WTF is a "citizen-scientist"? Isn't this encyclopedia on the internet? Then what country are these citizen-scientists citizens of? Aren't all scientists citizens of some country or another?
Do you mean amateur scientists? Some people refuse to call a spade a spade, referring to it as a "pointy shovel", but you're calling it a "bonk-digger".
That's not what "tolerance" in the context of drug abuse means. In that context, tolerance means that a hard core alcoholic like Amy can drink a pint of whiskey and if you couldn't smell it you wouldn't know she'd been drinking, while if I drank a pint of whiskey I wouldn't be able to walk. She went to the hospital with over a point four blood alcohol content, that's twice what it would take to kill you or me. That's tolerance.
Yes, of course it's mentally altering. So is alcohol, tobacco, and a host of other legal, more dangerous activities and substances.
Marijuana definitely lends itself to compulsive use
I've noticed that people with obsessive-compulsive disorder are drawn to it. You had no trouble quitting, that should tell you something about those who do have trouble quitting.
Of the people I know who have or had trouble quitting, every one of them started smoking it as a teenager. I do not advocate the use of pot or any other non-prescribed psychoactive drug by any non-adult.
It can be habituating but it does not follow the medical definition of addictive. I've herad Everquest called "addictive", this is clearly a misuse of the term. As to the orange juice, drink it every morning for a year and try to tell me you don't miss it when it's gone!
Caffiene is indeed physically addictive. If you've read my K5 treatise How to quit smoking cigarettes you'll see a journal of my own struggle with an addiction (now butt-free for eight years). As mentioned in the article, I found the habituation to be as bad as the actual physical addiction. However, lets not call a spade a "pointy shovel". Habituation is not addiction, and you can't get addicted to Everquest.
I bet I could go off caffeine longer and with significantly less effort than you could go off pot. Of course, you could probably go off sex much longer than I could go off of caffeine...;)
I'd give up the pot way before I gave up coffee. I can't function without coffee, and I don't have pot very often these days, I can't afford it. And I could go without sex longer than I could coffee, although I damned sure wouldn't want to!
There's another thing, people talking about "sex addiction" or "food addiction". That's just absured. Those are bodily functions, hard-wired into our being, that our species wouldn't have survived without.
The stock market is no measure of prosperity; at least, no measure of prosperity for the ordinary non-rich man. The market did fabulously when Reagan pushed through the capital gains tax cuts that caused selling a business or stock to have a lower tax than if the seller had actually worked for a living.
But those of us who did work for a living during his reign did poorly indeed as a result of the inevitable orgy of corporate takeovers. I worked for Disney at the time, and like every other company that wasn't trying to do hostile takeovers it was on the receiving end.
Some folks wanted to buy Disney for its real estate. Our hours were cut back from 40 per week to 35. It was great for the rich stockholders, not so pleasant for those of us who merely create the wealth.
Destroying the software market, eh? Lets see, they've been selling software for... how long? Over half a century? And free software has been around for, lets see, I was getting free software (and shareware; I paid good money for the squeaky 2D side scroller called Duke Nukem 1, all three episodes) for, um, carry the one... damn somebody else do the math, I need a nap.
If it's destroying the software market, what's taking it so damned long?
-mcgrew
(journal is too violent to link, don't want to give the tetris guy any ideas. Let alone "Chairman Steve")
is there a patent on this troll? It must certainly have a copyright. Maybe Tami should sue; it bears an uncanny resemblance to her. Except she's usually not smiling and she has more hair.
From your link: Whilst some studies and tests have proven inconclusive,[45]a recent study by the Canadian government
Show me a study funded by Microsoft and I'll show you a study that says they have a lower TCO than open source. Show me a study funded by McDonald's and I'll show you a study that says trans fats are harmless.
Ramesh Ganju at the Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts, US, and colleagues deposited human lung cancer cells under the skin of a dozen mice and allowed the tumours to grow in the animals for about two weeks. They then began giving half of these mice daily injections of about 250 micrograms of synthetic THC right next to the tumours for three weeks. A cannabis cigarette may contain as much as 150 milligrams of THC.
