Your video, Randy Marsh's honest explanation of marijuana use, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 26 Badge!

I'm sorry, but if the ailments' not terminal or in the case of a physically incapacitating or debilitating disease like leukemia, marijuana use before the brain is through completely developing (studies of late suggest age 25), is deleterious.

On the flip side, who's to say that tweaking the meat is anything but using one's body as a laboratory with one's will as the engine, which it is.

*eia Evolution in Action, babies.

I simply have a personal problem with irritating, stoner-ass parents-Especially flakes from Oregon. Pasty white Americans playing didgeridoo.....Eww.

I have permanent physical pain, I go to a pain treatment clinic and use permanent longterm opiate use to just cover up the majority of the big stuff and get through the day. It first requires quite awhile to get use to the feeling of the permanence and being able to grab hold of your full mental functions again. Not impossible, everyone there gets to do it at some point or you don't go on them, that's it.

YOU WILL suffer from withdrawal at some point, it is inevitable--it's a very imperfect solution (and nope, Utah doesn't allow Marijuana use for medical needs yet).

Everytime someone chimes in and says that when they were on pot they had withdrawal, sorry no you didn't; go look it up the symptoms for one thing. Its not like each drug gets their own unique signature finisher, they are all the same! So if you are not experiencing those things in a BIG way, you DON'T have it.

Last time I checked Mary J. had a psycho. meltdown and THAT was it. That is nothing. Again, why are we still in the dark ages of pain medicine using highly addictive opiates? Oh, yeah, money, I forgot. Dr. Drew is a complete shill, he lost a lot of his credibility a long time ago. When he went on T.V. he became a joke.

>> ^rychan:

I don't like the way that Cenk pantomimes every clip before and after the fact. We just watched the clip ourselves, you don't need to exaggerate it.
But I do like the way he admits there is widespread Marijuana use. So rare to see a talking head conceding a point and independently verifying information.


I wouldn't really call it widespread, nor would I consider it any worse than a cigarette or an alcoholic drink. All three have cognitive effects.

I find his exaggeration warranted because someone needs to point out how ridiculous the other side of the argument is.

I don't like the way that Cenk pantomimes every clip before and after the fact. We just watched the clip ourselves, you don't need to exaggerate it.

But I do like the way he admits there is widespread Marijuana use. So rare to see a talking head conceding a point and independently verifying information.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^direpickle:
@Fusionaut: AFAIK, smoking pot can and does cause lung cancer, just like anything else that you burn and then inhale. It's not magic.
One study.

One study by the same government that outlaws marijuana use in practically all instances.
A lot of good money has been taken away from lung cancer research because of this kind of bias that tends to lump lung cancer with smoking. Smoking can lead to lung cancer, but it doesn't always and it certainly doesn't lead to all cases of it. Up to 15-20% of lung cancer cases are nonsmoking.


RARGH GOVERNMENTS BAD

Of course not all smoking leads to lung cancer. Of course not all lung cancer cases are caused by smoking. What point are you trying to make?

>> ^direpickle:

@Fusionaut: AFAIK, smoking pot can and does cause lung cancer, just like anything else that you burn and then inhale. It's not magic.
One study.


One study by the same government that outlaws marijuana use in practically all instances.

A lot of good money has been taken away from lung cancer research because of this kind of bias that tends to lump lung cancer with smoking. Smoking can lead to lung cancer, but it doesn't always and it certainly doesn't lead to all cases of it. Up to 15-20% of lung cancer cases are nonsmoking.

It's well known amongst demon worshipers?

See, you were just complaining about apostasy in another post today. And yet it sounds like you're sort of buying into some sort of weird, middle ages Malleus Maleficarum stuff here. Nowhere in the bible does it say that marijuana use is a sin. Am I wrong about that? Or is this something that god told you personally? To me, it sounds like you're just buying into the antiquated perception of mainstream society that says that marijuana use is "evil". So you're going to base your gospel (remember, you're the one who's preaching) on the words of Aleister Crowley now? All of a sudden Aleister Crowley is the last word on what's holy or unholy? Seems to me like he's the last person whose word you would want to take on the subject.

Oh, but you used the word "abuse" right? Drug "abuse" is sinful and Satanic? Well, isn't the abuse of anything sinful and satanic? So it's kind of a moot point right? Can't you just as easily abuse butter, or adrenaline or the bible?

