Replies

You stated Rush was lucky, becoming addicted to pain medication doesn't sound like luck to me. Not everyone who takes it becomes addicted.

From his statement it sounded like he still has back and neck pain from some failed surgery to correct the problem. Having known a few people with such problems, they don't get better with time.

I am not afraid to see the "moral equivalence", I reject it. For the reasons stated, and which are obvious on their face. Not sure why you wish to try and make the case. Perhaps we are talking at cross purposes. I do think addiction is addiction, regardless of who is the person addicted. Perhaps that is what you are referring to.

The part I probably differ with you is in taking into account how a person became addicted. One by choice, the other an unfortunate outcome. I hope you can discern the difference.

As for "all those inner city addicts who are rotting in our jails", I pity them for their addictions, but not the non-drug related crimes that landed them in jail.

Let me ask you a question.

Consider two people who get aids. One because they are a promiscuous gay person. The other through a blood transfusion.

You probably think that there's an important moral difference between them. I certainly agree with that. The one took a foolish risk. The other was blind-sided. But I don't see a moral difference that relevant to how we treat them once they have both gotten aids. They are both sick. They both need help.

Or would you say that we should treat them differently because one got sick because of his/her own reckless behavior and the other one got sick through no fault of their own? If so, why?

of course, I DO agree that we to do different things to discourage the spread of aids through consensual sex from what we have to do to discourage through blood transfusions. We have to safeguard the blood supply through public and collective means.

We have to discourage reckless sex through some kind of public persuasion directed at individuals.

But what follows about the people who get sick once those means fail? Should we really care for them differently, feel a different degree of sympathy for them?

Why?

That's a serious question. I'm not trying to score debating points.

I agree with the rest of your post, but I had to address this common misconception:

As for "all those inner city addicts who are rotting in our jails", I pity them for their addictions, but not the non-drug related crimes that landed them in jail.

There are many people in prison for use *alone.*

FReepmail me if you want a link.