- New! We now accept ACH Payments, View Payment Options
Forums > Social Chat > Drugs and choice
Login/Join to Participateonewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
Posted:In another thread about drug free spinning a few people said that taking drugs or not was a matter of personal choice.
I feel a little uneasy about applying that phrase to drugs as they tend to be addictive or habit forming substances.
i.e. they effectivly diminish or remove the ability to make choices. for example, someone who has never smoked can choose whether or not to light and smoke a cigarette, but someone who has a thirty a day habit and is severely addicted to nicotine no longer has that choice.
There are millions of smokers in the world who find it impossible to kick their habit, effectivley they have lost their ability to choose.
Whilst some drugs are considered non addictive, due to peer pressure and the pro drug marketing that is rife in our culture, choice is effectivly reduced.
I know that people shouldn't be influenced by such things, but humans are extremely suseptible to this- there wouldn't, for example, be so many drinks promotions if promotions didn't work.
The sad thing is that the young are most suseptible to this pro drug propaganda.
I was wondering what those of you who believe that taking drugs is a matter of personal choice, thought about this?
I feel a little uneasy about applying that phrase to drugs as they tend to be addictive or habit forming substances.
i.e. they effectivly diminish or remove the ability to make choices. for example, someone who has never smoked can choose whether or not to light and smoke a cigarette, but someone who has a thirty a day habit and is severely addicted to nicotine no longer has that choice.
There are millions of smokers in the world who find it impossible to kick their habit, effectivley they have lost their ability to choose.
Whilst some drugs are considered non addictive, due to peer pressure and the pro drug marketing that is rife in our culture, choice is effectivly reduced.
I know that people shouldn't be influenced by such things, but humans are extremely suseptible to this- there wouldn't, for example, be so many drinks promotions if promotions didn't work.
The sad thing is that the young are most suseptible to this pro drug propaganda.
I was wondering what those of you who believe that taking drugs is a matter of personal choice, thought about this?
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Posted:i beleive weather you are an addict or not you have a choice. addicts stop taking whatever drug was their 'little friend' and become 'clean'. there has to be some sort of choosing going on.
all drugs altar ablitiy to make dicisions, espeacially the dicision to continue or discontinue taking that drug, as it has positives and negitives, so we make the decision based on the effects.
given time the negitives of drugs will always become small enough that the benifits seem worth while to take that drug again. in other cases like tobacco if you don't continue taking you feel like shit, hence its actually addictive, but still a decision can be made to injure some pain for a reletively short time for long term benifit.
drugs will always be desireable because there effects are usually quickly felt and intense in comparison to the alternative options that can require greater effort for less imediate benifit.
drugs do limit your ablity to choose but once you make the decision to live your life free from 'drugs' your ablity to make decisions increases. drugs are beautiful, they are great teachers, but you are the one who decides what is taught, how can it not be your decision?
all drugs altar ablitiy to make dicisions, espeacially the dicision to continue or discontinue taking that drug, as it has positives and negitives, so we make the decision based on the effects.
given time the negitives of drugs will always become small enough that the benifits seem worth while to take that drug again. in other cases like tobacco if you don't continue taking you feel like shit, hence its actually addictive, but still a decision can be made to injure some pain for a reletively short time for long term benifit.
drugs will always be desireable because there effects are usually quickly felt and intense in comparison to the alternative options that can require greater effort for less imediate benifit.
drugs do limit your ablity to choose but once you make the decision to live your life free from 'drugs' your ablity to make decisions increases. drugs are beautiful, they are great teachers, but you are the one who decides what is taught, how can it not be your decision?
Delete
Posted:Frosty, you have show me nothing but hate, even after I extended the olive branch. Frankly man, you just opend the wrong can of worms.
Hey Mike... so you never answerd what your folks would think if their good doctor son ever got busted for pot and kicked out of school. Whats wrong? Did I prove that what you do in the privicy of your own home, to yourself, may not just harm yourself, but may harm others that you love and love you?
Mike, I dont drink illeagly, I did, for about a month, but what you do isnt just slightly illeagle, you get busted enough times you've commited a fellonly. Do you think someone wants a convicted fellon with a drug problem working in their hospital?
You got some balls man, sitting there on your couch tokin it up with how many years of college on the line? What are going to do when you are forced to take a urinalisis? Uhh ohh there goes what 8 years of schooling?
You call me a hipocrite because I feel that if one should be illeagle they all should be, yet I have drank alcohol? Pretty pithy if you ask me. You're practically a doctor for Pete's sake, you are supposed to be the embodyment of good health, yet you smoke! That makes about as much sence as a soup sandwich!
Why dont you tell the good people what doctors do to a patient who has tried to slit their wrists? Here you can just confirm and or correct what I say; after you stop the bleeding and dress the wound, you tie their arms to their bed and ship em off to the psych ward. You attempt to get them the propper psychological help. I know I am not exact but thats the jist of it right?
Now you say, do what you want as long as it only hurts yourself, its okay. Now how in the world do you get that? All the person has done is try to hurt themselves.
Ahhhh I get it, you can try to kill yourself slowly, thats okay, but if you try to kill yourself quickly... then you get tied to a bed!
What is the difference between taking a chemical that, with repeated use, will eventually kill you, and taking a razor to your wrist?
In my eyes I dont see a difference.
Is that being a tyrant, or is that showing that I care for someone who I dont even know?
To be honest, all you are doing is crying like a little child, "Mommy, Ray is being mean, he says that I shouldn't kill myself... waahhh wahhh wahhh"
Sound rediculous?
If you want to take drugs, save yourself the money, just jump of a bridge and get it over with. Quit wasting my time and my money!
Hey Mike... so you never answerd what your folks would think if their good doctor son ever got busted for pot and kicked out of school. Whats wrong? Did I prove that what you do in the privicy of your own home, to yourself, may not just harm yourself, but may harm others that you love and love you?
Mike, I dont drink illeagly, I did, for about a month, but what you do isnt just slightly illeagle, you get busted enough times you've commited a fellonly. Do you think someone wants a convicted fellon with a drug problem working in their hospital?
You got some balls man, sitting there on your couch tokin it up with how many years of college on the line? What are going to do when you are forced to take a urinalisis? Uhh ohh there goes what 8 years of schooling?
