It seems I am guilty of stating that an actively addicted person is to some degree morally incapacitated.
XJarHead said: Plenty of soldiers got addicted to morphine due to battlefield injuries, and subsequently remained addicted even after the pain left. I had and have a lot more sympathy for them than I do for those who treated drugs as a toy from the outset.
Quite right. And do any of those soldiers who remained addicted steal to feed their habit? The sad fact is yes, they do.
The hope for addicts is recovery. If the addict is not recovering, it won't matter where our sympathies lie, because he will be at high risk for worse and worse consequences.
You are more guilty of a lack of understanding of some very real differences in the broad topic of drugs.
Many addicts are "legally" addcited and receiving Rx from their doctors. They must continually take "legal" drugs to make life liveable. Are such persons "morally incapacitated"?
I'd like to see you announce your convoluted judgment to the family of a suffering cancer patient.
If you cannot see a difference between the medically addicted person, whether the drugs are supplied through prescription or not, and the person who began by seeking a high of some kind, you have an unrealistic view of life and human nature.
No matter what, you do come across as a holier-than-thou and my red flags fly high when people like you show up.