|
The world is phucked up (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Slylee |
| drugs were invented for one reason only...to escape reality...i don't think i need to clarify my point any further:p |
|
|
| P`zazz |
| quote: | Originally posted by biznology
and if you refer to what i was saying, i never told you to STFU. and i dont understand why you dont agree with people that say you dont know anything about drugs, you said so yourself! |
No I wasn't reffering to you directly, I was reffering to the general attitude from some people that replied.
Oh and you say I am not willing to concede what other people are saying? well I have stated a backed up opionion that says 'Drugs are proven to be bad for you, why do people still use them?' and the general answer that I got is 'We use drugs and off cause you knownothing about it' no reasons to back up opinions whatsoever, nothing to support the use of drugs and I have no choice but to believe that people take drugs for very stupid reasons as they have nothing good to offer. |
|
|
| Az |
| quote: | Originally posted by P`zazz
No I wasn't reffering to you directly, I was reffering to the general attitude from some people that replied.
Oh and you say I am not willing to concede what other people are saying? well I have stated a backed up opionion that says 'Drugs are proven to be bad for you, why do people still use them?' and the general answer that I got is 'We use drugs and off cause you knownothing about it' no reasons to back up opinions whatsoever, nothing to support the use of drugs and I have no choice but to believe that people take drugs for very stupid reasons as they have nothing good to offer. |
I don't think anyone anywhere said they used drugs, you just assumed, and assumption is a terrible thing ;)
and I strongly disagree with your generalisation "drugs", how are we supposed to agree with you if you don't say which drugs you're against??
Get a grip :rolleyes: |
|
|
| DJ Fundamental |
| quote: | Originally posted by biznology
people have been making fact-based claims, in a logical manner without flaming. so why have you withdrawn from the discussion?
its closed-minded, uneducated people such as yourself that fuel the mania and scare tactics of drug use. cigarettes or drugs can be nasty, but that doesnt make them bad or wrong, it makes them a personal choice| |
Maybe he logged off to go to the ter... |
|
|
| P`zazz |
ok thank you for embarassing me, but the fact still remains that I gave reasons for my point of view wheres NONE of you gave a single valid point to support your , as far as I'm concerned it's you who is closed minded as you seem follow the 'diss to avoid inteligent conversation' method. |
|
|
| Az |
| quote: | Originally posted by P`zazz
ok thank you for embarassing me, but the fact still remains that I gave reasons for my point of view wheres NONE of you gave a single valid point to support your , as far as I'm concerned it's you who is closed minded as you seem follow the 'diss to avoid inteligent conversation' method. |
wtf?
you've generalised everything, you've made out every drug is the same, then when people have made valid points, you've seen things which aren't there.......maybe you smoke crack, who knows :nervous: ;) :p |
|
|
| biznology |
| quote: | Originally posted by P`zazz
ok thank you for embarassing me, but the fact still remains that I gave reasons for my point of view wheres NONE of you gave a single valid point to support your , as far as I'm concerned it's you who is closed minded as you seem follow the 'diss to avoid inteligent conversation' method. |
reasons as to what? why drugs are good? i dont know how to argue that.
how do you define bad? and what makes you think that what you think is bad, is what someone else thinks is bad? and why would making a personal choice make you a bad person?
i dont think anyone is bad person, its what people see in them or believe about them that makes them 'bad'.
by being vague and without stating any questions you left yourself open for some questionable interpretation...
prescription drugs save peoples lives everyday...
millions of people will do drugs today and not die of them...
millions have and will continue to die of drug use...
how do you define drugs? can they be anything that give you pleasure or help you escape reality? so is reading or video games a drug, it could be argued some people are addicted to those...trance?:p
i just find it rediculous when someone who most likely has taken an over the counter pain pill then decrys drugs and what bad people are for using them.
beyond that everything has risks. everytime you get in a vehicle there is a chance of you dying, and quite a large one too - larger than the risk of doing most drugs. our air is polluted, and thats worse than second hand smoke...i could go on longer, but its prolly not worth it| |
|
|
| P`zazz |
| I didn't even bother reading, you don't understand me, I don't understand you, let's leave it as is, all I wanted to do is try to understand why people insist on making so much harm to there body, I wasn't trying to insult anyone neither was I trying to start a fight, if anyone has something positive to add to this thread other than trying to make me look stupid then please do or just let it go |
|
|
| Renegade |
Hey P'zazz:
Seeing as you find only those actions that promote good health and longevity in any way justifiable, I may remind you of the damage you cause to yourself every day. Perhaps you'd like to change your mode of living to ensure that you in no way run the risk of damaging your body or your somewhat pointless goal of living to the age of 150:
Mobile phones, televisions, computer screens and many other modern amenities emit vast quantities of radiation that - quite apart from the relatively short term risks such as short term memory loss - can cause radioation poisoning, several different types of cancer, and many other serious health problems. What is to be done then? Do we ban these things? Should we smash all mobile phones, melt all television sets and burn all computers to ensure that no-one suffers health problems when they turn 90?
