Rats taking cannabis get taste for heroin

news@nature.com ^ | 5 July 2006 | Michael Hopkin

[Moonman62]

and that groups like the Libertarian Party that espouse such nonsense are losers.

Empty namecalling.

It's a fact. The LP is a loser, and that's because of its policies and reputation. It can no longer pull more than half a per cent in a national election. The same goes for the other groups I mentioned.

[Moonman62]

Alcohol was never banned. During Prohibition possession was legal,

A distinction without a difference, as manufacture, sale, or transportation was prohibited.

Then why is it the pot activists want to chip away at marijuana prohibition by making possession legal ?

[Moonman62]

Mighty thin reeds on which to hang your distinction. Cocaine is prescribable ... does that mean it's not banned?

How often is it prescribed? Whiskey was prescribed millions of times during alcohol "prohibition."

If these are such thin reeds, why are the pot activists pushing so hard to put the same weaknesses in marijuana prohibition that doomed alcohol prohibition?

[Moonman62]

Incorrect as usual; the U.S. Constitution, the "supreme law of the land, states as one of its purposes to "secure the Blessings of Liberty".

I don't don't think the Founding Fathers would consider drug addiction and all the social ills that go along with it a blessing of liberty.

[Moonman62]

So you think Roe v Wade and Lawrence v Texas were properly decided? Conservatives don't.

And it's improper to equate the right to be a drug addict to something as important as the right to life. Abortion is an active political topic among responsible elected national leaders. Every session of Congress takes steps to chip away at it, and it's always the most important issue when a new Supreme Court justice is selected.

In contrast the advocates for the liberty to be a drug addict are Libertarians, Anarchists, criminals and drug addicts. In other words, the government's right to keep law and order is going to usurp the right of an individual to be a drug addict for a long time to come.

[Know your rights]

Then why is it the pot activists want to chip away at marijuana prohibition by making possession legal ?

I don't know anyone who wants possession legal but manufacture, sale, and transportation legal ... and if that ever became the case I'd mock the notion that marijuana was no longer banned.

[Know your rights]

How often is it [cocaine] prescribed? Whiskey was prescribed millions of times during alcohol "prohibition."

How infrequently must a legally-prescribable drug be prescribed before it's "really" banned in your book?

If these are such thin reeds, why are the pot activists pushing so hard to put the same weaknesses in marijuana prohibition that doomed alcohol prohibition?

You think Prohibition fell because of alcohol prescriptions?! LOL! Speakeasies, rumrunners ... they all meant nothing. Your FR name is appropriate.

[Know your rights]

I don't don't think the Founding Fathers would consider drug addiction and all the social ills that go along with it a blessing of liberty.

What makes you think the Founding Fathers believed that liberty produced only blessings ... or that one could 'fine-tune' liberty so as to produce only blessings yet remain liberty?

[Know your rights]

the Supreme Court still decides where the "powers" of the government end, and the rights of the people begin.

So you think Roe v Wade and Lawrence v Texas were properly decided? Conservatives don't.

And it's improper to equate the right to be a drug addict to something as important as the right to life.

Nobody "equated" anything, Dodgy McSquirm; I just pointed out that your complete deference to the Supreme Court disqualified you as a conservative.