Should Kids Be Encouraged To Experiment With Sex and Drugs?

[Druidus]

The drugs don't choose to be taken, and the children don't choose to be abused.

But the person who takes the drugs is choosing to do it just as the person who abuses the children is choosing to do that.

I'm sorry, but that's an imbecilic comparison. Are you suggesting that consuming (smoking/snorting/injecting) an inanimate and non-conscious substance is as bad as inflicting permanent emotional and mental scars on a child by raping him/her?

I mean, really... I've seen weak arguments and straw grasping before, but this? Wow... I can't even tell if you're serious.

If you need drugs to be happy, there is something wrong with your life.

First of all, as I have said, I do not need drugs to be happy. I merely enjoy them, much the same as you can enjoy the experience of watching a sitcom, or a movie, or reading an excellent book, or hang gliding, or deep sea diving. My drug experiences are as valid as any of these. You have likely not experienced many drugs, if any beyond alcohol, tobacco, and/or coffee. Therefore, you are in no position to deny my experiences validity. To do so is purely an act of bigotry, unless you have experienced them yourself.

Ask most teenagers who get pregnant if drugs or alcohol is involved?

Sorry, but just like adults, teenagers can have sex without being on drugs or drunk.

By the way, alcohol is a drug and is ten times worse than cannabis.

That's a gross understatement. Alcohol is worse for society by far, I believe, than heroin would be. And cannabis is nearly completely harmless, alcohol most certainly is not. Alcohol is hundreds to thousands of times worse than cannabis, I would say. If the concept of "worse" can even be applied to cannabis.

 

[TurtleGirl]

I think that sort of outward encouragement to an assembly of students one doesn't know is irresponsible. I'm not sure encouragement is the right word, but I certainly disagree with forbidding. That tends to have the reverse effect often with children.

When it came to sex, my parents never said absolutely never do it. They said they would prefer I didn't. They talked with me about all that comes with sex (risk of pregnancy, risk of disease, etc.). Then they asked that if I chose to have sex that I use protection. My mother even went as far as to insist that if I was too embarrassed to buy protection myself that she would buy it for me rather than me having unprotected sex.

When it came to drugs, my father was still occasionally smoking pot when I was a kid. He was also very open about his drug use and told all the stories including the trouble he ended up in as a result of his drugs and drinking. I think his openness was enough to teach me that there are very real consequences for drinking and taking drugs so I never had an interest.

Both of my parents were chain smokers when I was growing up. The smell that lingered in our home and on my clothes was humiliating enough for me to never want to do it myself. I actually started trying to convince them not to smoke as a young child. I am very proud to say that my father quit cold turkey almost ten years ago and has never taken it back up since. My mother quit with him but sadly started up again a couple of years ago.

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/heal/a/aa990818.htm

This is a rather short article about the general effects of different drugs when they are abused, including prescription drugs. This is what we are discussing encouraging children/teens to do "safely".

 

[Mathematician]

If you need drugs to be happy, there is something wrong with your life.

Ask most teenagers who get pregnant if drugs or alcohol is involved? By the way, alcohol is a drug and is ten times worse than cannabis.

Why does society blame inanimate objects for people's own stupidity? :sarcastic

I don't think anyone is advocating outright encouragement, but something similar to real sex education. If you want to play it safe, then don't touch drugs. But if you're going to take drugs, here are the negatives and POSITIVES.

 

[Druidus]

This is a rather short article about the general effects of different drugs when they are abused, including prescription drugs. This is what we are discussing encouraging children/teens to do "safely".

Propaganda? Please. I can discount much on that site.

Stimulants or Amphetamines

(Dexedrine, Methamphetamine or "Crystal", "Crank", and "Speed") increase alertness and physical activity. Amphetamines increase heart and breathing rates and blood pressure, dialate pupils and decrease appetite. Side-effects can include sweating, dry mouth, blurred vision, insomnia, loss of appetite, and dizziness. In addition users can feel restless, anxious and moody, become excitable and have a false sense of power and security.