Tumours in the control mice averaged about 0.6 grams in weight by the end of the five-week trial. By comparison, those in the mice that received THC weighed just 0.25 grams - 60% less
The comparison was due to appear in a report on the harmful effects of cannabis published last December by the WHO. But it was ditched at the last minute following a long and intense dispute between WHO officials, the cannabis experts who drafted the report and a group of external advisers.
As the WHO's first report on cannabis for 15 years, the document had been eagerly awaited by doctors and specialists in drug abuse. The official explanation for excluding the comparison of dope with legal substances is that "the reliability and public health significance of such comparisons are doubtful". However, insiders say the comparison was scientifically sound and that the WHO caved in to political pressure. It is understood that advisers from the US National Institute on Drug Abuse and the UN International Drug Control Programme warned the WHO that it would play into the hands of groups campaigning to legalise marijuana.
One member of the expert panel which drafted the report, says: "In the eyes of some, any such comparison is tantamount to an argument for marijuana legalisation." Another member, Billy Martin of the Medical College of Virginia in Richmond, says that some WHO officials "went nuts" when they saw the draft report.
The leaked version of the excluded section states that the reason for making the comparisons was "not to promote one drug over another but rather to minimise the double standards that have operated in appraising the health effects of cannabis". Nevertheless, in most of the comparisons it makes between cannabis and alcohol, the illegal drug comes out better--or at least on a par--with the legal one.
I saw reference to another study that compared nonsmokers, daily pot smokers, daily cigarette smokers, and people who smoked both pot and cigarettes daily since at least 1970, but I can't find the study. Those who smoked only pot had the fewest cancers, those who didn't smoke had the second fewest, followed by those who smoked both pot and cigs, with the butthead-only crowd having the most cancers. The most striking was the difference between those who smoked both, and those who smoked only cigarettes. From that study I'd say if you smoke cigarettes it would behoove you to start smoking pot as well.
That support is bolstered by research showing that cannabis (and psychoactive extracts such as THC or cannabinoids) can provide relief for sufferers of multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease and epilepsy. Cannabis can also help to improve appetite and decrease weight loss in AIDS victims and may be able to slow the growth of cancerou
Pat Robertson and George Bush are the wolves in sheep's clothing Christ warned us about. I firmly believe that Pat Robertson single handedly converted more Christians to Athieism than all the slashdot Athiests combined!
Never trust a "Christian" in a four thousand dollar suit.
I was named after Saint Stephen, who the bible says was stoned. If you read my journals you'll find all kinds of references to pot, here's the latest, Dork Side of the Moon about last Wednesday's eclipse. It mentions buying reefer from my dealer, Mary Jane. Sorry, no hookers in that one. However, considering your slashdot nick you might find it interesting, as someone goes to jail for attempted murder.
I personally don't think even murderers should be executed, let alone executed bizarrely and without trial. I do think the episode is humorous in a "beavis and butthead" kind of perverse way.
I've never heard of pederasts walking around the streets approaching young boys for sex
From the local newspaper here in Springfield, a small city of only 100k population:
Two solicited for sex
Two men were solicited for sex in the parking lot of the Amtrak station at Third and Washington streets about 7:45 p.m. Monday.
The victims, ages 16 and 19, told police they were walking home from the mall and stopped to rest at the train station, then saw a black Toyota sport utility vehicle circling the parking lot. The vehicle eventually stopped in front of them, and the driver offered to pay $20 if one of them would perform a sex act on him.
The teens, alarmed, went inside and called police. The man was gone when officers arrived.
They described the man as white, in his 40s and balding with gray hair.
No, they weren't infants, but both were teenagers and one was only sixteen years old.
And you must have missed my journal about another local pederast, with multiple links to several stories about him. He had been a policeman, clergyman, clown, day care worker, and Big Brother; all of which put him in close contact with children.
He died in the Sangamon County Jail after being tasered, then having a fat guard sit on him until his toes turned purple. No, I'm not making it up, there are links to the news articles in the/. journal.
As I mentioned in another comment, I'm friends with more hookers than I'm a client of, and every single one of them had been molested as a child, all by family members or family friends, most of them by their mom's boyfriend.
You need to take your meds. There is no contradiction; I said your danger from internet pederasts and meatspace terrorists was so slight as to not warrant worrying; that it takes your mind off of real dangers like traffic and your grandpa.
