Drug tests for welfare

[xav8terx]

You don't have to be "completely incapacitated" to wreck a car or get killed. Being mentally impaired is all it takes.



Using cell phones is far worse. Putting make up on, shaving, looking at the hot girl/guy next to you...anything can happen on the road.

Car accidents are the worst possible point to make against marijuana.

[JJGlanton]

I plan on it. But unlike people like you...I know how to be responsible not just expect everyone else to be...look up conservative values if you need any help understanding any of that.
yeah. people that don't encourage their kids to smoke pot are the irresponsible ones. Good point.

[JJGlanton]

These guys will rant and rave about weed, but they most likely pop more pills than Elvis Presley.
got anything to support such an accusation? And who has "ranted and raved about weed"? Has your drug use completely stripped you of your reading comprehension?

[JJGlanton]

So then...as usual...you are making wild assumptions...guess it's to be expected from you.
Apparently this moron does not believe anyone has been a car wreck that was impaired by weed. Moronic, to say the least.

[JJGlanton]

Yeah smoking pot gets you high...um no shit Sherlock. But you continue to try to claim it's as bad as alcohol...simply not true. As bad as the smoke you are blowing around for everyone to die from...simply not true. Get off your high horse. Clean your own house before you talk about others.


Got any proof that anyone has died as the result of smoke exhaled by Mint? Fuckin lefties....dumb as a box of hammers.:lmao2:

[JJGlanton]

Bullshit.

I've never seen anyone completely incapacitated after smoking weed.
you are just too stoned to tell. But anyways- you might want to check your local laws to see whether or not marijuana consumption impairs your ability to drive. That is, unless you are too baked to read, mannnnnnn.

[xav8terx]

yeah. people that don't encourage their kids to smoke pot are the irresponsible ones. Good point.


I would never encourage my kid to do anything that would harm him. But if he has questions I will answer them. But I agree with Zeb that if he did insist on doing it I would prefer for him to do it in my presence as apposed to getting it from the street...but again, I don’t do it in the house where he can see it and I keep my "stash" put up so the questions haven't even come up. Of course he’s 7 so why would they?

[xav8terx]

Apparently this moron does not believe anyone has been a car wreck that was impaired by weed. Moronic, to say the least.

Then show us the facts as you seem to have piles of it.

[JJGlanton]

I would never encourage my kid to do anything that would harm him. But if he has questions I will answer them. But I agree with Zeb that if he did insist on doing it I would prefer for him to do it in my presence as apposed to getting it from the street...but again, I don’t do it in the house where he can see it and I keep my "stash" put up so the questions haven't even come up. Of course he’s 7 so why would they?
well, its good to see another lefty that would encourage criminal activity and drug use on behalf of his kid. I guess you don't want the apple to fall too far from the tree.

[doctordog]

Using cell phones is far worse. Putting make up on, shaving, looking at the hot girl/guy next to you...anything can happen on the road.

Car accidents are the worst possible point to make against marijuana.

Right, that is why many large companies take hair samples from prospective workers. People that regularly smoke weed are some of the most dagerous people there is on a job site or in factories with equipment like presses, saws, and drills.

[Bill Cosby]

Using cell phones is far worse. Putting make up on, shaving, looking at the hot girl/guy next to you...anything can happen on the road.

Car accidents are the worst possible point to make against marijuana.

Why is that??? There is like 50,000 or so deaths per year attributed to booZed driving??? Is there a # on "evil Pot" driving????

Annual Causes of Death in the United States (http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30)
Tobacco 435,0001
Poor Diet and Physical Inactivity 365,0001
Alcohol 85,000 1
Microbial Agents 75,0001
Toxic Agents 55,0001
Motor Vehicle Crashes 26,3471
Adverse Reactions to Prescription Drugs 32,0002
Suicide 30,6223
Incidents Involving Firearms 29,0001
Homicide 20,3084
Sexual Behaviors 20,0001
All Illicit Drug Use, Direct and Indirect 17,0001, 5
Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs Such As Aspirin 7,6006
Marijuana 07

1.