Not all side effects occur for everyone or every dose. They go away after the high.

Using large amounts of these drugs can result in a condition known as amphetamine psychosis -- which can result in auditory, visual and tactile hallucinations, intense paranoia, irrational thoughts and beliefs, delusions, and mental confusion.

Amphetamine psychosis is very uncommon. You have to binge for days to get it, with ridiculous amounts of amphetamine.

Amphetamine overdose can also cause cardiac arrhythmias, headaches, convulsions, hypertension, rapid heart rate, coma and death. Amphetamines are psychologically and physically addictive.

Amphetamines are bad when overdosed. So is aspirin. So is tylenol. So is water.

And there is no denying the addictive potential of amphetamine.

Pot has more than 400 different chemical compounds and contains even more cancer-causing agents than are found in tobacco, according to some studies. Even low doses or pot can interfere with coordination, perception of time, reasoning and judgment, -- making driving under its influence extremely dangerous. Marijuana use causes short-term memory loss, decreases sperm and testosterone production in men, and may disrupt the menstrual cycle and cause miscarriage and stillbirth in women.

Pot has more than 400 different chemical compounds? Oh my god! That means nothing. The fact that they put it in there at all shows how they have to reach. Everything is made of chemicals and chemical compounds. Everything. The number of compounds means absolutely nothing. Apples have loads of chemicals. Pastries. Cake.


The cause of any cancerous compounds in cannabis are the carbons that you release when you burn it. It's not a reason to illegalize a plant. Even though these carbons undoubtedly exist, cannabis has never been linked to cancer, except as a preventative agent (in a study of 60,000 patients, cannabis smokers got lung cancer less).


Driving under the influence of cannabis is not "extremely dangerous." I would never condone it, but it's less risky than driving under the influence of alcohol. It's the same level of risk as driving on certain prescription medecines. The last two sentences about the reproductive systems are complete myths.

Heroin, Opium, Morphine, and Codeine are used legally by the medical profession to relieve pain. But they are abused due to their mood-altering effects. All narcotics are extremely physically and psychologically addictive. Medical problems can include congested lungs, liver disease, tetanus, infection of the heart valves, skin abscesses, anemia and pneumonia. Death can occur from overdose.

This entire paragraph is misleading. Opiates cause no harm to the body or brain. Addiction can result, but no harm. The harm can come from the means of administration. The harm in that list comes entirely from two means of ingesting heroin, smoking and injecting it. It's not the heroin that causes the harm, it's the means of ingestion, and they mislead people by ignoring that.

Downers -- Valium, Quaaludes, Librium, Xanax -- also have appropriate medical uses, but are also abused by many users. "Barbs" cause slurred speech, disorientation and "drunken" behavior. They are physically and psychologically addictive.
Withdrawal symptoms include anxiety, convulsions, and possible death.

These "downers" are barbiturates and benzodiazepines. They have effects almost exactly equal to alcohol, as well as the same level of mental and physical addictive potential. Just like alcohol, the withdrawal can be fatal.

Funny, the effects are equivalent to alcohol, but these have to be illegal because they are pills, and, thus, unaccepted.

LSD, DMT, Mescaline, PCP, and Psilocybin have very unpredictable effects.

No they don't. Certainly not combined with a good set/setting.
zSB(3,3)

Users may experience morbid hallucinations and feel panicked, confused, paranoid and out of control -- or in other words, a "bad trip." The heightened suggestibility and intensified emotions that hallucinogens create can worsen any pre-existing emotional problems.

Notice the lack of numbers? Because bad trips are rare. And "morbid" hallucinations? Please. This attempt at villifying psychedelics (hallucinogens is an extremely poor term) is very disappointing. If a person has pre-existing emotional or psychological problems, then psychedelics are not for them anyway.

Physical effects of hallucinogen use include dilated pupils, sweating, insomnia, loss of appetite, tremors; and increased body temperature, heart rate and blood pressure.

Again, not all of these occur. Few do. They are mostly unnoticeable.


