"I wish pot was legalized...not so much that it would be legal to use it, but it would make all the pot heads shut the fuck up already."

11/28/2007 11:06:42 AM

^^that's true, I realized after I posted that i could have used better wording.

but the main point remains.

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:07 AM. Reason : fhds]

11/28/2007 11:07:01 AM

i can't remember what comedian said it

11/28/2007 11:07:20 AM

DRUGS ARE BAD MMKAY

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:07 AM. Reason : oops]

11/28/2007 11:07:29 AM

YALL DONT EVEN SMOKE THE GOOD SHIT!!!

11/28/2007 11:07:38 AM

Quote :

"My personal belief is that ultimately, it all boils down to your personal responsibility. If you knew that you might possibly (even if it's a remote possibility) be subjected to drug tests, and that the results of such tests could directly impact your employment status, yet you still decided to partake of substances which would produce unfavorable results in such tests...then you should be prepared to deal with the consequences of your actions. Regardless of what should or should not be fair, in your opinion, even if it involves eating meat, you agreed to abide by explicitly stated policies as a term of employment. It's not your right to be employed by any company; it is your privilege. Is it really that hard to just not do it? Are you really using your substance habits to determine the path that your life career makes? That goes for all habits: internet, alcohol, pot, coke, little boys, etc. This is a joke. "

just thought i would repost this.

Quote :

"wow just, wow I guess you obey every law, then, huh?"

I obey everyone that could get me fired..and if I get caught breaking one I take the penalty like a fucking man.

ps...do you know what a 'bigot' is? you keep using it like people are discriminating against 'your kind.' drug user is not a race, gender or creed.

11/28/2007 11:09:44 AM

wow, what the hell happened to this thread?

11/28/2007 11:09:50 AM

Quote :

"you're comparing your subjective OPINION against HIS subjective opinion...his opinions are no more wrong or stupid than yours are, but any subjective measure"

when he says that ANYONE who uses a substance for reasons other than health is relying on them, it is actually one of the most wrong and stupid opinions i have ever heard.

lol, anyone who has a drink on the weekend is an alcoholic, and relys on alcohol to get by.....comical.

11/28/2007 11:10:18 AM

Quote :

"^^^^ I don't know, I don't think 47% of the US has played WoW."

well, i meant the numbers by my experience are skewed

11/28/2007 11:10:29 AM

Quote :

"So besides the mechanism, how do you distinguish someone getting an adrenaline high off of playing counterstrike vs. someone smoking a joint? I mean I know a lot more people who failed classes because they were hooked on WoW than for pot use."

the mechanism is the whole point - someone playing a game synthesized endogenous hormones in their physiologically natural state and concentration. someone who smokes a joint is augmenting their body's natural cannabinoid receptors with physiologically abnormal amounts of the substance. again, modern medicine is great for situations that warrant augmentation of our natural physiology, but i think it's wrong to use this in an otherwise healthy body.

Quote :

""It's not your dislike of drugs that is wrong and stupid, it's your closed-minded condemning of all drug users that don't have a medical condition.""

and yes, i do condemn recreational drug use. i'm not saying that people who use drugs are inherently bad, but that this part of their life is wrong and i disagree with it.

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:13 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:10:54 AM

for the record, i dont give a rat fuck if someone wants to do drugs. you do whatever you want to do in your own house. have fun.

i do give a fuck if that person cant man up and accept responsibility for his actions, then blames the system. fuck yourself.

11/28/2007 11:12:43 AM

yeah on second thought, fuck it, it is wrong; condemning ALL that touch a substance for non-medical reasons. just like some hardcore psycho-christian babble bullshit is WRONG whether it's there opinion or not. Hitler's opinion was fucking STUPID and wrong(silly and extreme analogy, i know, but you get the point). My previous post was saying wrong in terms of right or wrong, not "incorrect"

you just can't make a blanket statement like "all who have used recreation drugs are weak-minded," fuck.

FUCK the following:

Jimmy Hendrix
The Beatles
Led Zeppelin
Black Sabbath
etc.



[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:18 AM. Reason : sfsd]

11/28/2007 11:13:25 AM

i have totally quit reading this stuff. just posting cause its my Jeepin4x4's thread

11/28/2007 11:14:31 AM

Hahahaha i went to a dry wedding where the entire wedding party was on pharmaceuticals for anxiety.

11/28/2007 11:14:47 AM

Quote :

"i'm not saying that people who use drugs are inherently bad"

uh, you said they are "WEAKER" than you, and "weak minded fools"

11/28/2007 11:15:23 AM

Hope that dimebag was worth it. Sure McDonalds is looking for a shift manager.

Quote :

"how hard is it for you fuckers to not do drugs?"

11/28/2007 11:16:41 AM

Quote :

"FUCK the following: Jimmy Hendrix The Beatles Led Zeppelin Black Sabbath"

i fucking hate you

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:16 AM. Reason : k]

11/28/2007 11:16:46 AM

weak =! bad

but yeah, i stand by that. if you gotta toke it up just to get through the day, then you are WEAK.* face it. i can get through the day on my own, thank you very much

*again, does not apply to medically warranted uses

11/28/2007 11:17:56 AM

remember when people were concerned about me?

hahaha that stopped on the first page.

oh well, my confidence is back! I'm gonna pass this test!!

