It is all I can do to not delve into a diatribe about the hypocracy in #4... how many times have you labeled drug users (meth, crack,steroids,etc.) as immoral swine? What is the fucking difference?

When did the use of meth and crack stop becoming mind-altering self-destruction?

Also, I've never labelled steroid users as "immoral swine." There's nothing wrong with steroid use except for the fact that it is illegal in the U.S.

Puc said:
The only difference I can see is legality. And, if you actually consider legality tantamount to morality, I feel sorry for you...

Oh please... I could retire myself and 3 generations to follow if I had a nickel for every bullshit law I could describe.

-Warik
 
Warik said:


Also, I've never labelled steroid users as "immoral swine." There's nothing wrong with steroid use except for the fact that it is illegal in the U.S.

-Warik



Hey man watch it!!!

HEMAN was juiced to the gills.
 
Warik said:


When did the use of meth and crack stop becoming mind-altering self-destruction?

Also, I've never labelled steroid users as "immoral swine." There's nothing wrong with steroid use except for the fact that it is illegal in the U.S.



Oh please... I could retire myself and 3 generations to follow if I had a nickel for every bullshit law I could describe.

-Warik

I could purport that you are merely describing different degrees of mid-altering self destruction, BUT I do believe there is validity in such delineation.

I am not convinced mind-altering is inherently immoral, however. But, I am a moral relativist and you are not. So, I will side-step this one and apologize for calling you a hypocrite. I see your point, here....
 
Puc said:
I could purport that you are merely describing different degrees of mid-altering self destruction, BUT I do believe there is validity in such delineation.

I do believe that different degrees of mind-altering self-destruction, in addition to the intent of the individual guilty of such behavior, is an important factor in the morality or immorality of a particular action. In this case, however, we cannot argue the purposes and intentions of the distinct actions.

Steroid users - use steroids to increase muscle size and improve their bodies in various ways.

Drug (meth, crack, coke, etc) - use drugs to chemically alter their perception of reality, i.e. do cool things with their heads.

Cigarette smokers - why they do this? I don't know, but I'm sure that the common purpose for smoking is neither to alter one's mind nor to fuck up one's body. In fact, almost every cigarette smoker you talk to will probably say "NAH, I'M FINE... CIGARETTES AREN'T BAD FOR *ME!*"

Puc said:
I am not convinced mind-altering is inherently immoral, however. But, I am a moral relativist and you are not. So, I will side-step this one and apologize for calling you a hypocrite. I see your point, here....

I'm convinced that it's immoral, but to a certain degree. I do believe that some acts are more morally inappropriate than others. Murder of an innocent, for example, is far worse a deed than using some type of recreational drug.

Glad we could be civil about this, though. Apology accepted.

-Warik
 
the largest growing group of smokers is in 3rd world countries and in china... a large group/possibly the largest group of smokers in the developed countries are working class people.

you don't see how the tobacco companies are targeting? you don't have a problem with it?
 
smallmovesal said:
the largest growing group of smokers is in 3rd world countries and in china... a large group/possibly the largest group of smokers in the developed countries are working class people.

you don't see how the tobacco companies are targeting? you don't have a problem with it?

Why would anyone have a problem with who a company targets for sales? Their job is to sale a product and make a profit. So it would only be logical to target the largest group of smokers.
 
BO-CEPHUS said:


Why would anyone have a problem with who a company targets for sales? Their job is to sale a product and make a profit. So it would only be logical to target the largest group of smokers.

apparently you have no conscience either... that was my point... sales for lives.
 
smallmovesal said:


apparently you have no conscience either... that was my point... sales for lives.

The product is legal, right? Do you just expect the company to go out of business and lay off all of its workers? Then we would have idiots on this board complaining about Big Tabacco screwing its employees. No one forces a person to smoke. If you cannot understand that, well that is you own problem.
 
BO-CEPHUS said:


The product is legal, right? Do you just expect the company to go out of business and lay off all of its workers? Then we would have idiots on this board complaining about Big Tabacco screwing its employees. No one forces a person to smoke. If you cannot understand that, well that is you own problem.

regardless of its legality, i think it's irresponsible the way they are targeting... i really don't think that a product that affects health should be seen in such b&w terms...

they've moved to targeting the 3rd world because of all our anti-smoking campaigns here... do you think people in the 3rd world have an idea of how bad smoking is for him/her? do you think people in the 3rd world can afford to be smoking? they get hooked, then they get poorer and less healthy.

i see your point but we're talking about lives here...
 
smallmovesal said:


regardless of its legality, i think it's irresponsible the way they are targeting... i really don't think that a product that affects health should be seen in such b&w terms...

they've moved to targeting the 3rd world because of all our anti-smoking campaigns here... do you think people in the 3rd world have an idea of how bad smoking is for him/her? do you think people in the 3rd world can afford to be smoking? they get hooked, then they get poorer and less healthy.

i see your point but we're talking about lives here...

The economy in America is much more important the lives of some random people in a third-world country.
 
Top Bottom