vonFiedler
I Like Chopin
Dunno, Urban Dictionary only has references to the TV show and the literal meaning.
It figures they would be the first people to make a sustained extraterrestrial colony.Headline in 2015:
Drug Cartel lands on the moon.
-_-
I can partially agree with your point about letting people do what they with their bodies, but there has to be some sort of regulation. I mean some of these druggies actually end up having children and these children will see this and start doing what's bad for them. You can't just let these people influence a generation to start thinking drugs are good for you or something like that. That's partially the reason why drug trafficking is trying to be prevented, other than the fact that they get money and we don't.I believe murder is perfectly acceptable when it is self-defence. That includes defence from unjust government. It is unjust to prevent people from doing whatever they like with their bodies, it is unjust to attempt to obstruct suppliers of things that have demand, it is unjust to lock them in tiny rooms for decades at a time in punishment for it. Murder is perfectly justified in defending one's self from these things.
You do realize that we're talking about murder, right? As in taking someone else's life? Murdering members of the Coast Guard and DEA, who are only trying to protect the citizens of the United States, is not justified by the greed of people trying to smuggle illegal goods into our country. Law enforcement agencies are trained to not attack suspects unless they themselves are in put in danger. Murder is certainly not the means by which you should be achieving the "freedom" you seek in using illegal drugs and, if anything, only harms your cause by causing more drug-related violence and making drug lords look even more like the pieces of shit that they are stereotypically portrayed as in the American media.I believe murder is perfectly acceptable when it is self-defence. That includes defence from unjust government. It is unjust to prevent people from doing whatever they like with their bodies, it is unjust to attempt to obstruct suppliers of things that have demand, it is unjust to lock them in tiny rooms for decades at a time in punishment for it. Murder is perfectly justified in defending one's self from these things.
I was pointing out to the poster who had a problem with my putting the lives of drug dealers above the lives of those who would obstruct them that we don't all share the same values.Wrong argument.
The argument to recognise is that the Government, being the collective power of millions of people, backed by huge economic and military resource believes in sanctity of life. Consequently, what Lelouch believes about sanctity of life doesn't mean shit.
I am not suggesting the existance of a "soul" here. What I am suggesting is that everyone has someone else that cares about them, which is why murder is practically universally conisdered to be wrong (or at least one of the crimes that is most vehemently punished in this day and age, from a pragmatic standpoint). Not everyone shares your ideals of "freedom" manifesting itself through use of illicit drugs. Assassinating a tyrant for enslaving his people and putting them into hard labor camps and murdering DEA agents while trying to smuggle drugs aren't the same thing. Not even close.I was pointing out to the poster who had a problem with my putting the lives of drug dealers above the lives of those who would obstruct them that we don't all share the same values.
@ Tubaking - there's a difference between not wanting someone you care about to die and believing in an ineffable metaphysical constant that makes human life inherently valuable.
Which is to say, I would gladly see everyone who would obstruct freedom (in the case of the hypothetical scenario involving the coast guard and armed drug subs) lined up and shot into ditches, because I consider individual freedoms more important than any amount of collective ill will against them.
To be fair, there's lots of ways to be an unfit parent regardless of drug use. And the type of people who would raise children while constantly shooting up are probably the same parents who would be negligent for a different reason- alcohol being a large one- if drugs were illegal.I can partially agree with your point about letting people do what they with their bodies, but there has to be some sort of regulation. I mean some of these druggies actually end up having children and these children will see this and start doing what's bad for them. You can't just let these people influence a generation to start thinking drugs are good for you or something like that. That's partially the reason why drug trafficking is trying to be prevented, other than the fact that they get money and we don't.
We'll have to agree to disagree. I see no difference between the despot who bans dissent and the despot who bans drugs. Nor any difference between the enforcing arms of both despots.Assassinating a tyrant for enslaving his people and putting them into hard labor camps and murdering DEA agents while trying to smuggle drugs aren't the same thing. Not even close.
Personal freedom (in this context, I mean the freedom to do what you like to yourself, not the freedom to go on a shooting rampage) is something I consider fundamental. To me, you simply can't reduce it without making it absolutely worthless. That's why banning (or otherwise attempting to curtail people using whatever drug they want) is to me no better, worse or even different than any other form of oppression you care to name. I freely acknowledge this is an absolutist viewpoint and thus unlikely to be shared, but there's no reason you shouldn't be able to comprehend it whether you agree or not.I don't think you'll get freedom of drug use and freedom of expression on the same plane of logic anytime soon. Expression is a traditional fundamental right that needs to exist for societal progress, while drugs are a recreational activity that don't really contribute at all. I really don't see how they're remotely comparable. And I'm not exactly against drugs.
Basically...Detroit. I mean just look at Detroit. Ugh.Why shouldn't one be allowed to finance the distribution and use of drugs? Why shouldn't you be allowed to harm yourself if that's what you want?
I'm unsure what you mean by "possibly damaging the environment". Do you mean the propensity for areas of widespread drug use to become slums? If so, what has that to do with my right to put whatever I want into my body? If you don't like that, fix the slums, don't revoke personal freedoms.