You call me a hipocrite because I feel that if one should be illeagle they all should be, yet I have drank alcohol? Pretty pithy if you ask me. You're practically a doctor for Pete's sake, you are supposed to be the embodyment of good health, yet you smoke! That makes about as much sence as a soup sandwich!
Why dont you tell the good people what doctors do to a patient who has tried to slit their wrists? Here you can just confirm and or correct what I say; after you stop the bleeding and dress the wound, you tie their arms to their bed and ship em off to the psych ward. You attempt to get them the propper psychological help. I know I am not exact but thats the jist of it right?
Now you say, do what you want as long as it only hurts yourself, its okay. Now how in the world do you get that? All the person has done is try to hurt themselves.
Ahhhh I get it, you can try to kill yourself slowly, thats okay, but if you try to kill yourself quickly... then you get tied to a bed!
What is the difference between taking a chemical that, with repeated use, will eventually kill you, and taking a razor to your wrist?
In my eyes I dont see a difference.
Is that being a tyrant, or is that showing that I care for someone who I dont even know?
To be honest, all you are doing is crying like a little child, "Mommy, Ray is being mean, he says that I shouldn't kill myself... waahhh wahhh wahhh"
Sound rediculous?
If you want to take drugs, save yourself the money, just jump of a bridge and get it over with. Quit wasting my time and my money!
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
DeleteCharles
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
![Charles]()
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
Posted:Raymund...I feel you are wasting everybody elses time in this thread at the moment.
People respond to your posts, several times, in a pleasant but not nbecesarily sigreeing manner.
Then you start to make anti-social comments that border on direct insults, to anyone who disagrees with your views.
You have even refused to explain your view, and just told people to see it your way.
Of course people get agressive back, but it seems they take a lot more open critiscism than you. In my mind, it seems you almost look for critiscism when it isn't there, in the middle of posts actually discussing the topic at hand.
This thread is VERY close to being the most negative, insult riddled, emarassment on HoP at the moment.
It stops NOW!
Frosty and Raymund. You two seem to be the main protaginists (I know there are others but not in the volume of posts) in this and I'm sorry to have to ask this...but...
Your contributions are making this thread an unpleasant, unwelcoming and unfriendly place to be.
Respectfully, I request you both continue this discussion with each other via email, or Private Message.
I think it's time we let others have their say in a more pleasant environment.
Many thanks, the both of you, and we welcome your contributions on other threads.
People respond to your posts, several times, in a pleasant but not nbecesarily sigreeing manner.
Then you start to make anti-social comments that border on direct insults, to anyone who disagrees with your views.
You have even refused to explain your view, and just told people to see it your way.
Of course people get agressive back, but it seems they take a lot more open critiscism than you. In my mind, it seems you almost look for critiscism when it isn't there, in the middle of posts actually discussing the topic at hand.
This thread is VERY close to being the most negative, insult riddled, emarassment on HoP at the moment.
It stops NOW!
Frosty and Raymund. You two seem to be the main protaginists (I know there are others but not in the volume of posts) in this and I'm sorry to have to ask this...but...
Your contributions are making this thread an unpleasant, unwelcoming and unfriendly place to be.
Respectfully, I request you both continue this discussion with each other via email, or Private Message.
I think it's time we let others have their say in a more pleasant environment.
Many thanks, the both of you, and we welcome your contributions on other threads.
HoP Posting Guidelines
* Is it the Truth?
* Is it Fair to all concerned?
* Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
* Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Posted:Sorry... his posts get me quite worked up! have to stop replying directly at them... or just completely perhaps! heh
I can SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
DeletePosted:Whatever Frosty, I have said what I needed to in PM to Charles, if someone else wants to carry on fine. I'll just give one last bit of advice.
Follow the law and you will do fine, you dont have to agree with it or support it, just follow it.
Follow the law and you will do fine, you dont have to agree with it or support it, just follow it.
Some Jarhead last night: "this dumb a$$ thinks hes fireproof"
Deleteonewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
Posted:A lot of people are saying that addicts have a choice to stop.
So I think we need to investigate ways in which the choices of an addict differ from those of a non addict.
When a free person choices, for example, to visit a friend in two hours time, generally they end up going to see their friend. Things can come up which change it, maybe a family emergency; but on the whole they end up doing what they have chosen.
When an addict chooses not to smoke/take heroin anymore, they frequently end up doing the opposite of what they have chosen.
Admittedly, at the point they break down and reach for the cigarette/needle, they are in a sense choosing to do so; but isn't there a sense in which they are being compelled to do it?
There is within them a battle with part of them wanting to not use it and another part wanting to.
It is perhaps a shame that the word 'choice' applies to all these situations, because I do see a very clear difference in the situation where a person chooses to visit a friend and the situation where a addict reaches for a substance which they despise, simply because they can't take the pain of being without any more.
Maybe we need to think in degrees of choice i.e. for most people choosing to visit a friend is easy to do.
Whereas, and I'm sure that the most ardent supporter of peoples right to take drugs would agree here; some choices are harder to make and stick to, such as when a long term smoker/heroin addict chooses to quit taking their drug.
Harder in the sense that it's going to take a lot of work and committment to succeed in that choice.
So here's a point: -
As supporters of peoples right to choose, isn't there something paradoxical about taking substances which make choices harder?
If you are fully committed to the belief that every human being should be as free as possible to make their own choices, is it possible to condone the use of substances which make it harder for a person to choose freely.
Many of you are fiercely opposed to state oppression and attacks on personal liberty, isn't there a sense in which addictive drugs are an attack on liberty?
To put this consisely, some of you seem to be saying that, even if addictive drugs reduce an individuals ability to choose, that individual still has a right to choose them.
Then what about an analogy where a individual exercises their right to choose to live under a fascist regime i.e. they choose to have their right to choose diminished/taken away.
Let me make clear again that I am not saying drugs are bad/wrong simply raising the issue of how some of the consequences of (addictive) drug taking can affect liberty.
So I think we need to investigate ways in which the choices of an addict differ from those of a non addict.
When a free person choices, for example, to visit a friend in two hours time, generally they end up going to see their friend. Things can come up which change it, maybe a family emergency; but on the whole they end up doing what they have chosen.
