I went through a brief libertarian phase on the matter of drug legalization, but now I’ve come back around against it, albeit for different reasons than I was against it before.
It could be seen as a logical inconsistency that conservatives would want to keep drugs illegal on the basis that people shouldn’t have them. Is that not the argument liberals use regarding guns? But when a liberal says this, the conservative comes back with, “Outlawing guns isn’t going to stop bad guys from getting them.” And that’s true.
But the purpose for me in keeping drugs outlawed would not be to keep them out of people’s hands—again, it won’t achieve that affect at all. I know that if you outlaw drugs, “only outlaws will use drugs.” That’s fine with me if they do. So why outlaw drugs?
Because it breeds sloth and apathy. The people who want to smoke pot are going to smoke pot without regard for what the law says, but if it’s illegal, they will do it in the privacy of their home most of the time. If it’s legal, they will be more likely to do it in public (there’s nothing marijuana-smokers love more than telling people they smoke marijuana—they’re like vegans, marathoners, and teachers).
Ron Paul made a good point in one of the Republican primary debates for the 2012 election. He said that just because a drug becomes legal does not mean people who didn’t use drugs before are suddenly going to want to use them. Most people’s minds on the matter won’t be changed, he’s right. But kids will be adversely affected be legalization.
It is actually still illegal in Colorado to smoke marijuana publicly, but on Easter Sunday tens of thousands of potheads descended on Denver for a big pot-smoking festival. There’s power in numbers, they figured. Here’s a quote from an Associated Press article on the event:
"It feels good not to be persecuted anymore," said Joe Garramone, exultantly smoking a joint while his 3-year-old daughter played on a vast lawn crowded with fellow smokers.
Smoking in public allows kids to witness it. Growing up with that normalizes the practice in these kids’ eyes, so when they’re advised in their teen years not to smoke pot, those admonishments will seem merely like the silly hysterics of square, old-fashioned parents. “Nothing is wrong with it,” they will think. “Everyone does it all the time.”
Why would we want the next generation to have that belief? Drugs should be stigmatized, not normalized.
Secondly, but most importantly for me, getting high is a sin for the same reason that getting drunk is a sin. (Why not outlaw alcohol then? Because alcohol isn’t always drunk to get drunk; I drink and don’t get drunk. But people who use drugs use them specifically to get high.) If this violates the First Amendment, then the First Amendment is wrong on the matter. Call me a theocrat—that’s accurate, actually; I am a believer in Christian theocracy and an opponent of legalizing drugs, and I am both of those for the same reason: any nation that allows immorality to flourish cannot itself flourish.
Bless this post.
Asked by eftrom
Nothing is morally or politically wrong with “Like, I can’t even”. So it’s not to your tastes. Nobody cares. Nobody has to or should care. Let people be people; not every facet of others’ lives have to agree with you. Pick your battles and stop being a curmudgeon.
I hate this trend of being “funny” simply by pretending to be overly excited but in a serious way, using lots of cuss words and stuff. They type in all caps to emphasize how excited they are, but they use cuss words and type with an aggressive tone to demonstrate how “serious” they are. Guys, the joke has been done before. It was funny once, and now it’s just obnoxious. You’re just mimicking one another. You have no individual personalities. It’s like Tumblr devoured you all individually and then crapped you out in one turd. Now you’re all the same. Here’s an example of what I mean. Look at the words in between each picture. How many times have we seen people be “angry-excited” like that on Tumblr? Too many to count. It’s so retarded.LET’S FUCKIN TALK ABOUT ART
OH WHOA THAT’S A SWEET ASS MOTHERFUCKING CLASSICAL PAINTING BUT THEN FUCKIN LOOK AT THE DETAIL
TTHHHIIISSSSS IISSSSS AAAAA PAAAIINNNTTTIIINNNGGGG?!!?!!?!!!?!?!!! WHAT TO HECK????
FUCKIN SWEET ASS DAFT PUNK COLORED PENCILS HELLA
LOOK AT THIS AND TELL ME IT ISN’T FUCKIN RAD AS HELL
THIS LOOKS LIKE A SCENE OUT OF A MOVIE
OH SWEET LOOK AT THIS SCULPTURE RIGHT
JUST WAIT A FUCKIN MINUTE HERE
THIS IS A DRAWING MADE TO LOOK LIKE A SCULPTURE I CAN’T FUCKING
Oh, look, he’s now utilizing the “I can’t” “joke” trend, in which people use the phrase “I can’t” to mean just about anything because that’s what all their peers do. That’s how unique this guy’s sense of humor is.
LOOK MORE SWEET ASS COLORED PENCIL DRAWINGS
NOW I’M ABOUT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT MY BRO BERNINI OKAY JUST TRUST ME ON THIS
ALREADY GORGEOUS RIGHT
FUCKING LOOK AT THAT LOOK AT IT I’M FUCKING
See that? He used the “don’t complete your thoughts because it’s funnier if you don’t” joke.
HOW DOES MARBLE LOOK LIKE GOSSAMER FABRIC HOOOOOWWWW??!!!!?
There are so many actually important problems with the people of tumblr, and you take the time and effort to call people turds for their sense of humor and the way they express admiration? Trends and memes don’t mean people have no individuality; it means we’re sharing something in common. Rebelling against all trends and hating the people among you for any reason don’t make you superior; it makes you a jackass. I’m outie.
This semester I went to the White Privilege Conference in Madison, WI for my honors seminar about examining privilege. I made a poster about the behaviors of particular white female musicians who appropriate other cultures as a means of identity and sexualize/objectify WOC as a means of displaying sexual agency and social power. All under the guise of “empowerment”.
This is my take on the knowledge I found through seminar and readings, (esp. online articles) so in no way do I claim these ideas or concepts as my own.
This is quite the race-mongering fad. Not everything is a fight between white people and everybody else. Anything white people do with or regarding anything of another race or culture is criticized. You do realize you’re calling for segregation, right? You say a famous person wearing a hijab mocks those who get attacked for it? What about the fact that it norms the fashion which makes it socially acceptable for all to wear? By your arguments, you are proposing we segregate all races, restrict multiculturalism, and refuse to stand up for any race or culture not your own. Your kind are and have always been the true racists.
"Harrison Bergeron" is a satirical and dystopian science-fiction short story written by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. … The satire raises a serious question concerning the desirability of social equality and the extent to which society is prepared to go to achieve it.
It is the year 2081. Because of Amendments to the Constitution, every American is fully equal, meaning that no one is smarter, better-looking, stronger, or faster than anyone else. The Handicapper General and a team of agents ensure that the laws of equality are enforced. The government forces citizens to wear “handicaps” (a mask if they are too handsome or beautiful, earphones with deafening radio signals to make intelligent people unable to concentrate and form thoughts, and heavy weights to slow down those who are too strong or fast).
One April, 14 year old Harrison Bergeron, an extremely handsome teenage genius, is taken away from his parents, George and Hazel, by the government. George and Hazel are not fully aware of the tragedy. Hazel’s lack of awareness is due to “average” intelligence, which in 2081, is the politically correct way of referring to someone of well-below-average intelligence. George does not comprehend the tragedy since the law requires him to wear the radio ear piece for twenty-four hours a day because he is of above-average intelligence.
Hazel and George are watching a ballet on TV. Hazel has been crying, though she cannot remember why. She remarks on the beauty of the dance. For a few moments, George reflects on the dancers, who are weighed down to counteract their gracefulness and masked to cover up their good looks. They have been handicapped so that TV viewers will not feel bad about their own appearance and hence will feel equally as talented and good-looking. Because of their handicaps, the dancers are not very good. A noise interrupts George’s thoughts: two of the dancers onscreen hear the noise, too; apparently, they must wear radios as well.