Well what about the legitimate use of a drug? Is using aspirin sinful and satanic? It sounds to me like you're pretty much writing off the use of any marijuana ever. Well what about someone dying of leukemia who hasn't eaten in a week because they're so sick? I'd like to see you say to that person that they were worshiping demons for taking marijuana to help them eat. That the sick or the dying should not receive comfort because of something Aleister Crowley said.

It sounds to me like you're guilty of letting the devil convince you of something that God has yet to let us know about.

I won't even get into the whole "burning bush" thing since I know you prefer to take any bible verse that suits your purpose literally.

>> ^shinyblurry:

What you think about me has no bearing on my witness here. Even if no one believes me, at least they will have the information if they ever wake up. Satan is real, and anyone who doesn't know God has been utterly deceived by him. It's been well known amongst demon worshippers that marijuana opens you to spiritual realms controlled by Satan. Aliester crowley stated that very clearly in his book of the law. Drug abuse of any kind is sinful and satanic, and invites possession.
>> ^Ryjkyj:
Shiny, it's comments like that that truly help illustrate the level of your ignorance.

As this video strongly implies, Carl Sagan was a recreational marijuana user. From Wikipedia:

Sagan was a user and advocate of marijuana. Under the pseudonym "Mr. X", he contributed an essay about smoking cannabis to the 1971 book Marihuana Reconsidered.[47][48] The essay explained that marijuana use had helped to inspire some of Sagan's works and enhance sensual and intellectual experiences. After Sagan's death, his friend Lester Grinspoon disclosed this information to Sagan's biographer, Keay Davidson. The publishing of the biography, Carl Sagan: A Life, in 1999 brought media attention to this aspect of Sagan's life.

Also, I didn't notice anything "stagey" or otherwise about the video. I think that's just how she speaks...

>> ^curiousity:

>> ^MaxWilder:
^ The proper course to take is full LEGALIZATION.
Regulated, but fully legal sale and possession of all drugs is the only way to break the back of these cartels. It will also solve the prison overcrowding issue and provide a nice tax income for local governments who are currently being squeezed to death.
Anybody who is still against the legalization of recreational drugs is simply ignorant or idiotic.

Hear hear, but I do have an issue with saying that anyone against legalization is ignorant or idiotic. Although this rhetoric is very common these days, it simply kills conversation that might occur with people who are open to discussing different sides of this issue.
Of the people that I feel may change their mind or at least be truly open, I have most often run into an emotional argument against full legalization. This emotional argument is usually based on personally knowing someone brought low by drugs or fear of what would happen. For someone having a loved one/associate/etc who was hurt by drugs, you can sympathize with them and bring up the point that legalization will open the doors for support services and remove some social stigma from seeking help before they hit bottom or kill themselves (accident or purposefully.) The general fears can be talked out and likened to other things in life which are fearful... because really this is the fear of the unknown. The Netherlands has lower adult and teen marijuana use despite its lax laws on it, and if I remember correctly, one of officials made the comment about this stat, "We have succeeded in making marijuana boring." It's a standard of desire, things forbidden are simply tantalizing.


That's pretty much what I mean by ignorant. It's not meant as an insult, just a lack of knowledge. They don't know the truth about how people react to substances being legal or illegal. Legalization will allow addicts to more easily admit they have a problem and seek help. Legalization will make substances less attractive to people who are turned on by flaunting the law.

Of course there are also idiots who have heard all of this and still think drugs should be illegal because "they are dangerous." For them it is fully intended to be an insult.

>> ^MaxWilder:

^ The proper course to take is full LEGALIZATION.
Regulated, but fully legal sale and possession of all drugs is the only way to break the back of these cartels. It will also solve the prison overcrowding issue and provide a nice tax income for local governments who are currently being squeezed to death.
Anybody who is still against the legalization of recreational drugs is simply ignorant or idiotic.


Hear hear, but I do have an issue with saying that anyone against legalization is ignorant or idiotic. Although this rhetoric is very common these days, it simply kills conversation that might occur with people who are open to discussing different sides of this issue.