When an addict chooses not to smoke/take heroin anymore, they frequently end up doing the opposite of what they have chosen.
Admittedly, at the point they break down and reach for the cigarette/needle, they are in a sense choosing to do so; but isn't there a sense in which they are being compelled to do it?
There is within them a battle with part of them wanting to not use it and another part wanting to.
It is perhaps a shame that the word 'choice' applies to all these situations, because I do see a very clear difference in the situation where a person chooses to visit a friend and the situation where a addict reaches for a substance which they despise, simply because they can't take the pain of being without any more.
Maybe we need to think in degrees of choice i.e. for most people choosing to visit a friend is easy to do.
Whereas, and I'm sure that the most ardent supporter of peoples right to take drugs would agree here; some choices are harder to make and stick to, such as when a long term smoker/heroin addict chooses to quit taking their drug.
Harder in the sense that it's going to take a lot of work and committment to succeed in that choice.
So here's a point: -
As supporters of peoples right to choose, isn't there something paradoxical about taking substances which make choices harder?
If you are fully committed to the belief that every human being should be as free as possible to make their own choices, is it possible to condone the use of substances which make it harder for a person to choose freely.
Many of you are fiercely opposed to state oppression and attacks on personal liberty, isn't there a sense in which addictive drugs are an attack on liberty?
To put this consisely, some of you seem to be saying that, even if addictive drugs reduce an individuals ability to choose, that individual still has a right to choose them.
Then what about an analogy where a individual exercises their right to choose to live under a fascist regime i.e. they choose to have their right to choose diminished/taken away.
Let me make clear again that I am not saying drugs are bad/wrong simply raising the issue of how some of the consequences of (addictive) drug taking can affect liberty.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Posted:this sounds a lot like the suicide law in the UK, you can be jailed for attempted suicide because taking your own life is illegal.
how messed up does that sound? oh yes, we live in democracy where people have the right to freedoms and the basic human right to choose what is best for them but if you decide that life is just not worth living, you cant do anything about it without breaking the law, therefore you are condoned to live under the very democracy that takes those rights away from you.
just a brief glimpse of the workd we live in and the rediculous rules we follow
how messed up does that sound? oh yes, we live in democracy where people have the right to freedoms and the basic human right to choose what is best for them but if you decide that life is just not worth living, you cant do anything about it without breaking the law, therefore you are condoned to live under the very democracy that takes those rights away from you.
just a brief glimpse of the workd we live in and the rediculous rules we follow
whats up with all the limitations?
DeletePosted:quote:Many of you are fiercely opposed to state oppression and attacks on personal liberty, isn't there a sense in which addictive drugs are an attack on liberty?that's an interesting point!
i guess it is... and as you say some people do choose to live under a totalitarian regime
and others choose to live by other laws/rules - the extents to which, for example, jehovas witnesses go to could be called totalitarian
i think people should be free to make those choices though without being punished - all we can really do is educate people in what they're thinking of getting into and let them make a properly informed decision. how many pregnancies at 14/15 would we see if the mothers were truly aware of how much work was ahead and how it would affect their lives? and it follows that how many people would start taking heroin or smoking knowing truly how hard it is to give up...
i'd be tempted to put forwards the theorem that it's education that reduces choice - how can you have fair choice if you don't knwo what you're getting?
i guess it is... and as you say some people do choose to live under a totalitarian regime
and others choose to live by other laws/rules - the extents to which, for example, jehovas witnesses go to could be called totalitarian
i think people should be free to make those choices though without being punished - all we can really do is educate people in what they're thinking of getting into and let them make a properly informed decision. how many pregnancies at 14/15 would we see if the mothers were truly aware of how much work was ahead and how it would affect their lives? and it follows that how many people would start taking heroin or smoking knowing truly how hard it is to give up...
i'd be tempted to put forwards the theorem that it's education that reduces choice - how can you have fair choice if you don't knwo what you're getting?
I can SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
DeletePosted:thats the other thing....drugs should be illegal? what about substances like Salva Divinorum, Datura, Liberty caps, Fly Agairc and Peyote, ALL of these substances are perfectly legal and Datura is one of the most dangerous plants about, even experienced shamans who use the plant regularly hold it in great respect as they know powerfull the effects can have, the dangers of Datura are far more formidable than those of ecstacy for example.
there is a difference between the majority of natural and man-made drugs (apart from the obvious all you smart arses!!)in that the man-made, chemical variety on the whole, seem to be more addictive and usually the effects are felt quicker than their natural counterparts, this can help indicate how violently they ravage our systems.
all of the above-mentioned legal drugs are hallucinogens of sorts, this makes me wonder why cannabis is illegal as it can be classed as a mild halucinogen (although some cross-strains would have you think otherwise) so why for the last 40 odd years has one of the softest, most palletable and enjoyable drugs on the market can be so harshly victimised?
all of this bullshit about cannabis being a "gateway" drug is laughable propoganda being spouted by the government and now its become a new catchphrase for parents worried about the possible drug use at their childrens' schools, cannabis is no more a "gateway" drug than tobacco or alcohol, the alcoholism level in this country is absurd and its one of the major contributing factors to the trouble with some of our football fans, they think they need to be so near to unconsiousness to enjoy themselves that violence has become part of the enjoyment, if thats not a "gateway" drug then what is? how many stoners do you see shouting, throwing stuff about and starting fights? hardly any
remember, im not saying that any of these drugs aren't harmless to you, too much of anything can kill us but if you think that even eating your breakfast is contributing to the decay of your body then innocent things like a bowl of shreddies (although they are made by evil evil nestle) take on a different light.
