Religious Practice and "Drugs"

[Zephyranth]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

Oh, I didn't intend that to sound personally defensive or anything, I'm just aware that I'm a dissenting opinion so I must have been among those addressed. Apologies. It was merely intended to be a clarification of my view on the subject.

Oh, I see! When it comes to drugs, I'm someone who doesn't see it as something that's right for me, but unless someone was really getting hurt I wouldn't stop them... It's their life, I just don't want it to be me in that position. I've been raised very health conscious, though and that has certainly been something that's stuck with me.

[Gallifrey]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

Oh, I see! When it comes to drugs, I'm someone who doesn't see it as something that's right for me, but unless someone was really getting hurt I wouldn't stop them... It's their life, I just don't want it to be me in that position. I've been raised very health conscious, though and that has certainly been something that's stuck with me.

I just realized I wasn't talking about you at all anyway xDD; It was a general reply to Siloh, who wrote that long post about their depression and medical marijuana on the last page. I didn't remember their username until I just saw it...

You and I completely agree :P Sorry for the misunderstanding. Totally my bad, I got confused.

[Medusa]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

Look. I'm not anti pot. I think it should be legalized. And personally I don't care if it's currently not. It aint my thing. But that's just me.

But since this IS NOT about if pot is good or bad....let me discuss the actual topic.

Pot to be spiritual.

If you need something to reach your god, great.
But think about that idea for a while.

[Zephyranth]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

I just realized I wasn't talking about you at all anyway xDD; It was a general reply to Siloh, who wrote that long post about their depression and medical marijuana on the last page. I didn't remember their username until I just saw it...

You and I completely agree :P Sorry for the misunderstanding.

People consistently have different opinions on things like drug use. Debating drugs is just one of those things... Everyone sees it just a little bit differently. Don't worry about it I'm just glad not to have offended anybody. I don't much enjoy conflict

[Ramses II]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

An addiction is not the same as a need.

You're injecting this notion of addiction, just because one consumes X doesn't inherently imply addiction. That's a whole different animal. I do use various substances regularly however I watch both my frequency and dosages and have no dependence whatsoever on anything other than nicotine.

Source of the medical benefits of cannabis? Last time I checked, cannabis blocked receptors in your brain that responded to growth hormones, ultimately retarding development, and impaired your neurological functioning. Of course, there are certainly some drugs that are medically useful and even necessary - hence I've specified recreational drug use. Alcohol does have an important use - to sterilize things - but as much as we like to think the government is irrational and stupid, illegal drugs are illegal for a reason...

This is kind of getting off topic, however the current restrictions on various substances aren't solving or addressing any of the alleged problems associated with X rather the cause more problems than they actually solve. The entire "war on drugs.," is nothing but a giant racket which isn't benefiting anyone. Prohibition turned out great didn't? Higher crime rates, more organized crime, more people in prison for a ridiculous charge, more seedy elements and corruption being brought into every city it effected; I mean it goes on and on. I think it's amazing that for the first 10,000 years of recorded human history, humanity was perfectly fine but now, oh it's different, now we have to impose these absurd prohibition laws for the "safety and well being of the country." Furthermore, virtually everything you just said in regards to the alleged side-effects of the use of cannabis I take issue with and would go on to say, they're outright myths that are probably buttressed with biased medical research. As far as the medical benefits of cannabis go, we could honestly be here all damn day. Cannabis has been used as medicine for thousands upon thousands of years starting with most notably the Chinese whom would use it for digestive issue and menstruation.

-Combining marijuana components enhances inhibitory effects on brain cancer
-Cannabidiol Enhances the Inhibitory Effects of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol on Human Glioblastoma Cell Proliferation and Survival
-Cannabinoid action induces autophagy-mediated cell death through stimulation of ER stress in human glioma cells
-Residual Effects of Cannabis Use on Neurocognitive Performance After Prolonged Abstinence: A Meta-Analysis

I have a lot more links but that should be sufficient for the time being, as a starter but I could go on for days.

Medusa addressed the third point perfectly already.