11/28/2007 11:18:05 AM

Quote :

"Hope that dimebag was worth it. Sure McDonalds is looking for a shift manager."

im pretty sure that MickeyDs drug-tests its management since they are handling money.

11/28/2007 11:18:28 AM

Quote :

"i do give a fuck if that person cant man up and accept responsibility for his actions, then blames the system. fuck yourself."

the system is broken in many more areas than just drug policy, that's just the reality of it.

11/28/2007 11:18:44 AM

Quote :

"but yeah, i stand by that. if you gotta toke it up just to get through the day, then you are WEAK.* face it. i can get through the day on my own, thank you very much"

as can I. I smoke about once a month. For fun, at concerts, in attempt to feel cleansed for the following week etc.

but I don't have a medical condition, so I guess I'm a weak minded fool.

I'm done here, I'm going to go escape from reality and take a nap.



[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:22 AM. Reason : fds]

11/28/2007 11:20:04 AM

Quote :

"remember when people were concerned about me? hahaha that stopped on the first page. oh well, my confidence is back! I'm gonna pass this test"

some companies have a retest policy....i've worked at a few who will allow a retest within a certain amount of time on your dime....its worth checking into just in case.

Quote :

"but yeah, i stand by that. if you gotta toke it up just to get through the day, then you are WEAK."

I can agree with that, but that's a far cry from your original position.

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:21 AM. Reason : .]

11/28/2007 11:20:28 AM

Quote :

"the mechanism is the whole point - someone playing a game synthesized endogenous hormones in their physiologically natural state and concentration. someone who smokes a joint is augmenting their body's natural cannabinoid receptors with physiologically abnormal amounts of the substance. again, modern medicine is great for situations that warrant augmentation of our natural physiology, but i think it's wrong to use this in an otherwise healthy body."

To be fair, pot is a whole lot more natural than a video game. Also, consider the situations in which people experience both stimuli. Do you think it's all that natural for someone to enter an adrenaline induced excited state while sedentary?

11/28/2007 11:20:41 AM

Quote :

"To be fair, pot is a whole lot more natural than a video game."

i think you missed his point.

11/28/2007 11:21:39 AM

Quote :

"Do you think it's all that natural for someone to enter an adrenaline induced excited state while sedentary?"

yes. no matter what, as long as a FOREIGN CHEMICAL isn't entering your body, it's natural.

11/28/2007 11:22:13 AM

what critics!?

11/28/2007 11:22:49 AM

^^^No I got it. In one case you have a chemical produced by the brain in response to stimuli, and in the other case the chemical is introduced to the brain. How is one inherently more natural if the situation that causes it is so contrived and manufactured. Tank joo for teh halp reeding tho.

^^ Our bodies rely on foreign chemicals entering our bodies all the time though. Hell high-sugar foods have been shown to cause a dramatic increase in seratonin levels in the brain- behaving similarly to mild psychoactive drugs.

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:25 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:23:05 AM

I think plenty of things are wrong, but I don't go around spreading elitist bullshit about the people doing them being weak.

11/28/2007 11:23:48 AM

Quote :

"How is one inherently more natural if the situation that causes it is so contrived and manufactured "

its the chemical reaction thats natural, atleast thats the way i interpreted it. you body naturally reacts to feelings and situations, whether they are manufactured or not. its still a natural reaction. if you get stressed, your body reacts accordingly...it doesnt matter how that stress is induced.

11/28/2007 11:26:59 AM

so you're saying that auto-erotic asphyxiation is okay?????

11/28/2007 11:27:41 AM

yall just dont understand...drugs accept me for who i am..

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:28 AM. Reason : d]

11/28/2007 11:28:18 AM

^^wait, its not?

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:28 AM. Reason : but it feels so good.]

11/28/2007 11:28:30 AM

Quote :

"Our bodies rely on foreign chemicals entering our bodies all the time though. Hell high-sugar foods have been shown to cause a dramatic increase in seratonin levels in the brain- behaving similarly to mild psychoactive drugs."

ok, well that's clearly not "natural" then is it? you can get high off pure oxygen, that's a natural substance, right? it is, but the dose at which you get high is not natural

11/28/2007 11:28:37 AM

And your brain reacts fairly directly to a lot of chemicals you introduce too- like sugar causing a noticeable rise in seratonin.

^ So you're equally against candy?

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:29 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:29:05 AM

you guys are fucking ridiculous, just shut the fuck up already

11/28/2007 11:30:41 AM

sugar is natural

11/28/2007 11:30:41 AM

Yes it is. There's meat sugars, fruit sugars... etc. etc. Replace candy with a large ripe pear or two.