(2000): "The leading causes of death in 2000 were tobacco (435,000 deaths; 18.1% of total US deaths), poor diet and physical inactivity (400,000 deaths; 16.6%), and alcohol consumption (85,000 deaths; 3.5%). Other actual causes of death were microbial agents (75,000), toxic agents (55,000), motor vehicle crashes (43,000), incidents involving firearms (29,000), sexual behaviors (20,000), and illicit use of drugs (17,000)."
(Note: According to a correction published by the Journal on Jan. 19, 2005, "On page 1240, in Table 2, '400,000 (16.6)' deaths for 'poor diet and physical inactivity' in 2000 should be '365,000 (15.2).' A dagger symbol should be added to 'alcohol consumption' in the body of the table and a dagger footnote should be added with 'in 1990 data, deaths from alcohol-related crashes are included in alcohol consumption deaths, but not in motor vehicle deaths. In 2000 data, 16,653 deaths from alcohol-related crashes are included in both alcohol consumption and motor vehicle death categories." Source: Journal of the American Medical Association, Jan. 19, 2005, Vol. 293, No. 3, p. 298.)
Source:
Mokdad, Ali H., PhD, James S. Marks, MD, MPH, Donna F. Stroup, PhD, MSc, Julie L. Gerberding, MD, MPH, "Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000," Journal of the American Medical Association, March 10, 2004, Vol. 291, No. 10, pp. 1238, 1241.

2.

(2000): "Illicit drug use is associated with suicide, homicide, motor-vehicle injury, HIV infection, pneumonia, violence, mental illness, and hepatitis. An estimated 3 million individuals in the United States have serious drug problems. Several studies have reported an undercount of the number of deaths attributed to drugs by vital statistics; however, improved medical treatments have reduced mortality from many diseases associated with illicit drug use. In keeping with the report by McGinnis and Foege, we included deaths caused indirectly by illicit drug use in this category. We used attributable fractions to compute the number of deaths due to illicit drug use. Overall, we estimate that illicit drug use resulted in approximately 17000 deaths in 2000, a reduction of 3000 deaths from the 1990 report."
Source:
Mokdad, Ali H., PhD, James S. Marks, MD, MPH, Donna F. Stroup, PhD, MSc, Julie L. Gerberding, MD, MPH, "Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000," Journal of the American Medical Association, March 10, 2004, Vol. 291, No. 10, p. 1242.

3.

(2006): The US Centers for Disease Control reports that in 2006, there were a total of 33,300 deaths from suicide in the US.
Source:
Heron MP, Hoyert DL, Murphy SL, Xu JQ, Kochanek KD, Tejada-Vera B. Deaths: Final data for 2006. National vital statistics reports; vol 57 no 14. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2009, Table B.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_14.pdf

4.

(2006): The US Centers for Disease Control reports that in 2006, there were a total of 18,573 deaths from homicide in the US.
Source:
Heron MP, Hoyert DL, Murphy SL, Xu JQ, Kochanek KD, Tejada-Vera B. Deaths: Final data for 2006. National vital statistics reports; vol 57 no 14. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2009, Table B.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_14.pdf

5.

(2006): "In 2006, a total of 38,396 persons died of drug-induced causes in the United States (Tables 21 and 22). This category includes not only deaths from dependent and nondependent use of legal or illegal drugs, but also poisoning from medically prescribed and other drugs. It excludes unintentional injuries, homicides, and other causes indirectly related to drug use, as well as newborn deaths due to the mother’s drug use."
Source:
Heron MP, Hoyert DL, Murphy SL, Xu JQ, Kochanek KD, Tejada-Vera B. Deaths: Final data for 2006. National vital statistics reports; vol 57 no 14. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2009, p, 11.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_14.pdf

6.

(2006): "In 2006, a total of 22,073 persons died of alcohol-induced causes in the United States (Tables 23 and 24). This category includes not only deaths from dependent and nondependent use of alcohol, but also accidental poisoning by alcohol. It excludes unintentional injuries, homicides, and other causes indirectly related to alcohol use as well as deaths due to fetal alcohol syndrome."
Source:
Heron MP, Hoyert DL, Murphy SL, Xu JQ, Kochanek KD, Tejada-Vera B. Deaths: Final data for 2006. National vital statistics reports; vol 57 no 14. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2009, p, 11.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr57/nvsr57_14.pdf

7.