I believe you're getting posts confused. From my first reply: At any rate, every single one of these girls was molested as a child or adolescent (before the age of 14). Every single one was molested by a family member or family friend. It was usually the mother's boyfriend who did the molesting.
Are you going to be killed by a terrorist? No. You're more likely to die by tripping over your own shoelaces than to be killed by a terrorist. Again, if you are murdered there is almost a 100% chance it will be by a friend or even more likely a family member.
Worrying about terrorists and online predators distracts from the real dangers we face daily
To which you replied try not to walk into that conversation acting exactly like that stereotype
the stereotype being: someone who is afraid of nothing
You should join the DAM maybe - Mothers Against Dyslexia. Because your reading skills, at least today, are severely wanting. Or are you just trolling again?
Can anyone remind me why pornography needs to be "fought"?
Well gee, you guys jump me for writing journals about drunken whores so I do one about attempted murder and how do you act? Now you're against fighting! Do I have to do one about two naked hookers catfighting? Or would you rather have me write about a couple of old ladies drinking tea? That would be a great read now wouldn't it?
Well what's on the telly then? Looks like a penguin to me.
Damn, you CAN'T please everybody! Or, it seems, anybody. At least I can't.
Er, speaking of my often NSFW journals (particularly the one titled "NSFW") does this mean you won't be reading slashdot in Utah any more? Do they even have nerds in Utah?
Has anybody RTFM? How do they propose to tell one picture from another? If their algorythms are that advanced, how can they tell a breast in playboy from a breast in an anti-cancer site? Is Michaelangelo's David and its gay little pecker to be censored? How about Picasso's Vagina series? Sorry, google's failed me there as "moderate safe search" is on.
Ephesians 5:18- And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
That's a far cry from saying not to drink, or that drinking is a sin. It's saying that being filled with God is better than being filled with wine. Who besides an athiest could argue with that?
1 Peter 4 - Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin; That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.
I don't see where this is germaine to drinking; it doesn't mention drinking at all.
Galatians 5:16-21 (more in context) says This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Hatred. Variance. Wrath. Strife. Revelling. All the same as drunkenness. Yet again, the apostles were so drunk they couldn't stay awake in the garden with Jesus.
Matthew 26:39 - And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt. And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?
Mark 14:23-37 - And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.... And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou? couldest not thou watch one hour?
Proverbs 4:24 - Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.
In other words, stop frowning!
Yes, drinking can have us do things we may later regret, but that's not the fault of the wine. God put wine here for us to enjoy.
Genesis 1:29 - And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
As the page you link points out, abuse and addiction are two different things. And embarrassing as it is coming from an EDU domain, it contradicts itself, as the last bulletpoint in "dependance" is "abuse".
Note that it doesn't say addiction. It says dependance. And note where it got its graphics: the same place it got its funding. That's right, the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Couldn't you have found a more scholarly link than a government-funded college? You expect them to bite the hand that feeds them?
I've read that little piece of government propaganda that but have never, ever seen it, and as I've smoked reefer for over three decades I've met a lot of smokers.
Also, there is no tolerance with marijuana. You only have tolerance with physically addictive substances like alcohol, heroin, caffiene, or oxycontin.
Well, that's the youth thing. Everybody else is sitting around the dorm passing the sunny-d so if you don't too you're a pussy. Conformity is dangerous.
No, I am most certainly NOT telling you there is NOTHING to worry about. You should worry about your commute to work. You should worry about trans fat. You should worry that your grandpa might shoot or molest your child.
You should NOT worry about terrorists or internet child molesters, because the danger from them is as close to zero as you can get. There are a hell of a lot more important things to worry about.
Yeah, good luck with that. In America, nobody dies of any cancer that wasn't caused by cigarettes. Nope, the fact that the guy worked at Hanford for thirty years has nothing to do with the fact that he got lung cancer, it must be second hand cigarette smoke!
You've touched a sore spot with me. I haven't had a cigarette for eight years, but I'm pissed first at the Springfiled/Sangamon smoking ban and now at the statewide ban. It caused the closure of at least two of my favorite bars. The rest of them have all raised their prices.
There are still bars here that allow smoking. I drink next to smokers at them. No I'm not goiiing to rat them out. Fucking nanny state busybodies piss me off. If these asshats wanted a nonsmoking bar why didn't they just open one? I mean, besides the fact that nineteen out of twenty drinkers smoke?