And what about the food we eat? Both too much and too little fibre in ones diet can cause bowel cancer and other health problems relating to to the digestive tract. How do we strike a careful balance then? Should we force supermarkets to use scales to determine just how much fibre is in the food we eat (so long as they don't attach these scales to a computer screen - which causes cancer you know)? Also, food with high fat content can cause heart problems in the long term, whereas a diet with too little fat can cause more immediate health risks (particularly amongst pre-pubescent children). Should we have police in every supermarket ensuring that people neither overstep nor understep their necessary daily calorie intake? Did you know that seperate studies have labelled both red meat and tic-tacs as carcinogenic? Should we ban all barbeques and minty-fresh breath as a result? Lettuce, fish, peas, peanuts, rice, biscuits and any food containing salt have also been linked with cancer (see here and here), so in the interests of prolonging life for as long as possible, should we ban all these foodstuffs as well? After all, these things may prevent us from living a long life right?
And what about cars? According to a study that I read recently, 10 million ecstacy pills have been consumed in Australia in the past decade and 15 deaths have been directly linked to it (and even then, it's usually the result of a deadly cocktail of drugs or ignorance of how to use the drug safely - plenty of water, but not too much, plenty of rest time, not ridiculously large amounts of the drug at one time etc.). So do the math: even if I disregard the reasons leading to deaths caused by ecstacy, if you take a pill in Australia - based on the mortality rate I outlined above - you have a 1 / 666,000 chance of dying. If you drive a car - according to road fatality rates - your odds of dying are 1 / 12,000. Therefore, the odds of you dying from driving a car are 55 times greater than the odds of you dying from taking ecstacy - which constitutes the greater risk?
What then of the dangers caused by products found in our homes? Those such as perfumes, deodorants, soaps, detergents and toothpaste? Exposure to these "legal" products must be okay, right? Perhaps this report may interest you:
http://www.ourlittleplace.com/chemicals.html
Even those of you living in a big city are no better off. Did you know that "Air pollution kills an estimated 2.7 million to 3.0 million people every year" or, to put it another way, causes "about 6% of all deaths annually"? What's the answer? Should the inhabitants of these economic centres disperse into rural areas, destroying both the economy and the decentralised envirnoments they move to in the process? Or perhaps they should spend their time inside where they can no longer be harmed by pollutants? Or perhaps not: "About 2.5 billion people, almost all in developing countries, suffer from high levels of indoor air pollution" (http://www.jhuccp.org/pr/m15/m15chap2.stm)..... where should we go then? Space perhaps, to escape the health risks caused by the very act of living in this planet?
Did you know that space travel has been linked with kidney problems and protein deficiencies (45% less protein synthesis according to this article) which is not to speak of the obvious dangers caused by direct exposure to the sun's harmful rays? It seems to me, mate, that the only way to avoid the harms of living the human life is to end it all now - after all, one cannot be harmed once one is dead, right?
Anyway, I think I've made my point.
All I'm trying to say is that the totality of the experience of life is merely that tiny sliver of time which separates the past and the future. Anyone who mortgages this tiny sliver of pleasure for a tiny sliver at some distant point in the future, is one who is missing the point of our short existence on this lonely rock we call home.
I smoke, I drink, I do the occasional pill and I've enjoyed every second of it. If I were to die tomorrow, I would not feel the slightest pang of regret for the way that I have lived my life, nor for the long list of hedonistic sensations that constitute it.
So, my wise friend, why the hell should you feel regret for the life that I have enjoyed and - above all - for the life I have chosen for myself? Perhaps when you stop viewing the internet through your computer screen, abstain from fish meat and tic-tacs, give up your car and stop breathing in the air that surrounds you, then you can come preaching to me about self-preservation, but - until then - I can leave you only with one final sentiment: "On a long enough time scale, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero".
Welcome to mortality my friend. :) |
|
|
| WhiteRussian |
It's my choice, noone tells me what to do. I want to do drugs, therefore I do 'em, :p
It's what it all boils down to, the right to do whatever the hell you want with your own body. As long as you dont hurt anyone else when doing 'em.
There's one problem with this though, what about if more people get addicted and need help if we leaglize it? Well, if the insane amount of money that goverments all around the world use to combat drug related crime instead would go to treatment clinics, then we'd be as close as we could get to actually handling drug use, :)
EDIT: It feels so useless to reply to threads that Renegade gets his hands on, he makes all other replies seem un-neccesary, ;) |
|
|
| P`zazz |
| ok, I see what you mean... personally I wouldn't be able to live like you because for example I don't enjoy smoking at all, I guess other people do but I didn't say stop smoking or anything, I just wanted to see other ppls point of you and why they like that thing which I don't. Plus you are being extremist, computers, tvs and mobile phones etc can be harmful if used in a wrong way but if used correctly they can do no harm at all whereas smoking and the rest are harmfull and from your post it seems that you agree :) |
|
|
|
|
