Squeak, Sqweak, Sqeee
I hope I don't wander to far off topic but here is my 2 cents...ok so it's a few dollars more
Even if one limits his substance abuse to privacy (never driving, working drunk or high etc) what happens when the use of these substances cause medical problems? Will we leave these people to die or pay their medical expenses? Even without direct contact these people's addictions cause economic damage (high taxes etc.) which directly result in others being hurt. I'm certain if you smoke enough marijuana you will have health problems but what positive benefit does it provide? A valid point in one of the drinking threads and what Neirai said "Proverbs 31:6-7" applies here. This only applies to relief from physical pain that cannot be healed, not mental though. Which is why I would support a medical use of marijuana in a non-smoking form if it was proven to have a beneficial effect (Certainly smoking your lungs with anything is hazardous to your health so I guess you'd have to vaporize it, but, I don't see people vaporizing nicotine). However, in mental pain drugs and alcohol only hide pain. They don't let a person deal with the cause of the pain itself and if you can never deal with the cause you will never get past it and thus you are addicted whether there is a chemical addiction or not. Really it seems like the world wants you to keep hopping from one false cure to another. Drugs don't fill the void, try alcohol, try sex , try food...etc. Of course we all know the only thing that will...
Now at what point should the government intervene though? You can't give everyone access to everything, I don't think the average guy should have access to radioactive materials
(ah man and I had this great idea for clean fusion. I had the Gerbil wheel all set up
) . On the opposite end obesity is causing a lot of health care problems should they be regulating fast food? Unfortunately they are, the problem has come that far. What then is the root of the problem? It's people are addressing only the effect of these abuses and not the cause. There is no personal responsibly being instilled in people and until people have that you can't have these substances because they will abuse them. When you say something is wrong or sinful and are against popular opinion you are a bigot or infringing on ones rights (how is just saying something is wrong infringing on anyone's rights anyway???) . People will say "you can do anything you dream of" but not "don't enter into temptation" from which the potential user, encouraged to believe in himself not God, says "I can use substances without getting addicted". If you beat the odds and don't get addicted great, but, why do you need drugs anyway? Whether it's marijuana or another drug it gives you a purposeless pleasure with no accomplishment and no change to your status for the better. At least if you beat a video game or overcome a challenge you have done something, you have a reason to be happy and without the short term memory loss you may actually remember it.
ANYTHING can become a sin when used at the wrong time and place. Unfortunately if people don't get more personal responsibility that's the way things will go. If we outlaw all things we end up in a big brother society, if we allow all things we end up in a society that destroys itself by it's lack of personal responsibility. Good government is about balancing the personal liberties of people with the safety and well being of those people. Since we will never be perfect (on Earth) government cannot allow all things and since the government is made up of us it will never be perfect so it cannot outlaw all things. No society is truly "free" as long as sin exists. The point at which you start outlawing things should be based on the personal responsibility shown by it's people. It's like giving some responsibility to your children you give a little and if they prove the can handle it you give them more, if not you take it away. In the case of marijuana people haven't shown responsibility with similar things like smoking so why would you give them another responsibility?
THE SOLUTION It's not to address just the effect but the cause of these problems. That should come not from the government but from Christians, because, nothing, drug use, etc. would matter if there is no hereafter. Furthermore, I've always found it hypocritical when "say no to etc. campaigns" say not to succumb to peer pressure then use peer pressure (it's not cool etc.) to get you to avoid substance abuse.
Some churches nowadays will not hold anyone responsible for their actions for fear of driving them away, but, this is what we should be doing, with love of course. I know it is difficult to phrase a correction (as we do not want to be perceived as thinking we are better). Why are Christians so scared of saying something is wrong and you are going to hurt yourself with it when that is the central message of Christianity anyway (i.e.. you're a sinner (wrong) and you are going to hell (hurt yourself) without Jesus, of course I'd phrase it different in practice).
MY BOTTOM LINE I am for a medically dispensed and monitored marijuana in a non-smoking form IF it is proven to have a application there. Given that it is much, much harder to take something away from people than give it to them I don't think we should legalize it for medical use until we have some hard evidence that marijuana does have a medical application (which cannot be better filled by another legal substance). However, there is a time and a place for everything under God and that marijuana would have a use makes sense. I am not for open distribution of it though.
Saw this old film on hemp's non-medical uses a while back thought it was applicable here. (note the sound is out of sync in the film and this site does have some objectable material elsewhere)
http://www.archive.org/details/Hemp_for_victory_1942
On a side note much is said about the failure of prohibition, but, look at the trade we made by repealing it, less organized crime vs. more alcohol related crime. Not just drunk driving but virtually any other crime can be committed because a person is drunk, domestic violence, murder, theft etc... Why are people so much more willing to except a large slow death and destruction toll to a smaller more shocking one? Last year (ALONE), nearly 16,000~ people were killed as a result of drunk driving. And over 1 million people were injured AND this is only from drunk driving. I just don't believe that's a fair trade for the freedom to drink.
Ok I got a bit off topic but everything is connected so it's hard to address one issue without addressing another. It is nice to see everyone discussing the issue in such a polite manner though
![[toj.cc]phantom](/forums/data/avatars/m/1/1132.jpg?1442680067){kind=avatar}