...if you forgot to buy beer before the game starts the previous day, you're SOL thanks to these religiously sponsored legislative actions.
That's something I can't understand, except that people are too lazy to read their own bibles and fall prey to the wolves in sheep's clothing.
There is nothing whatever in the Christian Bible that says drinking is a sin. Ok there is a passage in the old testament that says kings shouldn't drink, and one in the new testament that says we should soberly wait for the second coming - but it also says "give strong drink to the dying and wine to those with the blues." It also chronicles the fact that on Jesus' last night on earth, all the apostles were shitfaced drunk.
These peole aren't reading Christ's bible, they're reading Pat Robertson's bible. Jesus had quite a few things to say about people like Robertson and his four thousand dollar suits...
Slashdot Mirror
WTF is a "citizen-scientist"? Isn't this encyclopedia on the internet? Then what country are these citizen-scientists citizens of? Aren't all scientists citizens of some country or another?
Do you mean amateur scientists? Some people refuse to call a spade a spade, referring to it as a "pointy shovel", but you're calling it a "bonk-digger".
That's not what "tolerance" in the context of drug abuse means. In that context, tolerance means that a hard core alcoholic like Amy can drink a pint of whiskey and if you couldn't smell it you wouldn't know she'd been drinking, while if I drank a pint of whiskey I wouldn't be able to walk. She went to the hospital with over a point four blood alcohol content, that's twice what it would take to kill you or me. That's tolerance.
Yes, of course it's mentally altering. So is alcohol, tobacco, and a host of other legal, more dangerous activities and substances.
Marijuana definitely lends itself to compulsive use
;)
I've noticed that people with obsessive-compulsive disorder are drawn to it. You had no trouble quitting, that should tell you something about those who do have trouble quitting.
Of the people I know who have or had trouble quitting, every one of them started smoking it as a teenager. I do not advocate the use of pot or any other non-prescribed psychoactive drug by any non-adult.
It can be habituating but it does not follow the medical definition of addictive. I've herad Everquest called "addictive", this is clearly a misuse of the term. As to the orange juice, drink it every morning for a year and try to tell me you don't miss it when it's gone!
Caffiene is indeed physically addictive. If you've read my K5 treatise How to quit smoking cigarettes you'll see a journal of my own struggle with an addiction (now butt-free for eight years). As mentioned in the article, I found the habituation to be as bad as the actual physical addiction. However, lets not call a spade a "pointy shovel". Habituation is not addiction, and you can't get addicted to Everquest.
I bet I could go off caffeine longer and with significantly less effort than you could go off pot. Of course, you could probably go off sex much longer than I could go off of caffeine...
I'd give up the pot way before I gave up coffee. I can't function without coffee, and I don't have pot very often these days, I can't afford it. And I could go without sex longer than I could coffee, although I damned sure wouldn't want to!
There's another thing, people talking about "sex addiction" or "food addiction". That's just absured. Those are bodily functions, hard-wired into our being, that our species wouldn't have survived without.
The stock market is no measure of prosperity; at least, no measure of prosperity for the ordinary non-rich man. The market did fabulously when Reagan pushed through the capital gains tax cuts that caused selling a business or stock to have a lower tax than if the seller had actually worked for a living.
But those of us who did work for a living during his reign did poorly indeed as a result of the inevitable orgy of corporate takeovers. I worked for Disney at the time, and like every other company that wasn't trying to do hostile takeovers it was on the receiving end.
Some folks wanted to buy Disney for its real estate. Our hours were cut back from 40 per week to 35. It was great for the rich stockholders, not so pleasant for those of us who merely create the wealth.
You're right, that is what I meant to say, although more truthful would be "slows the growth of cancers".
Destroying the software market, eh? Lets see, they've been selling software for... how long? Over half a century? And free software has been around for, lets see, I was getting free software (and shareware; I paid good money for the squeaky 2D side scroller called Duke Nukem 1, all three episodes) for, um, carry the one... damn somebody else do the math, I need a nap.
If it's destroying the software market, what's taking it so damned long?
-mcgrew
(journal is too violent to link, don't want to give the tetris guy any ideas. Let alone "Chairman Steve")
is there a patent on this troll? It must certainly have a copyright. Maybe Tami should sue; it bears an uncanny resemblance to her. Except she's usually not smiling and she has more hair.