No, she did not, simply saying "you need to eat, you don't need drugs," is missing the point and doesn't negate or address it. I could easily throw out numerous other comparisons, really. I will also clarify, I'm not talking about relying on drugs for spritual fufillment or englightenment nor do I rely on whatever I'm consuming. A lot of things are being injected into the conversation.

Also, I am honestly flabbergasted that some here have that much trust in the American gov't to say, "these things are illegal for reason." If I could anyone some advice before I died it would be this "never trust a woman or a government." I mean, I smoke dro on a daily basis, I'm a salesman, I'm extremely good at what I do, and it serves the same function as coffee for me. To be clear again, I'm talking about the use of all mind-altering substances and spiritual practice; I do not rely on them though they do play their role every now and again.

[Medusa]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

No, she did not, simply saying "you need to eat, you don't need drugs," is missing the point and doesn't negate or address it. I could easily throw out numerous other comparisons, really. I will also clarify, I'm not talking about relying on drugs for spritual fufillment or englightenment nor do I rely on whatever I'm consuming. A lot of things are being injected into the conversation.

Because I'm bored as all hell...

Technically YOU brought in the comparison of need into the mix.



Gallifrey stated (in which you copied into your first post here)

Certainly not! You need an amount of food to stay healthy. You don't need any weed for your body to function

You replied:

I don't know about all that, I smoke dro like people drink coffee every morning and throughout the day to get through.

NEED was the subject in question. Which you replied with your apparent need of dro to get through the day.

So I find the first person to compare need of food and need of dro...was indeed you.


*just taking the piss outa ya'

[Ramses II]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

NEED was the subject in question. Which you replied with your apparent need of dro to get through the day.

So I find the first person to compare need of food and need of dro...was indeed you.

Ach so, indeed, I probably should have worded that better or rather just omitted the part of needing it to get through the day. My main point was some people need coffee in the morning and throughout the day, I just use a different product though I don't need it. Only thing I do "need," is good pipe baccy. My mistake though, clearly.

[Gallifrey]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

You're injecting this notion of addiction, just because one consumes X doesn't inherently imply addiction. That's a whole different animal. I do use various substances regularly however I watch both my frequency and dosages and have no dependence whatsoever on anything other than nicotine.


This is kind of getting off topic, however the current restrictions on various substances aren't solving or addressing any of the alleged problems associated with X rather the cause more problems than they actually solve. The entire "war on drugs.," is nothing but a giant racket which isn't benefiting anyone. Prohibition turned out great didn't? Higher crime rates, more organized crime, more people in prison for a ridiculous charge, more seedy elements and corruption being brought into every city it effected; I mean it goes on and on. I think it's amazing that for the first 10,000 years of recorded human history, humanity was perfectly fine but now, oh it's different, now we have to impose these absurd prohibition laws for the "safety and well being of the country." Furthermore, virtually everything you just said in regards to the alleged side-effects of the use of cannabis I take issue with and would go on to say, they're outright myths that are probably buttressed with biased medical research. As far as the medical benefits of cannabis go, we could honestly be here all damn day. Cannabis has been used as medicine for thousands upon thousands of years starting with most notably the Chinese whom would use it for digestive issue and menstruation.

-Combining marijuana components enhances inhibitory effects on brain cancer
-Cannabidiol Enhances the Inhibitory Effects of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol on Human Glioblastoma Cell Proliferation and Survival
-Cannabinoid action induces autophagy-mediated cell death through stimulation of ER stress in human glioma cells
-Residual Effects of Cannabis Use on Neurocognitive Performance After Prolonged Abstinence: A Meta-Analysis

I have a lot more links but that should be sufficient for the time being, as a starter but I could go on for days.



No, she did not, simply saying "you need to eat, you don't need drugs," is missing the point and doesn't negate or address it. I could easily throw out numerous other comparisons, really. I will also clarify, I'm not talking about relying on drugs for spritual fufillment or englightenment nor do I rely on whatever I'm consuming. A lot of things are being injected into the conversation.