[ 08. September 2003, 04:59: Message edited by: Kurobei ]
there is a difference between the majority of natural and man-made drugs (apart from the obvious all you smart arses!!)in that the man-made, chemical variety on the whole, seem to be more addictive and usually the effects are felt quicker than their natural counterparts, this can help indicate how violently they ravage our systems.
all of the above-mentioned legal drugs are hallucinogens of sorts, this makes me wonder why cannabis is illegal as it can be classed as a mild halucinogen (although some cross-strains would have you think otherwise) so why for the last 40 odd years has one of the softest, most palletable and enjoyable drugs on the market can be so harshly victimised?
all of this bullshit about cannabis being a "gateway" drug is laughable propoganda being spouted by the government and now its become a new catchphrase for parents worried about the possible drug use at their childrens' schools, cannabis is no more a "gateway" drug than tobacco or alcohol, the alcoholism level in this country is absurd and its one of the major contributing factors to the trouble with some of our football fans, they think they need to be so near to unconsiousness to enjoy themselves that violence has become part of the enjoyment, if thats not a "gateway" drug then what is? how many stoners do you see shouting, throwing stuff about and starting fights? hardly any
remember, im not saying that any of these drugs aren't harmless to you, too much of anything can kill us but if you think that even eating your breakfast is contributing to the decay of your body then innocent things like a bowl of shreddies (although they are made by evil evil nestle) take on a different light.
[ 08. September 2003, 04:59: Message edited by: Kurobei ]
whats up with all the limitations?
Deleteonewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
Posted:Kurobei- you're off topic. This isn't a thread about whether or not drugs should be legal, or whether or not drugs are bad.
It's about a specific issue relating to drugs and choice. I've recently reposted the initial post to clarify this.
Whilst the points you raise are of value they would be better on a new thread maybe entitled 'drugs and the law'?
If you look at the progress of this thread it will be obvious that people have very strong views on the pros/cons of drugs and this has at various points led to aggression and unpleasantness.
If we keep on topic the chances of this happening again will be minimised.
It's about a specific issue relating to drugs and choice. I've recently reposted the initial post to clarify this.
Whilst the points you raise are of value they would be better on a new thread maybe entitled 'drugs and the law'?
If you look at the progress of this thread it will be obvious that people have very strong views on the pros/cons of drugs and this has at various points led to aggression and unpleasantness.
If we keep on topic the chances of this happening again will be minimised.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Posted:is liberty the freedom of choice? all things effect or have an influence on choices. drugs being an obivous one. other things such as relationships with people and places effect your liberty as well, prepahs in more powerful ways than drugs do. and that could be the reason for taking the choice limiter in the first place, because most young people feel they have no choices. escape to the happy place, escape to the happy place.
the education people need is to visit communities and peoples whose beliefs are different. drug takers/pushers and the many other types of communities and cultures. a perspective over time, say as children from 15 to 20 even older, prepahs much older for some. the community presective is important because as an individuals we will see the lifestyles which seem to be more joy promoting then we can follow the path we deem best.
overseas exchange programs at high school usually result in people that are much better at making choice promoting decision as opposed to choice ristricting ones.
the education people need is to visit communities and peoples whose beliefs are different. drug takers/pushers and the many other types of communities and cultures. a perspective over time, say as children from 15 to 20 even older, prepahs much older for some. the community presective is important because as an individuals we will see the lifestyles which seem to be more joy promoting then we can follow the path we deem best.
overseas exchange programs at high school usually result in people that are much better at making choice promoting decision as opposed to choice ristricting ones.
Delete
Charles
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
![Charles]()
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
Posted:I think Liberty is the opportunity to choose freedom of choice.
It's an ideal, not an actual state that truly exists anywhere in the world.
There are so many events both within and outside our control that limit our ability to choose.
Drugs are one of those grey/gray areas where the initial choice is up to the individual (one would hope at least) but there is a high chance that after that choice has been made, the ability to choose 'no' becomes impaired.
This is a simple fact of life, some choices take us closer to liberty and some take us further away.
Some of these choices are made by us, some are made by others and some are environmental (including problems of the flesh).
No-one can truly know the full extent of their choice until after the fact, although i feel drugs are one of those areas where we have a good chance of understanding what might happen if we are educated properly.
Does that answer anything or does it provoke more questions?
It's an ideal, not an actual state that truly exists anywhere in the world.
There are so many events both within and outside our control that limit our ability to choose.
Drugs are one of those grey/gray areas where the initial choice is up to the individual (one would hope at least) but there is a high chance that after that choice has been made, the ability to choose 'no' becomes impaired.
This is a simple fact of life, some choices take us closer to liberty and some take us further away.
Some of these choices are made by us, some are made by others and some are environmental (including problems of the flesh).
No-one can truly know the full extent of their choice until after the fact, although i feel drugs are one of those areas where we have a good chance of understanding what might happen if we are educated properly.
Does that answer anything or does it provoke more questions?
HoP Posting Guidelines
* Is it the Truth?
* Is it Fair to all concerned?
* Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
* Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Posted:Hmmm... interesting charles. I will agree with the impairment of the "no" option, but I rely more on the social reasons for this. For instance, if you've been smoking for an extended amount of time, most of the people you are around probably still do while you may want to quit. This most assuradly makes quitting much, much harder as you are not only giving up something you like, addicting or not, and still trying to exist in the same environment. A complete change in attitude both internal AND external can have far easier effects, which is why rehab clinics work great, but when they get out, they go right back: same environment.
Now with the education aspect, I think this is a little off. If kids were told about the actual biological danger they are in taking this or that drug, instead of having "Just say no" shoved down their throat, I think they would have a much better understanding to make their choice. But what if some of the info we are told is vastly exagerated, and telling the "truth" would make more people willing to experiment? This is undoubtedly true in the case of pot, as most people would realize that it is less dangerous than alcohol. None the less, I think that an adequate education would also help those who aren't going to partake to know the real reasons WHY they have made that decission. After all, it is THEIR choice, and I don't know about everyone else, but I tend to want as much information as possible about my life choices prior to making them.
Also, I am of the mentality that I will try anything once. Excluding certain kinds of perversion and, yes, even some kinds of drugs. I like to know where people are coming from.
Now with the education aspect, I think this is a little off. If kids were told about the actual biological danger they are in taking this or that drug, instead of having "Just say no" shoved down their throat, I think they would have a much better understanding to make their choice. But what if some of the info we are told is vastly exagerated, and telling the "truth" would make more people willing to experiment? This is undoubtedly true in the case of pot, as most people would realize that it is less dangerous than alcohol. None the less, I think that an adequate education would also help those who aren't going to partake to know the real reasons WHY they have made that decission. After all, it is THEIR choice, and I don't know about everyone else, but I tend to want as much information as possible about my life choices prior to making them.