Here is a better description that I wrote myself, which is also more specific:

Drugs commonly used recreationally:

Alcohol

Alcohol is the most widely used recreational drug in the world. Many people don’t even realize that alcohol is a drug, but, indeed, it is one. In fact, alcohol is one of the most dangerous drugs out there. Addictive potential is high, physical and mental withdrawal effects are extremely dangerous (clearly illustrating this is the fact that while heroin withdrawal is not at all pleasant, it can’t kill you, but alcohol withdrawal can be fatal), and negative effects on the body and mind are prevalent and serious. Alcohol is neurotoxic and harms parts of the gastro-intestinal system. It is very easy to overdose on alcohol, and thousands die each year from such overdoses.

Anti- impotence drugs such as Sildenafil (Viagra)

I don’t think I have to elabourate on this one. I will say, however, that there is no logical difference between using Viagra recreationally and using an illegal drug that doesn’t damage the mind or the body recreationally; even if the recreation isn’t of the same form.

Barbiturates

Barbiturates are rare, nowadays. They were phased out by the supposedly less abusable benzodiazepines. Barbiturates are highly addicting hypnotics and/or sedatives. They have a powerful withdrawal effect similar to the withdrawal effect of alcohol.

Benzodiazepines

Benzodiazepines were the replacement for barbiturates. They were hailed as less abusable and non-addictive. However, it turns out that they are both abusable and addictive on the same scale as barbiturates or alcohol. As well, they also have a powerful withdrawal effect similar to the withdrawal effect of alcohol.

Cannabis

To quote NORML:

“Any discussion of marijuana should begin with the fact that there have been numerous official reports and studies, every one of which has concluded that marijuana poses no great risk to society and should not be criminalized. These include: the National Academy of Sciences' "Analysis of Marijuana Policy"(1982); the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse (the Shafer Report) (1973); the Canadian Government's Commission of Inquiry (Le Dain Report) (1970); the British Advisory Committee on Drug Dependency (Wooton Report) (1968); the La Guardia Report (1944); the Panama Canal Zone Military Investigations (1916-29); and Britain's monumental Indian Hemp Drugs Commission (1893-4).”

There have even been more studies since that show no harm coming of cannabis use. It was even shown in a study on 60,000+ Kaiser patients that smoking cannabis has a correlation to a lessened lung cancer risk (THC is a dilative agent, so it may assist your lungs in cleaning themselves).

But that leads to the Hawks vs. Doves form of debating, which is an exercise in futility. Here is an article from the Federation of American Scientists that explains this issue better than I am able:

http://fas.org/drugs/issue7.htm#1

Diphenhydramine hydrochloride (Benadryl)

Diphenhydramine/dimenhydrinate (both have the same effect) is a chemical that is rarely abused. It is a delerient, so it is in the same class as datura metel or datura inoxia. This chemical is non-addictive, has no withdrawal, and produces an unpleasant “high” (at least to most who try it).

 

[Druidus]

Dissociative Anaesthetics, including:

Ketamine (2-(2-chlorophenyl)-2-(methylamino)-cyclohexanone)
Ketamine is used as a veterinary anaesthetic. It has not been shown to be damaging to the human mind or body when not used in excess chronically. It is addictive and there is a withdrawal effect, however.

DXM (Dextromethorphan)

Dextromethorphan is found either in a hydrobromide salt or in a polisterix plastic bond. Dextromethorphan is used as an ingredient in cough medicines. However, DXM is a powerful dissociative at higher doses. It has not been shown to be damaging to the human mind or body when not used in excess chronically. It is not considered addictive (although there are reports of minor psychological addictions) and there are no withdrawal effects.

[FONT=&quot]PCP (Phencyclidine)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]

Phencyclidine is the most dangerous of the three commonly abused dissociatives. It is addictive, has been shown to be damaging when used in high amounts or in low amounts chronically. PCP also has a very unpleasant withdrawal effect. Under the effects of phencyclidine, some people have a tendency to become violent, and because phencyclidine numbs the association of the mind to the body, physical pain will be much less of an obstacle.