Show me a study funded by Microsoft and I'll show you a study that says they have a lower TCO than open source. Show me a study funded by McDonald's and I'll show you a study that says trans fats are harmless.
From New Scientist:
Also from New Scientist:
I saw reference to another study that compared nonsmokers, daily pot smokers, daily cigarette smokers, and people who smoked both pot and cigarettes daily since at least 1970, but I can't find the study. Those who smoked only pot had the fewest cancers, those who didn't smoke had the second fewest, followed by those who smoked both pot and cigs, with the butthead-only crowd having the most cancers. The most striking was the difference between those who smoked both, and those who smoked only cigarettes. From that study I'd say if you smoke cigarettes it would behoove you to start smoking pot as well.
One last NS link:
Amen.
Pat Robertson and George Bush are the wolves in sheep's clothing Christ warned us about. I firmly believe that Pat Robertson single handedly converted more Christians to Athieism than all the slashdot Athiests combined!
Never trust a "Christian" in a four thousand dollar suit.
I was named after Saint Stephen, who the bible says was stoned. If you read my journals you'll find all kinds of references to pot, here's the latest, Dork Side of the Moon about last Wednesday's eclipse. It mentions buying reefer from my dealer, Mary Jane. Sorry, no hookers in that one. However, considering your slashdot nick you might find it interesting, as someone goes to jail for attempted murder.
Can I presume from your neutral presentation here that you consider this a just, appropriate, and fitting punishment for his misdeeds?
;)
No. I most certainly do not consider it just, appropriate, or fitting.
Your link didn't take me to your journal entry
Sorry about the bad link, I'll blame Cowboy Neal
Here's one I tested, it works.
http://slashdot.org/~sm62704/journal/188219 titled Klutzo the Clown tasered to death .
I personally don't think even murderers should be executed, let alone executed bizarrely and without trial. I do think the episode is humorous in a "beavis and butthead" kind of perverse way.
From the local newspaper here in Springfield, a small city of only 100k population:No, they weren't infants, but both were teenagers and one was only sixteen years old.
And you must have missed my journal about another local pederast, with multiple links to several stories about him. He had been a policeman, clergyman, clown, day care worker, and Big Brother; all of which put him in close contact with children.
He died in the Sangamon County Jail after being tasered, then having a fat guard sit on him until his toes turned purple. No, I'm not making it up, there are links to the news articles in the
As I mentioned in another comment, I'm friends with more hookers than I'm a client of, and every single one of them had been molested as a child, all by family members or family friends, most of them by their mom's boyfriend.
You need to take your meds. There is no contradiction; I said your danger from internet pederasts and meatspace terrorists was so slight as to not warrant worrying; that it takes your mind off of real dangers like traffic and your grandpa.
I believe you're getting posts confused. From my first reply: At any rate, every single one of these girls was molested as a child or adolescent (before the age of 14). Every single one was molested by a family member or family friend. It was usually the mother's boyfriend who did the molesting.
Are you going to be killed by a terrorist? No. You're more likely to die by tripping over your own shoelaces than to be killed by a terrorist. Again, if you are murdered there is almost a 100% chance it will be by a friend or even more likely a family member.
Worrying about terrorists and online predators distracts from the real dangers we face daily
To which you replied
try not to walk into that conversation acting exactly like that stereotype
the stereotype being: someone who is afraid of nothing
You should join the DAM maybe - Mothers Against Dyslexia. Because your reading skills, at least today, are severely wanting. Or are you just trolling again?
Can anyone remind me why pornography needs to be "fought"?
Well gee, you guys jump me for writing journals about drunken whores so I do one about attempted murder and how do you act? Now you're against fighting! Do I have to do one about two naked hookers catfighting? Or would you rather have me write about a couple of old ladies drinking tea? That would be a great read now wouldn't it?
Well what's on the telly then?
Looks like a penguin to me.
Damn, you CAN'T please everybody! Or, it seems, anybody. At least I can't.
Er, speaking of my often NSFW journals (particularly the one titled "NSFW") does this mean you won't be reading slashdot in Utah any more? Do they even have nerds in Utah?