Also, I am of the mentality that I will try anything once. Excluding certain kinds of perversion and, yes, even some kinds of drugs. I like to know where people are coming from.
Delete
Charles
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
![Charles]()
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
BRONZE Member since Jun 2001
Corporate Circus Arts Entertainer
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Total posts: 3989
Posted:Also interesting, I8Beefy, is why you said quote: but I rely more on the social reasons for this. I'm not sure where it says in my post that I am talking chemical reasons for the "no" choice to becme impaired... There was no actual reason given at all.
The same goes for education. I'm not just talking goverment education such as schools and social programmes. I'm talking about general exposure from every source possible. Life education, if you will (which includes schools).
The same goes for education. I'm not just talking goverment education such as schools and social programmes. I'm talking about general exposure from every source possible. Life education, if you will (which includes schools).
HoP Posting Guidelines
* Is it the Truth?
* Is it Fair to all concerned?
* Will it build Goodwill and Better Friendships?
* Will it be Beneficial to all concerned?
Posted:quote:But what if some of the info we are told is vastly exagerated, and telling the "truth" would make more people willing to experiment?i think this is a big part of the problem - the horror stories the anti-lobby rolls out even with the soft drugs are so extreme that it's hard for anyone wondering whether they want to experiment to believe - so they try for themselves, and don't believe the horror stories about the harder drugs too
more mis-informed choices
certainly rather glad there are films like Requiem for a Dream which really does throw 'why not to even try heroin' into start daylight, trainspotting only made it seem kinda bad. despite that being an 18 rated film here and an unrated release in the states i think every kid should have to see that film as after that there is NO WAY anyone would start injecting anything
more mis-informed choices
certainly rather glad there are films like Requiem for a Dream which really does throw 'why not to even try heroin' into start daylight, trainspotting only made it seem kinda bad. despite that being an 18 rated film here and an unrated release in the states i think every kid should have to see that film as after that there is NO WAY anyone would start injecting anything
I can SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
DeletePosted:There have been lots of really interesting opinions and viewpoints posted in this thread and I just wanted to post mine, while trying not to go too off topic.
Basically what I think is that it is all a matter of potential. Drugs have the potential to be addictive. People have the potential to become addicted to things. When these two variables intersect, the ability to choose is at least greatly impaired, if not lost. To try to blanket statement all these things only serves to attack people. Either drug users will be attacked as addicts that won't admit their addiction or addicts are attacked as being weak-willed, or something else. This like everything else in life is not that simple.
I spent almost two years working with addicts and can say that they are some of the strongest, brightest people I know and some of them are still using. I would NEVER say that they suffer from a lack of will, just as I would never say that the people I have known that are no longer actively participating in their addictions necessarily have a strong will. It takes all kinds and sometimes stopping drug use is a matter of luck and timing. Having said that, I just want to ask people to really think about what they are saying. As I said before, when they make big balnket statements like, "its just a matter of will" or something like that, I feel like they are attacking some of the most beautiful, strongest, most humane people I have had the pleasure of knowing. Hope I answered some of something somewhere in there.
Basically what I think is that it is all a matter of potential. Drugs have the potential to be addictive. People have the potential to become addicted to things. When these two variables intersect, the ability to choose is at least greatly impaired, if not lost. To try to blanket statement all these things only serves to attack people. Either drug users will be attacked as addicts that won't admit their addiction or addicts are attacked as being weak-willed, or something else. This like everything else in life is not that simple.
I spent almost two years working with addicts and can say that they are some of the strongest, brightest people I know and some of them are still using. I would NEVER say that they suffer from a lack of will, just as I would never say that the people I have known that are no longer actively participating in their addictions necessarily have a strong will. It takes all kinds and sometimes stopping drug use is a matter of luck and timing. Having said that, I just want to ask people to really think about what they are saying. As I said before, when they make big balnket statements like, "its just a matter of will" or something like that, I feel like they are attacking some of the most beautiful, strongest, most humane people I have had the pleasure of knowing. Hope I answered some of something somewhere in there.
Beauty is the conscious sum of all our perversions.-Salvador DaliHope without action is hopeless.
Deleteonewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
Posted:I agree fully with you on the falsity of the 'it's a matter of will' thing.
It's a widespread myth that addiction can be overcome by will, and that addicts lack willpower.
The factors that lead to some people becoming addicted are far more subtle.
The belief that addicts are weak willed, stupid etc is not only untrue but harmful because it disguises the fact that anyone can become addicted.
I've mentioned Allen Carr's book, the 'Easy Way to Give up Smoking' on other threads, and would recommend anyone who wants to get a different perspective on addiction, and it's relationship to will, to read it.
Allen Carr is an example of a man in control of every other aspect of his life, and a strong willed individual, who found himself smoking 120 cigarettes a day, and unable to stop.
He found that understanding the nature of his addiction was far more powerful than willpower.
It's a widespread myth that addiction can be overcome by will, and that addicts lack willpower.
The factors that lead to some people becoming addicted are far more subtle.
The belief that addicts are weak willed, stupid etc is not only untrue but harmful because it disguises the fact that anyone can become addicted.
I've mentioned Allen Carr's book, the 'Easy Way to Give up Smoking' on other threads, and would recommend anyone who wants to get a different perspective on addiction, and it's relationship to will, to read it.
Allen Carr is an example of a man in control of every other aspect of his life, and a strong willed individual, who found himself smoking 120 cigarettes a day, and unable to stop.
He found that understanding the nature of his addiction was far more powerful than willpower.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Posted:This thread is seems more about people standing on soap boxes postulating personal opinions which comes across as "few facts in a sea of speculation".
quote:Salva Divinorum, Datura, Liberty caps, Fly Agairc and Peyote, ALL of these substances are perfectly legal and Datura is one of the most dangerous plants about, even,Not in my country, theyre not. Ditto on datura; very bad.
Yeah, and btw btw most modern products/drugs were originally plant compounds, even the semi-synthetics are plant based, hey
quote:Salva Divinorum, Datura, Liberty caps, Fly Agairc and Peyote, ALL of these substances are perfectly legal and Datura is one of the most dangerous plants about, even,Not in my country, theyre not. Ditto on datura; very bad.