Nitrous Oxide

Nitrous oxide is an inhalant. Almost all inhalants have been shown to be highly neurotoxic (damaging to the brain) and dangerous for the body. However, there are a few inhalants that have never shown danger to the mind and body when used responsibly. Nitrous oxide is one of them, along with diethyl ether (used as a replacement for alcohol before Modern Prohibition), and butyl/amyl nitrite. Nitrous oxide produces a short lived (several minutes) extremely powerful high with quite a lot of euphoria. The only dangers of nitrous oxide are not getting enough oxygen (Care must be taken to ensure that oxygen is received if a nitrous oxide breathing mask is being used. If “whippets”, or nitrous oxide canisters, are used, this is much less of an issue) and vitamin B-12 depletion. People who use nitrous oxide regularly would be wise to take vitamin B-12 supplements, as nitrous oxide has been shown to deplete the body’s stores of this vitamin.

GHB (Gamma-hydroxybutyrate)

GHB is a drug very similar to alcohol in effect, but without a hangover or the negative effects that alcohol commonly produces. However, GHB is also addictive and extremely easy to overdose on. I would like to note, however, that GHB is only easy to overdose on because it is a black market drug. Were it sold in pharmacies, doses would be pre-measured and accurate. GHB’s withdrawal effects are dangerous, but not nearly as dangerous as alcohol. Recently GHB has received attention by some in the science community as a potential antidepressant. Experimental and anecdotal reports have indicated that GHB may be a powerful antidepressant, better than any other on the market.

Kava kava (Piper methysticum)

Kava kava is a drug that some compare to alcohol. It is not illegal to possess, although it is illegal to consume in [/FONT][FONT=&quot]Canada[/FONT][FONT=&quot]. It has not known whether or not kava kava is addictive or whether it has a withdrawal effect.

Opium (Papaver somniferum), Opiates, and Opioids, including:

Opium is the milky latex collected from the seed pod of the common plant known as the opium poppy. Opiates are naturally derived and opioids are synthetic.

Heroin (Diacetylmorphine)

Heroin, the oft despised opiate, is actually not at all damaging to the mind or body. No study has ever shown detrimental physical or mental effects caused by heroin. There is simply no such causal link. However, that does not mean that heroin is not dangerous. It is. But its danger comes from a different source: Addiction, withdrawal, and overdosing. Heroin is extremely addictive, both physically and mentally. However, addiction does take some time to be felt, and, conceivably, one could have a once or twice a month heroin habit and never feel the effects of addiction or withdrawal ever. Heroin’s withdrawal effects are severely painful and may require hospitalization but will not cause death. Overdosing is a big problem with heroin, but this is simply because street heroin has no known purity and it is difficult to test for purity (for the layperson, anyway). Each time a heroin-user buys heroin, they should, at the absolute least, test the potency of the heroin by using an extremely small amount before full dosing.

Fentanyl, Hydrocodone, Meperidine, Oxycodone, and other prescription painkillers

These opioids are prescribed commonly for pain. Hydrocodone is the lowest on the scale of effect, followed by meperidine, oxycodone, and then fentanyl. All of them have addictive potential and all of them have withdrawal effects. However, like heroin, there is no real damage caused to the body or mind.

Phenethylamines, including:

2C-B (4-bromo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine)
2C-E (4-ethyl-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine)
2C-I (4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine)
2C-T-7 (4-propylthio-2,5-dimethoxyphenethylamine)

All of the above phenethylamines are research chemicals, or RCs, and not enough is known about them for me to list any of their effects on the body or mind. It is not known whether they are addictive or whether they have a withdrawal effect, however, these drugs are psychedelics, and therefore are probably not addictive and probably do not have a withdrawal effect.

Ephedrine (Ephedra)

Ephedrine is a stimulant, and is addictive with a moderate withdrawal effect. The highest danger in ephedrine use is the increase in blood pressure and heart rate. Those who already have high blood pressure or heart rates, or weak hearts, should never use ephedrine.