Has anybody RTFM? How do they propose to tell one picture from another? If their algorythms are that advanced, how can they tell a breast in playboy from a breast in an anti-cancer site? Is Michaelangelo's David and its gay little pecker to be censored? How about Picasso's Vagina series? Sorry, google's failed me there as "moderate safe search" is on.
"Not advocating" isn't exactly "forbidding".
...
Ephesians 5:18- And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
That's a far cry from saying not to drink, or that drinking is a sin. It's saying that being filled with God is better than being filled with wine. Who besides an athiest could argue with that?
1 Peter 4 - Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;
That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.
I don't see where this is germaine to drinking; it doesn't mention drinking at all.
1 Thessalonians 5 says nothing at all about drinking either.
Galatians 5:16-21 (more in context) says This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Hatred. Variance. Wrath. Strife. Revelling. All the same as drunkenness. Yet again, the apostles were so drunk they couldn't stay awake in the garden with Jesus.
Matthew 26:39 - And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?
Mark 14:23-37 - And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it.
And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many.
Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.
And he cometh, and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou? couldest not thou watch one hour?
Proverbs 4:24 - Put away from thee a froward mouth, and perverse lips put far from thee.
In other words, stop frowning!
Yes, drinking can have us do things we may later regret, but that's not the fault of the wine. God put wine here for us to enjoy.
Genesis 1:29 - And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
As the page you link points out, abuse and addiction are two different things. And embarrassing as it is coming from an EDU domain, it contradicts itself, as the last bulletpoint in "dependance" is "abuse".
Note that it doesn't say addiction. It says dependance. And note where it got its graphics: the same place it got its funding. That's right, the National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Couldn't you have found a more scholarly link than a government-funded college? You expect them to bite the hand that feeds them?
I've read that little piece of government propaganda that but have never, ever seen it, and as I've smoked reefer for over three decades I've met a lot of smokers.
Also, there is no tolerance with marijuana. You only have tolerance with physically addictive substances like alcohol, heroin, caffiene, or oxycontin.
Hey, if I could turn water into wine I'd be shitfaced 24/7.
Well, that's the youth thing. Everybody else is sitting around the dorm passing the sunny-d so if you don't too you're a pussy. Conformity is dangerous.
What about dogs and woman? Oh wait, this is slashdot, never mind.
No, I am most certainly NOT telling you there is NOTHING to worry about. You should worry about your commute to work. You should worry about trans fat. You should worry that your grandpa might shoot or molest your child.
You should NOT worry about terrorists or internet child molesters, because the danger from them is as close to zero as you can get. There are a hell of a lot more important things to worry about.
Yeah, good luck with that. In America, nobody dies of any cancer that wasn't caused by cigarettes. Nope, the fact that the guy worked at Hanford for thirty years has nothing to do with the fact that he got lung cancer, it must be second hand cigarette smoke!
You've touched a sore spot with me. I haven't had a cigarette for eight years, but I'm pissed first at the Springfiled/Sangamon smoking ban and now at the statewide ban. It caused the closure of at least two of my favorite bars. The rest of them have all raised their prices.
There are still bars here that allow smoking. I drink next to smokers at them. No I'm not goiiing to rat them out. Fucking nanny state busybodies piss me off. If these asshats wanted a nonsmoking bar why didn't they just open one? I mean, besides the fact that nineteen out of twenty drinkers smoke?
...if you forgot to buy beer before the game starts the previous day, you're SOL thanks to these religiously sponsored legislative actions.
That's something I can't understand, except that people are too lazy to read their own bibles and fall prey to the wolves in sheep's clothing.
There is nothing whatever in the Christian Bible that says drinking is a sin. Ok there is a passage in the old testament that says kings shouldn't drink, and one in the new testament that says we should soberly wait for the second coming - but it also says "give strong drink to the dying and wine to those with the blues." It also chronicles the fact that on Jesus' last night on earth, all the apostles were shitfaced drunk.
These peole aren't reading Christ's bible, they're reading Pat Robertson's bible. Jesus had quite a few things to say about people like Robertson and his four thousand dollar suits...
-mcgrew
If we don't comply they'll attack us again!
Don't forget Pakistan. We have to shut off cell phone service there too. After all, most of the Taliban is with our "friends" in Pakistan.
</sarcasm>
-mcgrew
Only the Democrats say that. The Republicans say "kiss my elephant".