(1996): "Each year, use of NSAIDs (Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs) accounts for an estimated 7,600 deaths and 76,000 hospitalizations in the United States." (NSAIDs include aspirin, ibuprofen, naproxen, diclofenac, ketoprofen, and tiaprofenic acid.)
Source:
Robyn Tamblyn, PhD; Laeora Berkson, MD, MHPE, FRCPC; W. Dale Jauphinee, MD, FRCPC; David Gayton, MD, PhD, FRCPC; Roland Grad, MD, MSc; Allen Huang, MD, FRCPC; Lisa Isaac, PhD; Peter McLeod, MD, FRCPC; and Linda Snell, MD, MHPE, FRCPC, "Unnecessary Prescribing of NSAIDs and the Management of NSAID-Related Gastropathy in Medical Practice," Annals of Internal Medicine (Washington, DC: American College of Physicians, 1997), September 15, 1997, 127:429-438, from the web at http://www.acponline.org/journals/annals/15sep97/nsaid.htm, last accessed Feb. 14, 2001, citing Fries, JF, "Assessing and understanding patient risk," Scandinavian Journal of Rheumatology Supplement, 1992;92:21-4.

8.

An exhaustive search of the literature finds no credible reports of deaths induced by marijuana. The US Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) records instances of drug mentions in medical examiners' reports, and though marijuana is mentioned, it is usually in combination with alcohol or other drugs. Marijuana alone has not been shown to cause an overdose death.
Source:
National Academy Press, 1999), available on the web at http://www.nap.edu/html/marimed/; and US Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, "In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition" (Docket #86-22), September 6, 1988, p. 57.

9.

The Centers for Disease Control reported that in 2003, HIV disease was the 22nd leading cause of death in the US for whites, the 9th leading cause of death for blacks, and the 13th leading cause of death for Hispanics.
Source:
Heron, Melonie P., PhD, Smith, Betty L., BsED, Division of Vital Statistics, "Deaths: Leading Causes for 2003," National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 55, No. 10 (Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, CDC, March 15, 2007), p. 10, Table E, and p. 12, Table F.

10.

"Adverse drug reactions are a significant public health problem in our health care system. For the 12,261,737 Medicare patients admitted to U.S. hospitals, ADRs were projected to cause the following increases: 2976 deaths, 118,200 patient-days, $516,034,829 in total charges, $37,611,868 in drug charges, and $9,456,698 in laboratory charges. If all Medicare patients were considered, these figures would be 3 times greater."
Source:
C. A. Bond, PharmD, FASHP, FCCP, and Cynthia L. Raehl, PharmD, FASHP, FCCP, Department of Pharmacy Practice, School of Pharmacy, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Amarillo, Texas, "Adverse Drug Reactions in United States Hospitals" Pharmacotherapy, 2006;26(5):601-608.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/531809

11.

"More than 60 per cent of drug treatment demand in Asia and Europe relate to opiates that are, especially heroin, the most deadly drugs. Deaths due to overdose are, in any single year, as high as 5,000-8,000 in Europe, and several times this amount in the Russian Federation alone."

[JJGlanton]

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051201/marijuana-raises-risk-of-fatal-car-crash

not real hard to find. There is a reason that driving while impaired is frowned upon.

[xav8terx]

well, its good to see another lefty that would encourage criminal activity and drug use on behalf of his kid. I guess you don't want the apple to fall too far from the tree.


It's called responsible parenting. You can have your conservative buddies raise your kid. You can follow what Glen, Hannity and Limp Dick advice for you but not me. I am smarter than that.



Take a look at what your state is doing dumb shit...you live in one of the many states that is waking up to the fact that criminalization of pot is doing far more harm then the plant is.


And you would be surprised how many of your closet righties smoke. But it goes back to the moral standard you expect the country to live by but yet live yourself.