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:32 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:31:27 AM

lend me some suga, im y0 neighbah

11/28/2007 11:33:46 AM

Quote :

"if you gotta toke it up just to get through the day, then you are WEAK"

who said anything about having to "toke it up just to get through the day"

is that what you think recreational drug use is?

I never cease to be amazed at how immature and bigoted your view of drug use is

are you just trolling for responses, or do you actually beleive the shit you post?

I mean, damn

Quote :

"ps...do you know what a 'bigot' is? you keep using it like people are discriminating against 'your kind.' drug user is not a race, gender or creed."

not to insult you or anything

but yes I do know what a bigot is

and it has more to do with than simply discrimination on the basis of race, gender or creed

I believe you have taken the common use as the meaning, not the actual meaning*

I could just suggest that you look it up, but I'll do it for you

Quote :

"One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ intolerant, prejudiced person One who is obstinately and zealously attached to an opinion that you do not entertain A narrow-minded person who is intolerant of beliefs other than his or her own A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own One who is narrrowly or intolerantly devoted to his or her opinions and prejudices A bigot is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from their own a person with fixed and intolerant belief"

*like the word "awesome" commonly means good, but it actually means "awe inspiring", whether good or bad





[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:40 AM. Reason : *]

11/28/2007 11:33:46 AM

Allow me to post yet again (thanks to DaBird for reposting earlier):

Quote :

"My personal belief is that ultimately, it all boils down to your personal responsibility. If you knew that you might possibly (even if it's a remote possibility) be subjected to drug tests, and that the results of such tests could directly impact your employment status, yet you still decided to partake of substances which would produce unfavorable results in such tests...then you should be prepared to deal with the consequences of your actions. Regardless of what should or should not be fair, in your opinion, even if it involves eating meat, you agreed to abide by explicitly stated policies as a term of employment. It's not your right to be employed by any company; it is your privilege. Is it really that hard to just not do it? Are you really using your substance habits to determine the path that your life career makes? That goes for all habits: internet, alcohol, pot, coke, little boys, etc. This is a joke."

I swear, this thread has been hijacked by a bunch of goddamn Lilliputian Big-Endians and Little-Endians.

11/28/2007 11:35:40 AM

the reason why people are experiencing psychotropic effects from eating a seeming innocuous substance is because they are getting unnaturally high doses. our bodies are not evolving fast enough to keep up with the rate at which we develop new processing strategies for food. 2000 years ago you couldn't eat a 4000 calorie meal in one sitting, because to eat that much food it would require your stomach to expand beyond human limits. also, no one had that much food available on a regular basis.


[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:38 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:36:42 AM

so did you pass or fail the test?

11/28/2007 11:39:39 AM

But you can experience a sugar high off of natural things to- like honey fruit. How about tea? I'm not saying you're inconsistent, I'm just curious about where you draw distinctions.

11/28/2007 11:40:14 AM

Quote :

"But you can experience a sugar high off of natural things to- like honey fruit. How about tea? I'm not saying you're inconsistent, I'm just curious about where you draw distinctions."

it's not a black and white situation. like i said before, i make the distinction between natural and unnatural based on dose (and chronicity), the nature of the administration, and the nature of the chemical in consideration.

11/28/2007 11:42:57 AM

Quote :

"I guess you obey every law, then, huh?"

YES. And don't compare this to speeding. Speeding isn't even a misdemeanor. You can't accidentally smoke pot.

11/28/2007 11:43:07 AM

^^Sounds like an easier way to make the distinction would be to look at the overall effects of use. Deleterious vs. benign. I'm not saying for legality's sake, that would be paternalistic if we made it illegal to do things that were bad for you.

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:44 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:43:58 AM

Quote :

"But you can experience a sugar high off of natural things to- like honey fruit. How about tea? I'm not saying you're inconsistent, I'm just curious about where you draw distinctions."

Totally subjective. Not going to change the immediate outcome of the original poster's quandary. Neither are the majority of the arguments in this thread.

Stipulations of employment exist. As long as employment is a commodity, such stipulations will stand...to varying degrees, of course. Many of you can argue until you're blue in the face, and that won't change a thing, especially if it's a totally recreational issue. Regulation of industry exists to guarantee employees basic rights and to prevent exploitation. Beyond that, it's anybody's game. Employee and employer decide which rules each is to be bound by. If you can't abide by the other's rules, then you don't play the game.

11/28/2007 11:47:04 AM

^^ thats a good way to think about it. i think the legal aspect is exactly that, for the most part (in regards to controlled substances). but you have to extend that with your personal opinions and beliefs, because if you were to only follow the law and nothing else, you'd be pretty fucked up

[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:49 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:47:08 AM

Quote :

"I guess you obey every law, then, huh?"

Quote :

"YES. And don't compare this to speeding. Speeding isn't even a misdemeanor. You can't accidentally smoke pot."

wow, I can't believe you took the bait

why wouldn't I compare it to speeding?

I mean, is there universal "rule of law" or not?

you can't have it both ways



oh, and

yes, you can accidentally smoke pot



[Edited on November 28, 2007 at 11:53 AM. Reason : ]

11/28/2007 11:49:44 AM