MDMA (3,4-Methylenedioxy-N-methamphetamine - ecstasy)
MDMA is dangerous on the street because it is often cut with many other chemicals. When used in pure form, it is relatively safe. However, weekly, biweekly, and maybe even monthly use can cause reversible brain damage (once use stops the brain will recover). The safe use limit has been estimated to be between 4 and 12 uses per year (Dr. Shulgin and others). When MDMA is used the brain is flooded with its serotonin stores, and the user experiences deep feelings of love for all people and things as well as euphoria and empathy. MDMA has been found to be highly effective in couple-therapy. It has been known to produce life-changing experiences. It is not physically addictive and there is no withdrawal, but it is psychologically addictive (users can come to be addicted to the feelings it produces if they use it too often) and there may be a mild depressant effect for one or two days after use, as your body rebuilds its serotonin stores.

MDEA (3,4-methylenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine)

MDEA is almost exactly the same as MDMA; there are very few differences. It is considered more psychedelic than MDMA. Addiction, withdrawal, and dangers are the same.

MDA (3,4-methylenedioxyamphetamine)

MDA is the precursor to MDMA, and it too is very similar to it. Again, it is considered more psychedelic than MDMA. Addiction, withdrawal, and dangers are the same.

Mescaline (Peyote and other cactii)

Mescaline has been used religiously for millennia by southern Amerindians. It is found in the peyote cactus (which takes approximately 27 years to grow before it can be used), the san pedro cactus, and the Peruvian torch cactus. The latter two are used far more often as they grow enough to be used within a year or two. Mescaline itself is not addictive, has no withdrawal effects, has never been shown to be neurotoxic or damaging to the body. Indeed, I see no reason why mescaline would be illegal, other than political reasons (Modern Prohibition, I’ve found, is largely a political game).

[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]

5five
[/FONT]

 

[Druidus]

[FONT=&quot]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphetamines

[Amphetamines, including:

Methamphetamine (Desoxyn)

Methamphetamine is prescribed rarely for extreme cases of ADD/ADHD. It is a powerful stimulant, is extremely addictive, has a powerful withdrawal effect, and is both neurotoxic and hard on the body. A perfect example of a drug that should not be legal without extreme restrictions and precautions.

[/FONT]Amphetamine (Adderall)

Amphetamine, also known as speed, is commonly prescribed for ADD/ADHD and is similar in effect to methamphetamine, although lesser in scale. It, too, is addictive, has a powerful withdrawal effect, and is both neurotoxic and hard on the body, although not to the same level as methamphetamine.

Non-phenethylamine stimulants, including:

Cocaine (and crack cocaine)

Cocaine and “crack cocaine” are the same drug. Cocaine comes from the South American plant known as the coca plant. “Crack cocaine” is slang, and the proper term for this chemical is cocaine freebase. The purpose of freebasing cocaine is so that it will become smokable (smoking any drug would produce a faster and a more intense, though shorter, experience). Cocaine in both salt (snortable) and freebase form are highly addictive and withdrawal is extreme, though almost entirely psychological. Both are also neurotoxic, to a degree, although this is only felt with chronic severe use. It is not very hard on the body, unless much is consumed.

Tobacco (nicotine)

Tobacco is one of most commonly used drugs in the world. It was first used by the Amerindians in the form of Nicotiania rustica. Today, tobacco companies are using a different strain of tobacco. Commerical tobacco has had harmaline and the other natural tobacco alkaloids bred out of it. Science has confirmed that using N. rustica is far less dangerous than using commercial tobacco, and it can be relatively safely used as the Amerindians used it. However, modern commercial tobacco is not so safe. It is highly addictive, has a moderate withdrawal, is neurotoxic and is damaging to several parts of the body.