[JJGlanton]

It's called responsible parenting. You can have your conservative buddies raise your kid. You can follow what Glen, Hannity and Limp Dick advice for you but not me. I am smarter than that.



Take a look at what your state is doing dumb shit...you live in one of the many states that is waking up to the fact that criminalization of pot is doing far more harm then the plant is.


And you would be surprised how many of your closet righties smoke. But it goes back to the moral standard you expect the country to live by but yet live yourself.
Your idea of responsible parenting would be very interesting to Child Protective Services.

BTW- I smoke occasionally, and have nothing against marijuana. Indeed, I believe it is far less damaging than alcohol. But that is very different from encouraging your kid to get high.

[xav8terx]

Your idea of responsible parenting would be very interesting to Child Protective Services.

BTW- I smoke occasionally, and have nothing against marijuana. Indeed, I believe it is far less damaging than alcohol. But that is very different from encouraging your kid to get high.


At what age would you think it would be ok? If you thought that i would smoke a joint with my 7 year old then i didnt explain myself very well.

[JJGlanton]

At what age would you think it would be ok? If you thought that i would smoke a joint with my 7 year old then i didnt explain myself very well.


It depends on who you need to accept your parenting. You surely do not need my approval, so as far as I am concerned- light up with your kid. However, the type of parenting you espouse carries special penalties under the law. If you let your 18 year old kid get drunk at your house, you have committed at least one very serious crime. If you let that same kid smoke weed under your supervision, you have committed a variety of serious crimes. So- the answer to your question turns on whose acceptance of your parenting is sought.

[Bokonon]

Forget cutting their welfare, if they're doing drugs they should be thrown in jail.
It's the law.

[xav8terx]

It depends on who you need to accept your parenting. You surely do not need my approval, so as far as I am concerned- light up with your kid. However, the type of parenting you espouse carries special penalties under the law. If you let your 18 year old kid get drunk at your house, you have committed at least one very serious crime. If you let that same kid smoke weed under your supervision, you have committed a variety of serious crimes. So- the answer to your question turns on whose acceptance of your parenting is sought.


So you let the government you want less controll from...controlling how you raise your children?

[JJGlanton]

So you let the government you want less controll from...controlling how you raise your children?
Yes, to an extent. Or do you think it should be legally permissible for a parent to get a 7 year old high?

[Zebulon0351]

Your idea of responsible parenting would be very interesting to Child Protective Services.

BTW- I smoke occasionally, and have nothing against marijuana. Indeed, I believe it is far less damaging than alcohol. But that is very different from encouraging your kid to get high.

Wait.. so you're telling us that you smoke pot now? Fuck you dude you god-damn hypocrite.

I wonder how CPS would feel about your ass.

[Zebulon0351]

There are no instant tests that can detect if you're stoned. Many of the stoner accidents are reported as simply "accidents". Don't tell me it isn't impairing, I've smoked the shit before. You can get just as fucked up or moreso as being on alcohol.

There is an instant test to see if someone is stoned:

If the driver:
- is driving 5 MPH under the speed limit
- is in the far right-had lane on the interstate
- is sitting straight up with hands in the "10 and 2" positions
- turns his/her blinker on a mile before its necessary
- spends 30 minutes staring at the snack and candy aisle of the local 7-11 just to buy a Kit-Kat bar.


he's probably stoned.

[JJGlanton]

Wait.. so you're telling us that you smoke pot now? Fuck you dude you god-damn hypocrite.

I wonder how CPS would feel about your ass.
Where did I ever lead you to believe otherwise? I never demonized marijuana- I attacked your ideas of responsible parenting, which include encouraging drug use and criminal activity.

I would never even show up on the CPS radar. They have no reason to feel anything about my ass.

[JJGlanton]

There is an instant test to see if someone is stoned:

If the driver:
- is driving 5 MPH under the speed limit
- is in the far right-had lane on the interstate
- is sitting straight up with hands in the "10 and 2" positions
- turns his/her blinker on a mile before its necessary
- spends 30 minutes staring at the snack and candy aisle of the local 7-11 just to buy a Kit-Kat bar.


he's probably stoned.