Yeah, and btw btw most modern products/drugs were originally plant compounds, even the semi-synthetics are plant based, hey
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:how was mr carr able to control the rest of his life? i'm guessing will is similar to desire. i don't think people who are unable to give up smoking are weak willed or lack desire to give up there addiction. i would say they are unwilling or unable to define/know the reason/cause of there need to be addicted. of course it isn't simple and it takes a great deal of effort and surpport to find these answers. but at some point a decision is made and that decision is made to stop continuing the addictive behavour.
the argument or suggestion that people are able to live normal lifes or even very productive lives misses the point. each of us comes to this world with given ablities, drugs of any kind impair ones ablities to some degree. one should compare themselves to themselves not some norm that is used conveintly to justified their impairing behavours.
the argument or suggestion that people are able to live normal lifes or even very productive lives misses the point. each of us comes to this world with given ablities, drugs of any kind impair ones ablities to some degree. one should compare themselves to themselves not some norm that is used conveintly to justified their impairing behavours.
Delete
onewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
Posted:quote:Originally posted by Itsgottab:
how was mr carr able to control the rest of his life? i'm guessing will is similar to desire. My understanding of it is that on the continuum, from desire, to will; desire lies on the end of the scale where we have little control; will is towards the end where we do have control.
So our desires arise from the subconscious and we can't choose what they are, we can't choose, for example, to feel desire for a food we dislike.
Will is an application of our rational mind to achieve something which may be the opposite of our desire.
So an addict will desire the substance he/she is addicted to and will have to employ will to combat it.
However, I would say that will in this sense is not the 'willpower' that many believe addicts to lack.
Willpower is an unrefined aspect of will consisting of just deciding to do (or not do) something and then using sheer discipline.
This can work, but the addict may then spend the rest of their lives constantly fighting the desire for the substance.
A more intelligent approach is to understand as fully as possible the cause/origin of the desire and then develop effective ways (using the will) to stop it arising.
So, where cigarettes are concerned for example; it may mean dismantling some of the habitual ideas that you subconsciously associate with nicotine.
Many people believe that cigarettes relax them, this means that when tense a desire for a smoke will arise. If they come to fully understand that a cigarette merely sedates the stress caused by the nicotine from the previous cigarette leaving the body, then the desire will be weakened.(i.e. the stress is actually caused by the smoking)
Obviously it will take more than this, but many addictive desires are supported by such beliefs, and each belief that is removed weakens that desire.
Relating this to the issue of choice, we get a picture where we see that much of what we call 'choice' is in fact the bubblings of our subconscious.
This is not generally a bad thing, but when those bubblings lead us to do things that are destructive we need to think about using our will to change the set of desires that are habitually ours.
how was mr carr able to control the rest of his life? i'm guessing will is similar to desire. My understanding of it is that on the continuum, from desire, to will; desire lies on the end of the scale where we have little control; will is towards the end where we do have control.
So our desires arise from the subconscious and we can't choose what they are, we can't choose, for example, to feel desire for a food we dislike.
Will is an application of our rational mind to achieve something which may be the opposite of our desire.
So an addict will desire the substance he/she is addicted to and will have to employ will to combat it.
However, I would say that will in this sense is not the 'willpower' that many believe addicts to lack.
Willpower is an unrefined aspect of will consisting of just deciding to do (or not do) something and then using sheer discipline.
This can work, but the addict may then spend the rest of their lives constantly fighting the desire for the substance.
A more intelligent approach is to understand as fully as possible the cause/origin of the desire and then develop effective ways (using the will) to stop it arising.
So, where cigarettes are concerned for example; it may mean dismantling some of the habitual ideas that you subconsciously associate with nicotine.
Many people believe that cigarettes relax them, this means that when tense a desire for a smoke will arise. If they come to fully understand that a cigarette merely sedates the stress caused by the nicotine from the previous cigarette leaving the body, then the desire will be weakened.(i.e. the stress is actually caused by the smoking)
Obviously it will take more than this, but many addictive desires are supported by such beliefs, and each belief that is removed weakens that desire.
Relating this to the issue of choice, we get a picture where we see that much of what we call 'choice' is in fact the bubblings of our subconscious.
This is not generally a bad thing, but when those bubblings lead us to do things that are destructive we need to think about using our will to change the set of desires that are habitually ours.
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Posted:i am using the word desire in the sense that i desire that lady over their, thats conscious as far as i can tell. i don't accept the freuds concept of our being, if thats what your're referring to?
so the desire to go outside for example incorprates some sort of feeling, rather than a running through of the pro and cons of going outside(rationality), or is feeling just ultra quick rational thinking.
everything we do is a choice, of course there are influences, but that is the reason for their being a choice, if their were no influences their would be no choices. because we don't cover all possible influences before we make decisions and almost definitly change those influences considered without making the decision to do so(we aren't rational beings, we are superior to rationality we have degres of intuition) we are making decisions free from fate and the limits of choice, confused?.
it has been well established that education alone doesn't make a sginificant difference in behavour modification. i learnt this from both university and an alcohal and drug info line course a few years back now.
the models i was taught involved a cycle and the individual knowing their cycle. by being given alternatives at given points on their cycle of addiction say, the addictive action could be broken. but the deeper cause of the cycle is not addressed.
so the desire to go outside for example incorprates some sort of feeling, rather than a running through of the pro and cons of going outside(rationality), or is feeling just ultra quick rational thinking.
everything we do is a choice, of course there are influences, but that is the reason for their being a choice, if their were no influences their would be no choices. because we don't cover all possible influences before we make decisions and almost definitly change those influences considered without making the decision to do so(we aren't rational beings, we are superior to rationality we have degres of intuition) we are making decisions free from fate and the limits of choice, confused?.
it has been well established that education alone doesn't make a sginificant difference in behavour modification. i learnt this from both university and an alcohal and drug info line course a few years back now.
the models i was taught involved a cycle and the individual knowing their cycle. by being given alternatives at given points on their cycle of addiction say, the addictive action could be broken. but the deeper cause of the cycle is not addressed.
Delete
Posted:Well that's all fine and dandy, all this "desire" and "will-power" stuff, but it seems a bit like text book speculation to me.