Tryptamines, including:

DMT (Dimethyltryptamine)

Dimethyltryptamine is found naturally in the blood, flesh, and brain of human beings, so it already exists in the body. It is also present in a high number of other animals and plants. It is secreted as a venom by a form of toad (indeed, this is where “toad-licking” came from). DMT is not addictive, there are no withdrawal effects, it is not neurotoxic and it is not hard on the body (unless taken orally). It can be consumed orally with a monoamine oxidase inhibitor (without the MAOI it will not be orally active) or it can be crystallized and smoked. Onset is rapid and when smoked (the most common method of ingestion) it lasts for roughly 20 minutes to a half hour. Again, another drug that baffles me with its illegality.

LSD (Lysergic acid diethylamide)

LSD, the oft hated psychedelic, is a powerful psychedelic. It is not addictive, has no withdrawal, is neurotoxic only when used in heavy excess, and is moderately hard on the body (the user might feel a bit sore the day after, but not always). Highly spiritual experiences are common, and life changing experiences are not rare.

Psilocybin and Psilocin (Psychedelic mushrooms)

Both of these chemicals are found in a wide variety of mushrooms. The most commonly used is the Psilocybe cubensis mushroom. It is not addictive, has no withdrawal, is not neurotoxic, is not hard on the body, and is extremely hard to overdose on. Highly spiritual experiences are common, and life changing experiences are not rare.

I know that I have been told, in school and by law enforcement, that drugs are bad for me. But the research shows differently. Many scientists are now changing their perception of psychoactives. In fact, most scientists no longer accept the “information” given to them by the government and government funded studies conducted by the DEA (It’s in the DEA’s best interests to be biased).

Here are a number of links that I suggest in case you dispute the veracity of my words (and also because they’re just plain interesting )

www.maps.org
www.thedea.org
www.erowid.org
www.thegooddrugsguide.com
www.norml.org

5five

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

There is no site that can make me deny real life experiences.....none. People aren't addicts because they think its cool, they're addicts because they can't help themselves. If people could really control that through sheer force of will, we'd have a lot less addicts on our hands and more casual users. No sane individual really wants to lose their families, jobs, homes, life, have to sell their bodies for money for the next hit, rob people for the money for their next hit, and the list goes on. No sane mother leaves her children for days on end without food, clean clothing, supervision, and in squalor because she's on a three day crack binge. I've seen what drugs do to people, how it negatively affects them and no internet website is gonna tell me any differently.

I would never ever encourage or condone drug use to anyone young or old. If they do it, they do it, but I'm not giving it the go ahead.

 

[Aqualung]

At Boulder High School in Boulder Colorado a couple months ago, a guest speaker recommended to the student body that they experiment responsibly with sex and drugs. His point seems to have been that the kids would experiment with sex and drugs anyway, so an effort should be made to get them to experiment responsibly. What do you make of his advice to the high school kids?

What benefit did he think would come from this, or was it really just apathy and fatalism that influenced his position?

 

[Druidus]

There is no site that can make me deny real life experiences.....none.

Yeah, because your experiences are obviously the same ones that everyone else has. Other people couldn't possibly have had different experiences that made drug use worthwhile for them.

People aren't addicts because they think its cool

Of course they aren't. No kid does drugs because they think that drugs are "cool." They use drugs because they enjoy the effects.

they're addicts because they can't help themselves.

Do you honestly think that everyone who uses drugs is addicted to them? For one thing, cannabis is NOT addictive. Yes, addiction is a bad thing (especially thanks to the laws of modern prohibition) but it is a HEALTH problem, not a criminal or legal problem, and it should be dealt with as such.

If people could really control that through sheer force of will, we'd have a lot less addicts on our hands and more casual users.

There are not as many addicts as you'd think. I assert that if we had legalized drugs and enforced classes for personal use licenses, we'd have almost no addicts at all. No one here has yet explained why such a system couldn't work, they've merely dismissed it out of hand.

No sane individual really wants to lose their families, jobs, homes, life, have to sell their bodies for money for the next hit, rob people for the money for their next hit, and the list goes on.