Of the people that I feel may change their mind or at least be truly open, I have most often run into an emotional argument against full legalization. This emotional argument is usually based on personally knowing someone brought low by drugs or fear of what would happen. For someone having a loved one/associate/etc who was hurt by drugs, you can sympathize with them and bring up the point that legalization will open the doors for support services and remove some social stigma from seeking help before they hit bottom or kill themselves (accident or purposefully.) The general fears can be talked out and likened to other things in life which are fearful... because really this is the fear of the unknown. The Netherlands has lower adult and teen marijuana use despite its lax laws on it, and if I remember correctly, one of officials made the comment about this stat, "We have succeeded in making marijuana boring." It's a standard of desire, things forbidden are simply tantalizing.

>> ^Xaielao:

Whether it would be a good thing or not is besides the point really. The amount of marijuana use would actually drop, and quite significantly. It's because using the drug is illegal (though decriminalized in a number of states, including mine thankfully) that makes its use popular.

I'm not so sure marijuana use would drop if it became legal. I can't think of anyone I know who smokes it because it's illegal, and I seriously doubt they would quit because the legal penalties go away. I do, however, know multiple people who currently avoid it because of its legal status. Maybe I'm wrong, but the people I know who smoke do so because they enjoy it and it isn't negatively impacting their lives.

On the other hand, I do think legalization would reduce the use of other drugs. Weed is what brings many to the black market, therefore providing access to more addictive drugs that they may otherwise not have been looking for. If they can grow cannabis themselves, or know someone who does, there's less chance of them experimenting with harder drugs.

>> ^shagen454:

Yeah, but if they legalize marijuana more people will do it, but that doesn't matter, that's a GOOOD thing!!


Sorry to double post but I wanted to reply to this statement hehe.

Whether it would be a good thing or not is besides the point really. The amount of marijuana use would actually drop, and quite significantly. It's because using the drug is illegal (though decriminalized in a number of states, including mine thankfully) that makes its use popular.

It's the same with alcohol. In the 20's when prohibition came into effect alcohol use spiked dramatically after a year or two. It suddenly became cool to drink because it was illegal and use spiked, especially amongst women and even children. The simple fact that it was illegal made it more popular. And for that reason if just pot was made fully legal, we would actually see use go down.

Schizophrenia runs in my family. So....I've known and loved and lived with lots of schizophrenics. Pot definitely helped manage the symptoms of those who chose to use it. One was even told by his shrink to continue smoking it as it worked really well for him provided he didn't combine it with alcohol or other drugs. For an exboyfriend, self medicating with pot prevented him from self medicated with harder substances.

It also doesn't cause nasty side effects like tardive dyskensia, which is a worry with traditionally prescribed anti-psychotics. I'm not suggesting anyone stop taking their anti psychotics and rely on marijuana, I'm just saying, I've got a load of anecdotal evidence that tells me pot is often helpful to schiozphrenics.

When my schizophrenic cousin joey (a regular pot smoker since age 14) killed himself, he hadn't smoked in 4 months.... he was keeping his urine clean while on probation.... if he had failed one more drug test, they would've sent him to jail. he was 24 years old, his crime? possession of marijuana. My aunt says those last 4 months were the most terrifying of either of their lives. joey's symptoms were so terrifying that he threw himself in front of a train.

fuck prohibition.

>> ^vaire2ube:

Yes, yes he can.
http://blog.norml.org/2010/05
/26/latest-research-on-pot-and-schizophrenia-runs-contrary-to-mainstream-media-hype/

Age Of Onset Of Schizophrenia Not Associated With Marijuana Use, Study Says
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=8213
In fact, it may even help people with the disease cope with their symptoms.
Or they rapin e'rebody. Probably 50/50, so lets outlaw a plant.
I think pot use led to the purchase of a large capacity magazine to increase his killing power. Therefore we should outlaw pot and make weapons more powerful.

Yes, yes he can.

http://blog.norml.org/2010/05/26/latest-research-on-pot-and-schizophrenia-runs-contrary-to-mainstream-media-hype/


Age Of Onset Of Schizophrenia Not Associated With Marijuana Use, Study Says
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=8213

In fact, it may even help people with the disease cope with their symptoms.

Or they rapin e'rebody. Probably 50/50, so lets outlaw a plant.

I think pot use led to the purchase of a large capacity magazine to increase his killing power. Therefore we should outlaw pot and make weapons more powerful.