What about gym-junkies that become addicted to the continued production of endorphins by their own bodies? Also, are not some addictions cause by the low natural production of certain chemicals, and people compensates for this low natural production by using or doing something that elevates the levels of these chemicals in the body. Like the SSRI (prozac type) anti-depressants elevate the level of seratonin in the brain, presumable to supplement a low natural production. And are not "thrill-seekers" driven because their body only produces low levels of dopermine? And wot about people who self-medicate with weed to try and cure more serious problems? Perhaps, just perhaps some addictions are organic in nature. I mean how popular is Prozac and other ssri happy pills"??????????
What about gym-junkies that become addicted to the continued production of endorphins by their own bodies? Also, are not some addictions cause by the low natural production of certain chemicals, and people compensates for this low natural production by using or doing something that elevates the levels of these chemicals in the body. Like the SSRI (prozac type) anti-depressants elevate the level of seratonin in the brain, presumable to supplement a low natural production. And are not "thrill-seekers" driven because their body only produces low levels of dopermine? And wot about people who self-medicate with weed to try and cure more serious problems? Perhaps, just perhaps some addictions are organic in nature. I mean how popular is Prozac and other ssri happy pills"??????????
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:as for the gym junkies, if they are addicted the same applies to them as any addicted person, is it healthy?we are whole human beings, if one activity dominates to the detremete of the whole being, it results in problems for the sufferer their associates and everyone else, although the degree of course reduces the futher you go from the source. they are also in a position where their ablity to choose is impaired by the addiction all be it chemical to excersie
interesting point about those suffering from body chemical states, are they addicts though? or are you suggesting we are all on a continunum, and that some people have reduced ablity to make decisions because of body chemistry? prehaps. it sounds like an excuse someone might make for not wanting to change, or start making constructive choices in their lives, not suggesting thats you.
interesting point about those suffering from body chemical states, are they addicts though? or are you suggesting we are all on a continunum, and that some people have reduced ablity to make decisions because of body chemistry? prehaps. it sounds like an excuse someone might make for not wanting to change, or start making constructive choices in their lives, not suggesting thats you.
Delete
Posted:Wot I meant was perhaps there is a “genetic predisposition” for some addictions. Like, alcoholism runs in some families for example. And what about the addiction to "greed" and that new wide-screen telly?
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:i don't beleive so, alcholism is a dsyfunction of the mind. it involves thought processes. genitics effect your ablity to learn but it would seem its a stretch to say they can effect the in which the mind functions. the alchol doesn't make the alcholic, its the minds use of it to regulate the mind itself. expressed best it 'whats your poison'
there isn't much balance in this world we live in, espeacialy in peoples veiw of themselves and their material wellbeing. the state of mental anxiety that exist amongst us makes people behave in addictive ways. we like to be where we are valued, things are fimilar and we are in control, that makes us naturally attracted to places and people who give us these feelings. so we feel controlled by the world and so essentially out of control. i am sorry but god must step in here. God being the creative force behind the existence of all things, or whatever you understand god to be. if one seeks peace and turth from god(god resides within us) peace and turth will be given, then the world has no power over you and hence addiction is no more and life turns into something mysteriously wonderful.
there isn't much balance in this world we live in, espeacialy in peoples veiw of themselves and their material wellbeing. the state of mental anxiety that exist amongst us makes people behave in addictive ways. we like to be where we are valued, things are fimilar and we are in control, that makes us naturally attracted to places and people who give us these feelings. so we feel controlled by the world and so essentially out of control. i am sorry but god must step in here. God being the creative force behind the existence of all things, or whatever you understand god to be. if one seeks peace and turth from god(god resides within us) peace and turth will be given, then the world has no power over you and hence addiction is no more and life turns into something mysteriously wonderful.
Delete
Posted:ARGH! Not god... remember that works for you and what you believe - but to other people it's just nonsense. Besides, it'll turn this into a huge row about the religious aspects of drug use - though i thought giving us all the plants of the earth to use was quite clear
quote:or are you suggesting we are all on a continunum, and that some people have reduced ablity to make decisions because of body chemistry?No - definately not true - they do not have reduced ability to choose, but instead different needs
Their body needs different things to yours and it will get them, their ability to choose is not a factor
that would be like suggesting we're all addicted to food because our bodies need it. some people need insulin injections - and i mean NEED or will die - it's not an addiction, it's just the drug their bodies need.
To say they are in some way mentally diminished by this might be a tad harsh
quote:or are you suggesting we are all on a continunum, and that some people have reduced ablity to make decisions because of body chemistry?No - definately not true - they do not have reduced ability to choose, but instead different needs
Their body needs different things to yours and it will get them, their ability to choose is not a factor
that would be like suggesting we're all addicted to food because our bodies need it. some people need insulin injections - and i mean NEED or will die - it's not an addiction, it's just the drug their bodies need.
To say they are in some way mentally diminished by this might be a tad harsh
I can SEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
DeletePosted:as a young man frostypaw you have yet to accept your limitations and that with god there are no limits. but lets not go there.
Delete
Posted:I wish I had time to read this whole thread in detail, so forgive me if I'm repeating or anything.
I've tried a lot of different substances, some legal and some not, in the past. I've enjoyed many, if not most, of them. I am a fully functioning, sociable, happy and well adjusted human being with a job, a family, good friends, and I'm enjoying life to it's fullest. In fact, I firmly believe without some of the experiences I've had on certain substances I wouldn't appreciate the world anywhere near as much as I do now.
Human beings have always had a desire - nay, a need - to get wasted, for as far back as records go. It's a natural function for people to try and push mental and physical boundaries back in the search for knowledge/enlightenment/whatever, or indeed just to alter one's state of mind on a temporary basis, even if only for FUN!
To my mind, any mechanism which tries to prevent that is only interested in preventing people asking questions and, for want of a better word, controlling the masses.
For those who would question that assertion, please remember that prior to 1900 practically ALL of the naturally occurring substances which are now controlled as Class A, Schedule 1 or whatever were legal and used throughout the echelons of society.
If you're interested in the subject and willing to look at a different perspective on the subject of intoxication of all kinds, you should grab a copy of a book called "Out of It" by Stuart Walton - it's a really interesting read and fleshes out the argument I've touched on above really well.
