Skip to comments.
Gone to Pot?
ScienceNOW Daily News ^
| 6 July 2006
| Mary Beckman
Posted on 07/08/2006 2:48:58 AM PDT by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 last
To: A CA Guy
"Research has shown that a person can safely drink up to 10 liters of water a day. That would equal 10 one-liter bottles of water."I wasn't sure about your number, so I double-checked it on my calculator. You were right.
What I'd like to know is how many 10-liter bottles can a person safely drink?
To: robertpaulsen; winston2
winston2:
The constitution does not guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it.
paulsen:
You are free to pursue your goal of seeking legislation that legalizes the use of marijuana.
We should all pursue the goal of restoring rights unconstitutionally criminalized by those who prohibit them, people like paulsen.
82
posted on
07/09/2006 6:39:45 AM PDT
by
tpaine
To: robertpaulsen
"Research has shown that a person can safely drink up to 10 liters of water a day. That would equal 10 one-liter bottles of water."= a ca gal
I wasn't sure about your number, so I double-checked it on my calculator. You were right.
IWhat I'd like to know is how many 10-liter bottles can a person safely drink? - rp
You guys sure are humg up swatting at gnats. In the meantime, the crows are carrying everything shiny away!
83
posted on
07/09/2006 8:50:37 AM PDT
by
pageonetoo
(You'll spot their posts soon enough!)
To: robertpaulsen
"I claim that the ingestion of a naturally occurring plant is one of the "pursuits of happiness"(winston2)
The constitution does not guarantee happiness, only the pursuit of it. The Constitution did claim to protect our rights - not suppress them.
You are free to pursue your goal of seeking legislation that legalizes the use of marijuana.
How generous of you!
Do you think the colonists should have sought legislation from England to approve their Boston Tea Party?
84
posted on
07/09/2006 10:12:35 AM PDT
by
winston2
(In matters of necessity let there be unity, in matters of doubt liberty, and in all things charity:-)
To: robertpaulsen
"I wonder what those numbers would be if "nicotine cigarettes" were substituted for "weed"."
And if they were nearly the same, then what? Well obviously, more research dollars would be needed, since tobacco would be a "gateway drug" as well.
85
posted on
07/10/2006 4:45:27 PM PDT
by
Izzy Dunne
(Hello, I'm a TAGLINE virus. Please help me spread by copying me into YOUR tag line.)
To: robertpaulsen
Why would you conclude that? She only mentioned alcohol and tobacco.I didn't quote her, but another portion of the article about pleasure receptors (which AFAIK every drug stimulates) in support of my statement ... so why are you misleadingly asking about what she said?
So, do you concede that marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco are gateway drugs?
If this research is correct, some portion of the "gateway effect" of marijuana, alcohol, and tobacco is neurochemical. What of it?
86
posted on
07/16/2006 10:52:43 AM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
To: All; MotleyGirl70; hole_n_one; RedBloodedAmerican
87
posted on
07/16/2006 10:56:44 AM PDT
by
cmsgop
( President Mahmud Ahmadinejad Must Purify Himself in The Waters of Lake Minnetonka)
To: muawiyah
Well, then, when they start stealing enough to pay for Big H, they are no longer protected by poverty.So your "argument" is that poverty protects druggies from hard drugs ... except when it doesn't. Very persuasive.
88
posted on
07/16/2006 10:59:59 AM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
To: Know your rights
Well, you have your druggies who aren't thieves, and then you have your druggies who are thieves.
Are there different kinds?
89
posted on
07/16/2006 3:41:51 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
you have your druggies who aren't thieves, and then you have your druggies who are thieves.Your point being ...?
90
posted on
07/16/2006 7:56:01 PM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
To: Know your rights
That being a druggy involves choices that may have moral consequences.
91
posted on
07/16/2006 7:58:15 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
(-)
To: muawiyah
Also true for many categories other than "druggy."
92
posted on
07/16/2006 8:04:07 PM PDT
by
Know your rights
(The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-92 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson