Our Drug War Next Door

[rocketpig]

jv103 said:

rocketpig said:

jv103 said:

Are you saying then that you in no way can sympathize with those who marginalize themselves. I mean it is a pretty fucking intimidating system. Either way, without the support of some form of majority, even with ideas and action an individual working as such, has no way to challenge the system and hope to get anywhere unless he/she is willing to become some sort of martyr or Leonard Peltier or something.

 

I never said that. In fact, you only agreed with me because you thought I said what you supposed I said.

I will never marginalize drugs or the the people they affect.

I'm only asking questions and parleying thoughts here. Still, people who abuse drugs largely marginalize themselves. Those who don't may succeed. Those who do drugs may succeed but how much did they restrict their conscience and artistic ability with those drugs? Or did they not and succeeded because, not in spite, of those influences? Were the drugs the ones that made them successful, not the actual person?

Riddle me, Batman.

No actually I only agree with you because I like your name. No in truth I think I've discussed post with you before. I'm not so sure about the drug thing and artistic talent. I imagine the same question could be asked about someone who eats healthily versus someone who eats chips all day; one would assume that diet has a lot to do with possible performance and if that is true than would not drugs constitute a diet in some sense. I mean Caffeine is a drug and it has become almost a diet staple allowing for faster, if not always as focused, response times. Maybe drugs, should be incorporated regularly therefore enhancing certain characteristics that we so desire. Like taking Omega threes as an anti-inflammatory, or extra protein and complex carbs in hopes of creating muscle mass. I wonder if drugs (I mean 'natural' peyote/mescaline, shrooms, marijuana, coca leaves, opium poppies) would constitute a diet more so than simply as an intoxicant.

Yeah I imagine that whether a drug helps or hinders could be either way though, probably being dependent on a person's proclivities.

-although, if that were the case than that would indicate that drugs actually don't do anything except possibly magnify whatever tendencies an individual may have in the first place meaning that the actual drugs aren't an issue at all.

 

 Edit: Oh sorry for the supposition but sometimes your writing is pretty cryptic.

Don't apologize for not understanding my cryptic wording, my point is that everyone should be allowed to think for themselves.

For the bolded: aren't we all drugged? Where do you draw the line over drugging for performance (or life) versus drugging for performance (or work)?

Where is the moral line drawn?

x