Re: MD Biological - Terrorism?

From: Platt Holden (
Date: Thu Dec 16 2004 - 16:46:32 GMT

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Understanding Quality And Power"


    > But what about other illegal drugs? Would you legalize
    > them, too. If not, why not?
    > Dan asks:
    > Well, why do some countries have more liberal restrictions and seem to
    > live alright??? In other words, why do Europeans give their children a
    > glass of wine for dinner yet in the US we have to be 21? What are they
    > doing that we aren't?

    Well, I wouldn't look to Europe for moral guidance given its recent
    history (20th century).

    >Is it that we sensationalize things to support
    > profits, or as Arlo mentioned, put the fear into public information and
    > then claim, "The USG will make it better by placing laws and restrictions
    > and allowing only selected companies to sell ...(drugs)? All the while the
    > politicians line their pockets from lobbyists.

    Nice smokescreen, but you haven't answered my question. Should all drugs
    be legalized? If not, why not?
    > > I'll ask you - What is
    > > so wrong with marijuana that it has to be made illegal? Besides the
    > > fact that the USG cannot make profits from it because anyone can grow
    > > it.
    > Platt responds:
    > I would guess it's illegal because it often leads to use of stronger drugs
    > with resultant higher social costs. But, I'm not an expert on the subject.

    > Dan asks:
    > And alcohol doesn't contribute to bad patterns and other drugs too?!?!

    Probably not to the degree of marijuana, but I'm no expert.

    > Platt:
    > You seem to be against making money. Is there something immoral in that?
    > How are you going to buy your marijuana if you don't make money? As for
    > political campaigns, would you make it illegal for companies, billionaires
    > and web sites like to contribute?
    > Dan states:
    > I am not against making money. But when the facts are skewed or the
    > information presented is meant to cause fear if you don't buy this certain
    > product then, YES, I am against making money off of fear tactics.

    Like what? Give us some examples. Most advertising appeals to romance,
    status or money. You liberals seem to want everyone to wear the same shoe

    > When it
    > comes to campaign contributions I believe that a company, billionaire, the
    > blue-collar worker, etc should sponsor their candidate because they
    > believe in the candidates' direction. I do not think these entities should
    > sponsor a candidate because, once they do that candidate will owe them
    > something - which could reflect negatively on DQ or human rights and which
    > is a conflict of public interest. As a public official you represent THE
    > PEOPLE...NOT yourself!

    Agree. Put the public official who takes a bribe in jail.

    >And when you give in to lobbyists then what am I,
    > the average citizen, supposed to think? That Enron's slap on the wrist
    > that cost millions is OK because my president says it is?

    What "slap on the wrist" are you talking about?

    > Dan says:
    > What I was trying to get at is that, NO, we don't teach gang members to be
    > gang members. But if anyone tells me that the prevalence of drugs in poorer
    > neighborhoods is "by chance" and the "more fortunate" have nothing to do
    > with it then someone is on something...and it ain't me!!!

    Drugs are in the poorer neighborhoods because it's a way to make money
    illegally. I'm for legalizing drugs to put an end to that criminal
    behavior. As for drug "prevalence," it's not just in the slums by a long

    >The USA has
    > become, and has actually always been, a very judgmental country.

    Well, it seems you are being very judgmental about a lot of things.

    >You can
    > do it your own way in long as it's done how I say!!! I see
    > Christians, Politicians, and all kinds not give a second to talk to a
    > black man in the ghetto. We (the "more fortunate") label them criminals,
    > thieves, drug addicts, etc...and preach that we are the most humanitarian
    > nation in the world.

    Did it ever occur to you that maybe some of them are criminals, thieves
    and drug addicts?

    > Yet, we stay away from "that part of town" because of
    > "those kinds of people". Yet, what if you talked with one of "those people"
    > and discovered they were highly intellectual? What if they were just
    > people that have always been faced with low Quality Static Patterns? And
    > please don't give the "everyone has a chance" BS.

    Your beginning to sound like those intellectuals that Pirsig talked about:

    "Phaedrus remembered parties in the fifties and sixties full of liberal
    intellectuals like himself who actually admired the criminal types that
    sometimes showed up. "Here we are," they seemed to believe, "drug pushers,
    flower children, anarchists, civil rights workers, college professors-
    we're all just comrades-in-arms against the cruel and corrupt social
    system that is really the enemy of us all." (Lila, 24)
    > Platt asks:
    > So you would make tobacco illegal, too?

    > Dan says:
    > Yes! What, it shouldn't be because it's not a hallucinogen?

    I'm confused. You want to make all drugs illegal? Or legal? Or just some
    and not others? What?

    > If you smoke while employed as a quality checker at a drug company, THEN
    > if becomes a public concern. Or screw up in other ways.
    > Dan says:
    > That's what I was trying to say. Yes, I agree.

    Glad we agree on that about drug use.
    > Platt says:
    > If getting high is your idea of pursuing DQ, go for it. The higher you
    > get, the more DQ you'll see. Trip out, man. Be cool.
    > But, IMHO druggies don't contribute much to evolution, unless you consider
    > rock a contribution.
    > Dan says:
    > I am not a druggie. Very rarely do I even drink a beer. Have I done all of
    > that? Yes, back in the day. Nothing more than pot and beer but,
    > nonetheless, I have enjoyed more than my share!

    I"ve never considered you a "druggie." But, if pursuing DQ depends on
    getting high, why not get high on a daily basis?

    >And YES, I consider rock
    > music a HUGE contribution!!!
    I consider rock a primitive throwback to jungle music. Take away the beat,
    the amplifiers, the strobe lights and the pot and what's left?


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Dec 16 2004 - 16:58:04 GMT