Hazel thinks George looks exhausted and urges him to lie down and rest his “handicap bag”, 47 pounds (21 kg) of weight placed in a bag and locked around George’s neck. He says he hardly notices the weight any more. Hazel suggests taking a few of the weights out of the bag, but he says if everyone broke the law, society would return to its old competitive ways. Hazel says she would hate that. A noise interrupts the conversation, and George cannot remember what they were talking about.
On TV, a news reporter with a speech impediment attempts to read a bulletin. After 30 seconds, unable to even say “Ladies and Gentlemen”, he hands the bulletin to a ballerina to read. Hazel commends him for working with his God-given abilities and says he should get a raise for trying so hard. The ballerina, wearing the most grotesque mask of all, and with weights meant for a 200-pound (90 kg) male, begins reading in her natural, beautiful voice, then apologizes and switches to a growly voice so that she will not sound nicer than anyone else. The bulletin says that Harrison has escaped from prison.
A photo of Harrison appears on the screen. He is wearing the handicaps meant to counteract his strength, intelligence, and good looks. The photo shows that he is 7 feet (2.1 m) tall and covered in 300 pounds (140 kg) of metal. He is wearing huge earphones, rather than a small radio, and big glasses meant to blind him and give him headaches. He is also wearing a red rubber nose and black caps over his teeth. His eyebrows are shaved off.
After a rumbling noise, the photo on the Bergerons’ TV screen is replaced with an image of Harrison himself, who has stormed the studio. In an attempt to overthrow the government and its handicapping systems, he says that he is the emperor, the greatest ruler in history, and that everyone must obey him. Then he rips off all of his handicaps. He says that the first woman brave enough to stand up will be his empress. A ballerina, presumably the one who reads the report, rises to her feet. Harrison removes her handicaps and mask, revealing a blindingly beautiful woman.
He orders the musicians to play, saying he will make them royalty if they do their best. Unhappy with their initial attempt, Harrison conducts, waving a couple of musicians in the air like batons, and sings. They try again and do better. After listening to the music, Harrison and his empress dance. Defying gravity, they move through the air, flying 30 feet (9 m) upward to the ceiling, then, still in the air, they kiss each other.
Diana Moon Glampers, the Handicapper General, comes into the studio and kills Harrison and the empress with a shotgun. Turning the gun on the musicians, she orders them to put their handicaps on in ten seconds, or the same fate will happen to them. The Bergerons’ screen goes dark. George, who has left the room to get a beer, returns and asks Hazel why she has been crying. She says that something sad happened on TV, but she cannot remember exactly what. He urges her not to remember sad things. A noise sounds in George’s head, and Hazel says it sounded like a doozy. He says she can say that again, and she repeats that it sounded like a doozy.
Asked by Anonymous
Oh gee, a marriage based on actual love rather than shared horniness; how could a union like that ever survive!
Asked by Anonymous
The point is to advocate it, make kids feel like it’s a real option, that they shouldn’t be pressured to have sex because it’s the only “normal” thing to do. It’s not just “not having sex is safest; now let’s move on to what you do when you want to completely ignore this advice”; it’s detailing ALL the benefits of abstinence—physical, emotional, psychological, economical, familial, relational, moral. It’s taking a tone in which you’re not assuming kids are going to be irresponsible. Judging by your apparent shallow perspective on abstinence, I think your education has failed you.
Asked by Anonymous
So you’d either kill yourself or kill your baby. Which of the party is more innocent? Who has more control over the matter? In case you haven’t realized, we don’t kill people just because someone threatens suicide if we don’t. That’s not how morality works.
Wait wait wait… Let me get this straight… You’re telling someone to chose killing just themselves or just the baby? What? Is the baby going to just pop out after she dies or something?
Excuse me, I am not telling anyone to kill themselves. Inferring I am in favor of someone killing themselves because I won’t let them kill their baby is called a false dichotomy.