I'd love for someone who currently believes "drugs are bad" to read this book and then come back to me with the same belief afterwards. I've only met people who already agree with me who have read it so far, I'm intrigued by what someone who has been (imho) brainwashed by the state on the issues would think.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/
0241140382/qid=1063029670/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/202-5374291-9122229
Hopefully I can come back and read more of this thread properly later. All I can say at the moment is that I believe in personal responsibility, and that if I wish to ingest something into my body, whatever it is, that should be my choice, not a Government's.
Ali xx
(EDIT - take out the spaces between ASIN/ and 024 to get the link, it was making the page too wide, sorry!!)
I've tried a lot of different substances, some legal and some not, in the past. I've enjoyed many, if not most, of them. I am a fully functioning, sociable, happy and well adjusted human being with a job, a family, good friends, and I'm enjoying life to it's fullest. In fact, I firmly believe without some of the experiences I've had on certain substances I wouldn't appreciate the world anywhere near as much as I do now.
Human beings have always had a desire - nay, a need - to get wasted, for as far back as records go. It's a natural function for people to try and push mental and physical boundaries back in the search for knowledge/enlightenment/whatever, or indeed just to alter one's state of mind on a temporary basis, even if only for FUN!
To my mind, any mechanism which tries to prevent that is only interested in preventing people asking questions and, for want of a better word, controlling the masses.
For those who would question that assertion, please remember that prior to 1900 practically ALL of the naturally occurring substances which are now controlled as Class A, Schedule 1 or whatever were legal and used throughout the echelons of society.
If you're interested in the subject and willing to look at a different perspective on the subject of intoxication of all kinds, you should grab a copy of a book called "Out of It" by Stuart Walton - it's a really interesting read and fleshes out the argument I've touched on above really well.
I'd love for someone who currently believes "drugs are bad" to read this book and then come back to me with the same belief afterwards. I've only met people who already agree with me who have read it so far, I'm intrigued by what someone who has been (imho) brainwashed by the state on the issues would think.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/
0241140382/qid=1063029670/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/202-5374291-9122229
Hopefully I can come back and read more of this thread properly later. All I can say at the moment is that I believe in personal responsibility, and that if I wish to ingest something into my body, whatever it is, that should be my choice, not a Government's.
Ali xx
(EDIT - take out the spaces between ASIN/ and 024 to get the link, it was making the page too wide, sorry!!)
Why is it that everthing which is fun is illegal, immoral, or fattening?
Deleteonewheeldave
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
GOLD Member since Aug 2002
Carpal \'Tunnel
Location: sheffield, United Kingdom
Total posts: 3252
Posted:Just another quick reminder that we're trying to keep this thread on topic i.e. not posting the pros and cons of drugs but sticking to the issue of choice.
Neither is it about whether drugs should be legal or not.
All these things are interesting, but, as we've already seen they result in going off topic and it would be better to discuss then on a new thread.
Ali-Bird, it sounds like you've got an interesting perspective, and the book sounds intriguing; maybe you could relate some of what it says to the issue of choice?
As we're on a new page I've cut and pasted the intial post below: -
quote:Originally posted by onewheeldave:
In another thread about drug free spinning a few people said that taking drugs or not was a matter of personal choice.
I feel a little uneasy about applying that phrase to drugs as they tend to be addictive or habit forming substances.
i.e. they effectivly diminish or remove the ability to make choices. for example, someone who has never smoked can choose whether or not to light and smoke a cigarette, but someone who has a thirty a day habit and is severely addicted to nicotine no longer has that choice.
There are millions of smokers in the world who find it impossible to kick their habit, effectivley they have lost their ability to choose.
Whilst some drugs are considered non addictive, due to peer pressure and the pro drug marketing that is rife in our culture, choice is effectivly reduced.
I know that people shouldn't be influenced by such things, but humans are extremely suseptible to this- there wouldn't, for example, be so many drinks promotions if promotions didn't work.
The sad thing is that the young are most suseptible to this pro drug propaganda.
I was wondering what those of you who believe that taking drugs is a matter of personal choice, thought about this?
[ 11. September 2003, 00:53: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
Neither is it about whether drugs should be legal or not.
All these things are interesting, but, as we've already seen they result in going off topic and it would be better to discuss then on a new thread.
Ali-Bird, it sounds like you've got an interesting perspective, and the book sounds intriguing; maybe you could relate some of what it says to the issue of choice?
As we're on a new page I've cut and pasted the intial post below: -
quote:Originally posted by onewheeldave:
In another thread about drug free spinning a few people said that taking drugs or not was a matter of personal choice.
I feel a little uneasy about applying that phrase to drugs as they tend to be addictive or habit forming substances.
i.e. they effectivly diminish or remove the ability to make choices. for example, someone who has never smoked can choose whether or not to light and smoke a cigarette, but someone who has a thirty a day habit and is severely addicted to nicotine no longer has that choice.
There are millions of smokers in the world who find it impossible to kick their habit, effectivley they have lost their ability to choose.
Whilst some drugs are considered non addictive, due to peer pressure and the pro drug marketing that is rife in our culture, choice is effectivly reduced.
I know that people shouldn't be influenced by such things, but humans are extremely suseptible to this- there wouldn't, for example, be so many drinks promotions if promotions didn't work.
The sad thing is that the young are most suseptible to this pro drug propaganda.
I was wondering what those of you who believe that taking drugs is a matter of personal choice, thought about this?
[ 11. September 2003, 00:53: Message edited by: onewheeldave ]
"You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it."
--MAJOR KORGO KORGAR,
"Last of The Lancers"
AFC 32
Educate your self in the Hazards of Fire Breathing STAY SAFE!
Similar Topics
Using the keywords [drug* choice] we found the following similar topics.1. Learn > Looking after you > Online and Social Safety > Staying safe while clubbing *help/resource
2. Forums > Drugs and choice [126 replies]
3. Forums > California, is druggy druggy druggy druggy... [14 replies]
4. Forums > Drug Free Spinning. [101 replies]
5. Forums > The Drug Topic!! [126 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2018 Home of Poi Ltd,
New Zealand unless otherwise stated.
All rights reserved
*All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com.