You're trying to tell me you need marijuana to function normally, and then you tell me you're not addicted. Isn't that the definition of an addiction? Or are you retracting the former statement? Which is it: do you "need" it or do you not?

For the first three studies, I concede those all are valid. And as stated previously, I don't deny there are some benefits for people with serious conditions - but that doesn't really apply here, because, as I also said, I've been talking about an average recreational user whose usage is not necessitated by a severe disease.

But as for the fourth - I'm wondering a couple of things. One, how large is the sample size, and how old are the participants, and how was data collected? I know that this is a meta-analysis of certain studies - which I'm admittedly a bit miffed by, because it's just too easy to cherry-pick the studies in a meta-analysis like this - so those questions are a bit hard to answer... especially without being able to see the full report. It would be more helpful if you could get a particular study so I could get some idea of what was actually done and and we could compare. (And the ancient Chinese used many useful things, but they also used a lot of things for medicine that should not be used :P)

And if you take offense to my hypothesis, do you have one of your own to counter with? Or are you just... offended?

You keep saying that this was missing the point, but you don't clarify. I mean, it sounds as if you're brushing us off - "Oh, you're missing the point." If every single person here is missing the point, then it's on you to clarify, because this indicates you weren't clear about your point in the first place. So if I've missed it, what is your point?

And honestly... you may think the world ten thousand years ago was fab, but I have a feeling if you - or any of us - was actually there, we'd be... well, we wouldn't like it, to say the least. It was pretty miserable. Just saying, I like civilization.

ALSO

Also, I am honestly flabbergasted that some here have that much trust in the American gov't to say, "these things are illegal for reason." If I could anyone some advice before I died it would be this "never trust a woman or a government."

...

[Medusa]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

Ramses, are you the ramses from lj?

[Zephyranth]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

You're trying to tell me you need marijuana to function normally, and then you tell me you're not addicted. Isn't that the definition of an addiction? Or are you retracting the former statement? Which is it: do you "need" it or do you not?

For the first three studies, I concede those all are valid. And as stated previously, I don't deny there are some benefits for people with serious conditions - but that doesn't really apply here, because, as I also said, I've been talking about an average recreational user whose usage is not necessitated by a severe disease.

But as for the fourth - I'm wondering a couple of things. One, how large is the sample size, and how old are the participants, and how was data collected? I know that this is a meta-analysis of certain studies - which I'm admittedly a bit miffed by, because it's just too easy to cherry-pick the studies in a meta-analysis like this - so those questions are a bit hard to answer... especially without being able to see the full report. It would be more helpful if you could get a particular study so I could get some idea of what was actually done and and we could compare. (And the ancient Chinese used many useful things, but they also used a lot of things for medicine that should not be used :P)

And if you take offense to my hypothesis, do you have one of your own to counter with? Or are you just... offended?

You keep saying that this was missing the point, but you don't clarify. I mean, it sounds as if you're brushing us off - "Oh, you're missing the point." If every single person here is missing the point, then it's on you to clarify, because this indicates you weren't clear about your point in the first place. So if I've missed it, what is your point?

And honestly... you may think the world ten thousand years ago was fab, but I have a feeling if you - or any of us - was actually there, we'd be... well, we wouldn't like it, to say the least. It was pretty miserable. Just saying, I like civilization.

ALSO


...

Whoa whoa whoa... Never trust a woman?! PLEASE tell me you're kidding... I didn't even see that before... Wow...

[Medusa]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

Lol. I can't wait for the back pedal on that one.

[Gardenia]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

If I could anyone some advice before I died it would be this "never trust a woman or a government."

...really?

[MaskedOne]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

Did anyone bring popcorn?

That has to be one of the better social gaffes of the month.

[Medusa]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

...really?

I imagine every woman here is giving side eye. And every man is backing away from this thread.

[Zephyranth]

Re: Religious Practice and "Drugs"

"never trust a woman or a government."

I hope you mean this in an 'I've been screwed over by women in the past and therefore don't trust them' way and not a sexist way. Either way is pretty bad but at least if you mean it the first way I might be able to not strongly dislike you...