Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (118556)	6/7/2005 7:29:19 AM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793921

Chemo has advanced a lot. There are good FDA approved drugs that do a better job than marijuana. I think the mj battle should be fought square on - the benefits to society of outlawing it aren't worth the hit to personal freedom. And that any case it is totally outside the purview of the Federal Government's Constitutional mandate. This strategy of arguing that mj is a healing drug isn't working. People see right through it.

To: Tom Clarke who wrote (118556)	6/7/2005 3:48:35 PM
From: KLP	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793921

I agree. If it is a Doc's Rx, then it should be considered as medicine. Why would the liberals on the SC shut medical use down? I've thought about some of the different views about marijuana use, cigarette and cigar use, alcohol use, etc. Wonder what would happen if we as a society considered these to be legal, AS LONG AS each person purchasing the item/substance, signed for the item, and part of the "fine print" was that the person themselves would not hold the government hostage for paying the bills for themselves if they become addicted to it, nor would the government be hostage for paying the bills for any damage to others they might incur while using the item/substance. The user of the item/substance or their estate if they should die, would be responsible for any damage that was sustained to others because of the use of the guilty individual. Make it a personal responsibility issue. I know, it won't work because some people believe that THEY and their individual liberties are the only ones that matter...and just forget about anyone else. We can't get deadbeat parents to pay their share of the kids upbringing. We can't stop people from murdering each other. We can't stop people from breaking any number of laws already on the books. Where do personal liberties become secondary to the greater good of society?