Of course not. And that's why the vast majority of drug users NEVER DO THOSE THINGS. Such things are RARE. Just because some people cannot handle the addictive potential of some drugs doesn't mean that all drugs should be illegalized or that all people who would otherwise enjoy them completely safely should be prohibited from use. Those who get addictions, under my system of legalization, would be "cured" of their addiction under my system. For free. The proceeds from drug sale taxes and class payments would easily cover this health expense, with plenty left over for more health, education, and social services.

No sane mother leaves her children for days on end without food, clean clothing, supervision, and in squalor because she's on a three day crack binge.

Yeah, no sane mother does that, I agree. But how many crack using mothers do that? Certainly not all of them, as you seem to think. Again, under my system, those children would be helped, because the mother would be helped. Before her addiction became a problem, she'd have been talked to, sent to classes again, and denied further drugs. Under your system of prohibition, she's free to waste her money on drugs with no real accountability, because you cannot stop her. Sure, you can arrest her and put her in jail for decades, but wouldn't it have been better to catch it before it got bad and save her from addiction and her children from losing their mother?

've seen what drugs do to people, how it negatively affects them and no internet website is gonna tell me any differently.

Sorry, you're wrong. You've seen what SOME drugs do to SOME people. You're experiences are not the ones we base as the foundations of reality, and while some people can get in trouble with drugs (PRIMARILY DUE TO MODERN PROHIBITION), many enjoy them safely.

It's impossible to argue with people who make up their minds before hearing the information. Your mind is set, and no matter how much research and science I give you, you won't change your mind. It's called being closed to new ideas.

What benefit did he think would come from this, or was it really just apathy and fatalism that influenced his position?

It's called harm reduction, Aqua. A percentage of people will use drugs regardless, at least we can try to educate them so that their use will cause less harm. We don't have to condone or encourage use, but we should most definately condone/encourage responsible use, if there must/will be use.

 

[Aqualung]

It's called harm reduction, Aqua. A percentage of people will use drugs regardless, at least we can try to educate them so that their use will cause less harm. We don't have to condone or encourage use,

You don't think "encourag[ing kids] to experiment with sex and drugs" is conding and encouaging? The word is right there in the OP. How can it NOT be encouraging?

 

[Druidus]

No, Aqua, I think that he said the wrong thing but that the spirit of his message is right. I think that he made poor word choice. We can all agree, in this thread, that encouraging drug use by children is wrong, and I am certainly not advocating that position.

I just don't think he meant it the way people are taking it. It's a misunderstanding.

 

[Aqualung]

No, Aqua, I think that he said the wrong thing

Ah, is that it then? Well...

 

[Druidus]

Aqua, what do you want me to say? I admit, if that's what he meant, he's wrong, and I disagree with him. But I honestly believe that he simply made a poor choice of words.

 

[Aqualung]

Aqua, what do you want me to say? I admit, if that's what he meant, he's wrong, and I disagree with him. But I honestly believe that he simply made a poor choice of words.

I don't want you say anything. That's why I didn't say, "Druidus, I want you say something." If he made a poor choice of words, I have no beef with him. Are you looking to debate me or something? Because I think we usually agree and that's not going to work out very well.

 

[fullyveiled muslimah]

Yeah, because your experiences are obviously the same ones that everyone else has. Other people couldn't possibly have had different experiences that made drug use worthwhile for them.

I don't have anything to say about other people's experiences, I was talking about mine. A lot of stuff is possible.

Do you honestly think that everyone who uses drugs is addicted to them? For one thing, cannabis is NOT addictive.

I've seen people get addicted to that too.

but it is a HEALTH problem, not a criminal or legal problem,

Being a health problem is enough for me. As long as the drugs are illegal it will be treated as such regardless of how you think it should be treated.

There are not as many addicts as you'd think

Maybe not where you are......

And that's why the vast majority of drug users NEVER DO THOSE THINGS. Such things are RARE.

Again maybe where you are its rare, but you can't speak for everybody. It was pretty damn common for me and my siblings, plus more than half the neighborhood worth of children where I grew up.