According to at least one French study, 7% of drivers involved in fatal car crashes were impaired by marijuana, and 2.5% were attributable to marijuana impairment.

[Zebulon0351]

Where did I ever lead you to believe otherwise? I never demonized marijuana- I attacked your ideas of responsible parenting, which include encouraging drug use and criminal activity.

I would never even show up on the CPS radar. They have no reason to feel anything about my ass.

Did I even imply that I would want to smoke out a 10 year old kid? Or a 13 year old kid?


You jump all over my ass for my little statement, but you obviously have no problem with marijuana or breaking the laws associated with it. Who in the fuck are you to judge ANYONE for their actions with a substance with which you have no problem in the first place?

[Zebulon0351]

According to at least one French study, 7% of drivers involved in fatal car crashes were impaired by marijuana, and 2.5% were attributable to marijuana impairment.

1. Cite your source
2. If you want to play the "one random-ass study" game.. I can do that too.. but just don't ever question my random study when I pull one from MY ass.

[JJGlanton]

Did I even imply that I would want to smoke out a 10 year old kid? Or a 13 year old kid?



You jump all over my ass for my little statement, but you obviously have no problem with marijuana or breaking the laws associated with it. Who in the fuck are you to judge ANYONE for their actions with a substance with which you have no problem in the first place?
You did not imply that there was any age at which you would let your kid smoke dope in front of you.

And you are right. I have no issue with marijuana use by adults, in spite of the fact that it is illegal.

And in answer to your question beginning "who the fuck are you to judge"- I never stated that I have any issue at all with marijuana. Which has nothing to do with the judgements being made. You clearly have no issue with marijuana. But would you pass judgement on a parent that gets their 10 year old stoned? Are you able to really understand what is being discussed, or are you still in the haze of your wake-and-bake?

On a lighter note- bein a dope smokin hippie- you should check out the album Spanker Madness by the Asylum Street Spankers. Fuckin fantastic.

[JJGlanton]

1. Cite your source
2. If you want to play the "one random-ass study" game.. I can do that too.. but just don't ever question my random study when I pull one from MY ass.
already done.

[Zebulon0351]

You did not imply that there was any age at which you would let your kid smoke dope in front of you.

And you are right. I have no issue with marijuana use by adults, in spite of the fact that it is illegal.

And in answer to your question beginning "who the fuck are you to judge"- I never stated that I have any issue at all with marijuana. Which has nothing to do with the judgements being made. You clearly have no issue with marijuana. But would you pass judgement on a parent that gets their 10 year old stoned? Are you able to really understand what is being discussed, or are you still in the haze of your wake-and-bake?

On a lighter note- bein a dope smokin hippie- you should check out the album Spanker Madness by the Asylum Street Spankers. Fuckin fantastic.

I would never support a parent getting their 10 year old kid high. I would even question it with a 16 year old.

[xav8terx]

Yes, to an extent. Or do you think it should be legally permissible for a parent to get a 7 year old high?

So the typical response from people like you, Minty, dog/Way, and all the other "oh the government is bad" is as long as it suites your agenda its ok...can’t fuckin have it both ways. So you need a law telling you that is bad? There are no laws that say my 7 year old cant watch Adult Swim, which is on a fuckin kids TV channel, but I am responsible enough and that good of a parent to know that he shouldn't be watching it so I don’t allow it. It doesn’t take the conservative right to tell me what is right.

[JJGlanton]

I would never support a parent getting their 10 year old kid high. I would even question it with a 16 year old.

Then why ask "who am I to judge"?

[JJGlanton]

So the typical response from people like you, Minty, dog/Way, and all the other "oh the government is bad" is as long as it suites your agenda its ok...can’t fuckin have it both ways. So you need a law telling you that is bad? There are no laws that say my 7 year old cant watch Adult Swim, which is on a fuckin kids TV channel, but I am responsible enough and that good of a parent to know that he shouldn't be watching it so I don’t allow it. It doesn’t take the conservative right to tell me what is right.
I do not believe any of the individuals you mentioned are anarchists. What is the point of your rant? One can simultaneously believe that governmnet is too intrusive yet support proscriptions on child abuse. Or do you think that, because you "don't need a conservative to tell you what is right", that child abuse should be legal?

