dimreepr

Kids aren't stupid, any more than the rest of us and there's enough scare stories in the media, for them to not want to become an addict. Perhaps that's why there's a trend in the youth to not drink? Sure they have a sense of immortality, as do we all; that next drink is just like all the other's and then, all of a sudden, it isn't; like approaching a black hole we never see the event horizon. It's got nothing to do with prohibition; like declaring war on terrorism, your just declaring war on your own imagination.

Just forgot the 😁

This discussion, seems to show why the elderly shouldn't be allowed to vote; it's not their future...

Because prohibition doesn't work, they have the option of whatever drug they want; the only difference between legal and illegal is, prison rather than a hospital; I know which I'd prefer my loved ones end up in, after they make a mistake. I'm not sure why you'd object to me being stoned in the privacy of my home.

Like I said, I'm not going to feed you, but I'm happy to use you as an example...

This reminds me of a conversation between two redwoods, as described by Terry Pratchett, "Burr that, winter, was a cold one"...

It helps the people who are forced into slavery by the criminal's created by the prohibition. It helps the police because: 1/ They can focus on real crime. 2/ They spend less, time and money, chasing a stoner that's just happy to be alone, or not, whatever... 3/ There's less crminals to chase. It helps me, because the money they raise on the tax, a stoner is more than willing to pay; and the money our society would save, raises my standard of living. It's such an obvious win win, one has to wonder, who's dragging their feet?

A thought experiment: Suppose I experience the day, the ups and downs, the same as anyone else, held in my ram memory; and I am still me, held in my operating system. But every day, when I wake up I forgot what I did yesterday. I think I would lose an important part of me, so my question is, what part and how important is it?

The rights you choose to allow it, has more to do with your opinion than pain suffered; unless you're a vegan...

I'm done feeding you...

Bugger, there's always a but...

Off topic, please stop. Your example entirely misses the point, life isn't Hollywood, 99% of people who get attacked don't get the satisfaction of seeing karma in action; they have to use their imagination.

Why is alcohol legal? Because the poor can make it anyway, and the rich has figured out how to make money out of it, despite poverty; much like gambling

Another thing you attack without understanding; karma isn't a thing it's a way of thinking, like science (causality for people), a way to understand our world and our place in it; and like science it's a way to drill down through our prejudice and bias and hate and love, to see where "squateth the toad of truth" - Sheldon Cooper. Science can't measure the infection rate. I can try, but I'm not sure you even want to understand. karma-sadhguru-quotes.avif

Indeed, which is why you spend most of your energy off topic answering question's asked 3 or 4 thread's ago; are you trolling me? So, you attempt to belittle me because I don't seeem to agree with you; karma, for instance is scientific, in that an action has unseen consequences even in a deterministic universe. But not the individuals action. Do you have evidence that Karma doesn't work? Let me answer for you, at best karma is a soft science and therefore not worthy of consideration, only science has answer's, if not today then tomorrow; the God of the gaps argument in reverse...

The irony seems to be that most of the unwanted will fund the prison business.

That would be a good question, if asked of you. You still don't get it; it doesn't matter that death is the end, what matters is how one lives; BTW how do you, or science, know that death is final? The universe tends to re-use the dead... What's totally irrational is an excuse made to appear like a reason...

I agree completely, but it's one thing to be happy with what you believe, it's another to belittle them because you don't share that belief. There's a difference between a reason and an excuse. You've got it backwards (no wonder you don't understand the word's), the bible is there to allay the fears of life, if a bad man does you harm God is there to punish him (no need for revenge), if you don't do other's harm God is there, at your death, to congratulate you with a prize. Given that, how is it rational to interpret the bible in a way to support their terror?

Like I said written by people not God: so now, instead of god, you choose the fact that you didn't know them, to irrationally dismiss the word's, your wife (and millions of others) seems to understand and is happy to live by. Indeed and usually, like here, it's off topic and irrelevant. Excellent point +1 It doesn't matter what one believes, if one has a rational reason to do so.

We know all the Bible's were written by people, all of which describe a different type of God/essence/way of life; it's rather silly to assume the author's were inspired by anything other than the thoughts of man. It would be irrational to discount the thoughts of our elders anyway, let alone by invoking a God in order to do so; let's not forget, we all stand on the shoulders of giant's; Newton is just easier to understand, despite his belief in alchemy.

Neither do I, but I could be wrong...

Indeed, utopia, for instance, means no place and a place we want to achieve...

Science doesn't try, it's a question for philosophy. We know all the Bible's were written by people, all of which describe a different type of God/essence/way of life; it's rather silly to assume the author's were inspired by anything other than the thoughts of man. So essentially the limits of God are the limits we decide it has.

It seems to me to be a method to attack a sentence/idea I don't agree with; a good legal document is free of ambiguity but not free of disagreement.