My State Legalized Weed

Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

Abusing anything is bad. The government should only regulate things that make a big negative impact on society on a whole, like alcohol, weed, smoking, fast food, etc.

What really bothers me isn't the fact that you are against a ban because of freedom of choice, but because you believe marijuana is harmless. Hell, I even heard Jill Stein say it was COMPLETELY harmless in a presidential debate.

Ra's al Ghul wrote:Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

I asked that too before and got no answer.

Ra's al Ghul wrote:Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

War on drugs?

Carlos Jenkinson wrote:Infact Ahly, chocolate is more likely to kill you and raise health concerns, you don't see an article on that shit and why it should be banned if you have a high usage of chocolate

Maybe because you don't get stoned, lose motor ability, and have impaired memory from taking chocolate. Oh, there is also the fact that chocolate isn't SMOKED.

Zzonked wrote:

Ra's al Ghul wrote:Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

War on drugs?

Yes, but why would they initiate a war on something that's apparently not harmful at all?

Edit: typo

Ra's al Ghul wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

Ra's al Ghul wrote:Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

War on drugs?

Yes, but why would they initiate a war on something that's apparently not harmful at all?

Edit: typo

Stigma combined with harmfulness probably does it, for example if alcohol or smoking came with the same stigma I'm sure the government would have a war on them. That's not to say it's deeply harmful though, but there are undoubtedly aspects that cause harm in excess.

Zzonked wrote:

Ra's al Ghul wrote:

Yes, but why would they initiate a war on something that's apparently not harmful at all?

Edit: typo

Stigma combined with harmfulness probably does it, for example if alcohol or smoking came with the same stigma I'm sure the government would have a war on them.

With gay marriage though, that's a matter of religion and social issues.

When the government fights against marijuana, it doesn't base its argument on religion.

ahlycotc wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

Ra's al Ghul wrote:

Yes, but why would they initiate a war on something that's apparently not harmful at all?

Edit: typo

Stigma combined with harmfulness probably does it, for example if alcohol or smoking came with the same stigma I'm sure the government would have a war on them.

With gay marriage though, that's a matter of religion and social issues.

When the government fights against marijuana, it doesn't base its argument on religion.

No but I would say the argument is fueled by morality rather than medical evidence.

The morality aspect of the argument is very much rooted in medical evidence.

Glen Damon wrote:The morality aspect of the argument is very much rooted in medical evidence.

Disagree. It's rooted in social stigma. People who eat McDonald's weekly put themselves at more risk than casual pot smokers.

ahlycotc wrote:

Zzonked wrote:

Stigma combined with harmfulness probably does it, for example if alcohol or smoking came with the same stigma I'm sure the government would have a war on them.

With gay marriage though, that's a matter of religion and social issues.

When the government fights against marijuana, it doesn't base its argument on religion.

What are yours based on when it comes to pot?

Medical research.

ahlycotc wrote:

Carlos Jenkinson wrote:Infact Ahly, chocolate is more likely to kill you and raise health concerns, you don't see an article on that shit and why it should be banned if you have a high usage of chocolate

Maybe because you don't get stoned, lose motor ability, and have impaired memory from taking chocolate. Oh, there is also the fact that chocolate isn't SMOKED.

That means fuck all, you don't even know what you're saying. You just disregard practically everything whilst being pedantic to suit your own interests like that article

Nothing about obesity, nothing about tooth decay, nothing about diabetes etc etc

Also what's wrong with it being smoked, it's much safer than anything carbonated

Ra's al Ghul wrote:Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

They're afraid of being wrong and legalising something that has a big support. Imagine the uproar the House of Lords would have if a bunch of middle aged men were suggested that a "Evil Marijuana" bill was passed. It's propaganda like this that gives people who have little knowledge on the subject the opinion that weed is evil.

Shit like it's a gateway drug is what's fed, but keep Alcohol it's fucking stupid

Carlos Jenkinson wrote:

Ra's al Ghul wrote:Why is it in the best interest of the government to spread negative propaganda about marijuana?