[GetAClue]

I do not believe any of the individuals you mentioned are anarchists. What is the point of your rant? One can simultaneously believe that governmnet is too intrusive yet support proscriptions on child abuse. Or do you think that, because you "don't need a conservative to tell you what is right", that child abuse should be legal?
The leftists have a hard time understanding that conservatives view the government as a necessary evil. There are things that we do need the government for and if constrained to those tasks, generally, those things spelled out in the Constitution, the government does just fine. It is when people become to depend upon the government to provide for them so they don't have to provide for themselves is when conservatives have a problem.

[Zebulon0351]

It is when people become to depend upon the government to provide for them so they don't have to provide for themselves is when conservatives have a problem.

Unfortunately, Conservatives don't understand that every single person who is on welfare and every single person who would benefit from a health care Government option is not a leech of society.

[JJGlanton]

Unfortunately, Conservatives don't understand that every single person who is on welfare and every single person who would benefit from a health care Government option is not a leech of society.
once again, Zebulon, your hysteria, and that last bong hit, have impeded your ability to post thoughtfully.

[Zebulon0351]

once again, Zebulon, your hysteria, and that last bong hit, have impeded your ability to post thoughtfully.

Just a stating the obvious. But I guess Glen Beck hasn't told you that has he?

[doctordog]

Just a stating the obvious. But I guess Glen Beck hasn't told you that has he?

Keep your masterbation fantasies to yourself.:lmao2:

[Brian-W]

You don't have to be "completely incapacitated" to wreck a car or get killed. Being mentally impaired is all it takes.

He said you could just as fucked up on weed and maybe moreso than you can on alcohol.

I'm sorry...but that is 100% pure bullshit.

[Brian-W]

Originally Posted by GetAClue
It is when people become to depend upon the government to provide for them so they don't have to provide for themselves is when conservatives have a problem.

Seems that a lot of conservatives always assume the worst about a person and just assume that if they need help, then they must be lazy.

Must be awful going through life with such a huge chip on one's shoulder.

[JJGlanton]

He said you could just as fucked up on weed and maybe moreso than you can on alcohol.

I'm sorry...but that is 100% pure bullshit.
I guess noone ever passed out smokin dope.....

[JJGlanton]

Just a stating the obvious. But I guess Glen Beck hasn't told you that has he?
What is obvious to an intoxicated lefty is generally not reflective of reality. I have never heard a single person of any political persuasion claim that every one using public assistance is a leech. Which of course is how you interpret the conservative understanding of the general effects of expanding welfare benefits on human nature. Smoke on, Lefty....:lmao2:

[xav8terx]

I do not believe any of the individuals you mentioned are anarchists. What is the point of your rant? One can simultaneously believe that governmnet is too intrusive yet support proscriptions on child abuse. Or do you think that, because you "don't need a conservative to tell you what is right", that child abuse should be legal?


Yeah, you got it right. I advocate child abuse. I'm so busted...did you by chance finish a second grade reading level or do you do this shit just for the show?

[JJGlanton]

Seems that a lot of conservatives always assume the worst about a person and just assume that if they need help, then they must be lazy.

Must be awful going through life with such a huge chip on one's shoulder.
It probably does seem that way to the lazy lefties, who have no belief in personal accountability, or the power of individuals to shape their own lives.:banghead:

[JJGlanton]

Yeah, you got it right. I advocate child abuse. I'm so busted...did you by chance finish a second grade reading level or do you do this shit just for the show?
You are the one that cannot rationalize the twin conservative beliefs that individuals should make their own decisions, and that some decisions should not be tolerated by society. Indeed, it is you that can see through your own simplistic and immature bullshit.:thumbsup:

[xav8terx]

You are the one that cannot rationalize the twin conservative beliefs that individuals should make their own decisions, and that some decisions should not be tolerated by society. Indeed, it is you that can see through your own simplistic and immature bullshit.:thumbsup:


Oh no, i realize that you guys want it both ways...again, as long as it fits into your narrow view of the world outside of your walls.