Yeah, no sane mother does that, I agree. But how many crack using mothers do that? Certainly not all of them, as you seem to think.

A whole bunch of 'em where I'm from. I didn't say all of them do it. There are functional crackheads, but that doesn't make it any better in my eyes.

Under your system of prohibition, she's free to waste her money on drugs with no real accountability, because you cannot stop her.

I never proposed a system. A good one would be for the US government to stop traficking the drugs in here and stop it at the source.

Sorry, you're wrong. You've seen what SOME drugs do to SOME people.

Firtsly telling me I'm wrong is tantamount to calling me a liar. Secondly I never said I have seen all the drug addicts in the world. I am making statements based on my personal experiences.

You're experiences are not the ones we base as the foundations of reality,

You may not base your reality on my experiences but then again I never asked you to. It's a reality for me though.

It's called being closed to new ideas.

Yes I am closed to the idea that drugs are somehow a good thing, and that those of us who have had terrible experiences with them are overreacting. I am also against the idea that drugs should be made available even though the overwheling majority of drug addicts are having alot of problems because of them, just because a few people like drugs and aren't addicts. We as a society have a responisibility to eliminate as much as possible things that are more harmful than beneficial.

It seems as though your position is that drugs are more beneficial than harmful and should therefore be facilitated. My position is that since it does more harm than good, drugs should be eradicated altogether. There is no benefit connected with drug abuse that cannot be found in healthier alternatives. Since drugs are not a necessity by long shot, I see no reason why they even have to be around.

The only drugs I can see being used responsibly is a prescription drug. They have a benefit that outweighs their harm, and can therefore be used and regulated. Narcotics such as meth, blows, and crack have no good uses that can't be gained another way. They are too highly addictive to be widely available or used on a regular basis.

 

[Sunstone]

It seems to me, Druidus, that you're largely talking ideals while others, such as FM, are talking realities. Frankly, it strikes me you really haven't seen that much of the world.

 

[Blindinglight]

By the way, alcohol is a drug and is ten times worse than cannabis.

And your point? This is actually a very common and well known fact. Alcohol attacks the entire body, rather than just one part of it.

It seems to me, Druidus, that you're largely talking ideals while others, such as FM, are talking realities. Frankly, it strikes me you really haven't seen that much of the world.

Well my friend, our nation was built upon ideals.
Really, drugs should be legalized. The jails would never be over crowded, the police can spend time solving crimes rather than getting brownie points for find a small bag of weed on someone, and the taxes brought in would be a massive amount. Crime rates would drop since drugs would be easier to obtain. Overall addiction would drop, as people wouldn't have to fear legal reprocussion from seeking addiction help.

 

[Sunstone]

Really, drugs should be legalized. The jails would never be over crowded, the police can spend time solving crimes rather than getting brownie points for find a small bag of weed on someone, and the taxes brought in would be a massive amount. Crime rates would drop since drugs would be easier to obtain. Overall addiction would drop, as people wouldn't have to fear legal reprocussion from seeking addiction help.

You've misunderstood me. At issue here -- according to the OP -- is what advice to give kids living with today's realities. Pretty much all Druidus has been doing is telling us what the world should be like, rather than how to deal responsibly with the world as it is. In doing that, he's sidetracked the thread off the OP.

 

[doppelganger]

If I'm not mistaken, American kids are already regularly encouraged to experiment with sex and drugs both by their peers and ceaselessly, relentlessly and overwhelmingly by our culture. We are all barraged with ads for alcohol, pharmaceuticals, cigarettes, caffeine. We start giving young kids drugs like ritalin and anti-depressants. Our culture is about drugs.

As for sex, scan the covers of the magazine rack next time you're at the store. Even teenage programming is predominantly about sex. The above ads for drugs are also about sex.

I'm not judging whether there is anything wrong with that. Just pointing out that the speaker apparently is preaching to the choir. The choir is just too damn high to realize it perhaps.:areyoucra

Maybe we should stop encouraging kids to experiment with sex and drugs. I don't know.