They're afraid of being wrong and legalising something that has a big support. Imagine the uproar the House of Lords would have if a bunch of middle aged men were suggested that a "Evil Marijuana" bill was passed. It's propaganda like this that gives people who have little knowledge on the subject the opinion that weed is evil.

Shit like it's a gateway drug is what's fed, but keep Alcohol it's fucking stupid

I'm not against weed being legalized. I'm against the reasons for it to be legal. (alcohol is worse hurr durr)

No one has ever given any real medical research saying it is harmless even if i've heard that a million times.

The fact that propaganda has made people believe that it is harmless is disgusting.

Childish Logic wrote:The fact that propaganda has made people believe that it is harmless is disgusting.

People don't think that way though. Look at the discussion in this thread.


The real issue here is the irrational bias that this topic gets compared to a million other things that are equally, or more dangerous, yet are allowed on the basis of free choice. Gambling, pornography, cigarettes, fast food, alcohol, skydiving, prostitution... the list goes on and on of things that are equally, or more dangerous for your health, or which have the potential to really fuck your shit up if it goes wrong or becomes a problem, yet they are allowed, and something like pot is not.

The social stigma that this drug gets is completely irrational.

Carlos Jenkinson wrote:

ahlycotc wrote:

Maybe because you don't get stoned, lose motor ability, and have impaired memory from taking chocolate. Oh, there is also the fact that chocolate isn't SMOKED.

That means fuck all, you don't even know what you're saying. You just disregard practically everything whilst being pedantic to suit your own interests like that article

Nothing about obesity, nothing about tooth decay, nothing about diabetes etc etc

Also what's wrong with it being smoked, it's much safer than anything carbonated

You are obviously living in a cave. Fast food and other unhealthy foods are being discussed in politics and have even been banned in some schools or taxed heavily in some states. The reason those things aren't being more regulated or outright banned is because the corporations that make these products lobby and have strong marketing.

Smoking weed is in not safer than drinking carbonated drinks. Show me a medical study that proves otherwise.

@bye_ya

Mustangt125 wrote:
I guess I forgot about shrooms. I don't think Salvia is a natural plant and opium needs treatment from the poppy plant. You can't just pop it off the stem.

And drugs like opium ruin lives. Pot just enhances gamer scores.

Bye_Ya wrote:

ahlycotc wrote:And comparing watching porn to taking drugs is laughable.

You were the one who used government policy as a resource for your argument.

And there are many reasons why the government would ban a rather harmless drug.

The fact that a presidential runner thinks it is harmless is enough.

To be honest I think the stigma about fast food has got out of hand too. It isn't the consumption of fast food that makes people overweight, it's the massive over consumption of any food and the sedentary lifestyle people live that makes them overweight. Seems like Maccy Ds has just become the whipping boy of the campaign.

Although that is quite off topic.

ahlycotc wrote:

Carlos Jenkinson wrote:Infact Ahly, chocolate is more likely to kill you and raise health concerns, you don't see an article on that shit and why it should be banned if you have a high usage of chocolate

Maybe because you don't get stoned, lose motor ability, and have impaired memory from taking chocolate. Oh, there is also the fact that chocolate isn't SMOKED.

Marijuana doesn't have to be smoked.

Zzonked wrote:To be honest I think the stigma about fast food has got out of hand too. It isn't the consumption of fast food that makes people overweight, it's the massive over consumption of any food and the sedentary lifestyle people live that makes them overweight. Seems like Maccy Ds has just become the whipping boy of the campaign.

Although that is quite off topic.

I've tried explaining this but people don't get it.

ayvee1 wrote:

ahlycotc wrote:

Maybe because you don't get stoned, lose motor ability, and have impaired memory from taking chocolate. Oh, there is also the fact that chocolate isn't SMOKED.

Marijuana doesn't have to be smoked.

That doesn't make it much better. In fact, the drug takes longer to leave the body that way.