[JJGlanton]

There is nothing narrow about recognizing that there are limits to what individuals should be able to do. The constraints referred to in this thread are common sense constraints. You are the one that seems to equate a belief that government intrusion into individual lives should be restrained with anarchism. But, then again, I never met a hard lefty that wasn't drowning in a sea of retardation.

[Bill Cosby]

You are the one that cannot rationalize the twin conservative beliefs that individuals should make their own decisions, and that some decisions should not be tolerated by society. Indeed, it is you that can see through your own simplistic and immature bullshit.:thumbsup:

That sounds a lot like you can make your own decisions as long as they are the ones we would make................:thumbsup:

[JJGlanton]

That sounds a lot like you can make your own decisions as long as they are the ones we would make................:thumbsup:
There are acceptable limits to human behavior. Which is why we have a criminal code that generally makes sense in proscribing behaviors. One can, without conflict, believe that government intrusion in our lives should be limited, and that there should be a punishment for smoking out a ten year old.

[xav8terx]

There are acceptable limits to human behavior. Which is why we have a criminal code that generally makes sense in proscribing behaviors. One can, without conflict, believe that government intrusion in our lives should be limited, and that there should be a punishment for smoking out a ten year old.


Which, for the thousandth time not one person on here has even suggested.

[JJGlanton]

Which, for the thousandth time not one person on here has even suggested.

Of course no one has. Not even you lefties are that hopeless. But clearly you are unable to appreciate the ability of a conservative to accommodate beliefs that government intrusion should be minimal, and that some behaviors are properly proscribed. You mistake conservatism with anarchism, which might render my second sentence in this post inaccurate.

[xav8terx]

Of course no one has. Not even you lefties are that hopeless. But clearly you are unable to appreciate the ability of a conservative to accommodate beliefs that government intrusion should be minimal, and that some behaviors are properly proscribed. You mistake conservatism with anarchism, which might render my second sentence in this post inaccurate.


I make absolutely no mistake about what you conservatives stand for. It's what YOU want or nothing at all. It's how YOU want people to act or nothing at all. YOUR morals are better and we should live by YOUR standard.

[JJGlanton]

I make absolutely no mistake about what you conservatives stand for. It's what YOU want or nothing at all. It's how YOU want people to act or nothing at all. YOUR morals are better and we should live by YOUR standard.

What the hell are you talking about? Live by your own morals, and within our criminal codes.

This whole line started from this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JJGlanton
Yes, to an extent. Or do you think it should be legally permissible for a parent to get a 7 year old high?


"So the typical response from people like you, Minty, dog/Way, and all the other "oh the government is bad" is as long as it suites your agenda its ok...can’t fuckin have it both ways. So you need a law telling you that is bad? There are no laws that say my 7 year old cant watch Adult Swim, which is on a fuckin kids TV channel, but I am responsible enough and that good of a parent to know that he shouldn't be watching it so I don’t allow it. It doesn’t take the conservative right to tell me what is right."

you went on this kick about the conflict you perceive in recoiling at excess government intrusion and accepting our criminal code as it applies to drugs. Where does the superiority of my morals even enter into your stupidity, or are you incapable of following even your own logic?

[Bill Cosby]

There are acceptable limits to human behavior. Which is why we have a criminal code that generally makes sense in proscribing behaviors. One can, without conflict, believe that government intrusion in our lives should be limited, and that there should be a punishment for smoking out a ten year old.

Sure & who better than you to decide what those limits are............ THnX God we have you here to tell us...............

Where would the country be w/out your contributions...........:lmao2: :lmao2:

[JJGlanton]

Sure & who better than you to decide what those limits are............ THnX God we have you here to tell us...............

Where would the country be w/out your contributions...........:lmao2: :lmao2:

You don't need me to tell you Bill. Your state and federal criminal codes are widely available.