If pot should be banned.. so should alcohol.

W

WichitaJohn

New member
CW, stop accusing people of being a drug addict. It reeks of immaturity and the presence of a strong bias. The reasons my post have been about pot is because that is the subject that I disagree with Bob. I have tried to reach him multiple times with no success. So I though I would try to discuss the topic with folks here on TOL and maybe get Bob's attention.

Here are some quotes from Bob:
"To the argument that pot is like alcohol and so should not be regulated differently, Denver Bible Church judges that reasoning as wrong and believes that pot should be illegal because:
1. It should be illegal to be high (intoxicated)
2. Any substance should be controlled whose normal use makes one high"--kgov.com/pot
(emphasis added)

"It should be illegal to get high and any substance should be controlled whose normal use makes one high."-http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-enyart/why-marijuana-should-be-i_b_1340311.html (emphasis added)


Apparently, Bob thinks that it is "normal" to use pot to get high but it is not "normal" to use alcohol to get drunk. This is a big part of his argument. I assure you that it is very normal for people to open a bottle of wine with intentions of getting drunk. And for those who are not intending to get drunk, it is normal for them to want to feel the effects. This is even more true of those who open a bottle of 100 proof Vodka. If everyone who purchased alcoholic beverages to feel the effects or to get drunk stopped buying alcohol most companies who manufacture such beverages would go out of business. Maybe the folks Bob socializes with drink wine with no intention of feeling the effects but this is not true of most wine drinkers. Therefore, this argument that he has used many times is not valid.

And if you don't think there is any difference between feeling the effects of alcohol and being drunk then you should at very least want to outlaw some hard liqueurs. I am sure there are some people who can feel the effects after one glass of wine. There are some wines that have over 20% alcohol. Imagine the effects of one shot of 190 proof everclear.

I would like for you consider two possibilities.
1. If the pot is low potency (scraps at the bottom of the bag) and I take a small enough drag I might not feel the effects at all. Or if the THC was deluted enough in brownies I could eat a small bite and not feel the effects. So would you consider the possibility that a small amount of THC can be ingested without feeling the effects?

2. Is it possible that a petite woman who has never drank alcohol could drink one average size glass of wine that is 20% alcohol and feel the effects?

Let me finish by making sure you realize a few things. I am a conservative Christian. I am not a pot head who says that pot has no adverse effects, is not addictive and has never harmed anyone. Pot is a drug that can be used responsibly or it can destroy lives. Just like alcohol.

I am a fan of Bob's and he encourages people to let him know if he is teaching something that
is incorrect. I believe this is one of those times. Maybe I am wrong and he is right. But like him I only seek truth. Please keep this in mind when conversing with me. The insults are not needed.
Also, I am sorry I missed your post concerning the Bible using the word "pharmakia". You post alot. I can't keep up. I will look into that matter.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
WichitaJohn said:
CW, stop accusing people of being a drug addict. It reeks of immaturity and the presence of a strong bias. The reasons my post have been about pot is because that is the subject that I disagree with Bob. I have tried to reach him multiple times with no success. So I though I would try to discuss the topic with folks here on TOL and maybe get Bob's attention.
Click to expand...

For someone who isn't addicted to marijuana, you sure do go to a lot of effort to legitimize it.

Here are some quotes from Bob:
"To the argument that pot is like alcohol and so should not be regulated differently, Denver Bible Church judges that reasoning as wrong and believes that pot should be illegal because:
1. It should be illegal to be high (intoxicated)
2. Any substance should be controlled whose normal use makes one high"--kgov.com/pot
(emphasis added)

"It should be illegal to get high and any substance should be controlled whose normal use makes one high."-http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-enyart/why-marijuana-should-be-i_b_1340311.html (emphasis added)

Apparently, Bob thinks that it is "normal" to use pot to get high but it is not "normal" to use alcohol to get drunk.
Click to expand...

Are you aware of the nickname that goes with marijuana use?
Stoner (drug user), a habitual user of cannabis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoner

This is a big part of his argument. I assure you that it is very normal for people to open a bottle of wine with intentions of getting drunk. And for those who are not intending to get drunk, it is normal for them to want to feel the effects. This is even more true of those who open a bottle of 100 proof Vodka. If everyone who purchased alcoholic beverages to feel the effects or to get drunk stopped buying alcohol most companies who manufacture such beverages would go out of business. Maybe the folks Bob socializes with drink wine with no intention of feeling the effects but this is not true of most wine drinkers. Therefore, this argument that he has used many times is not valid.

And if you don't think there is any difference between feeling the effects of alcohol and being drunk then you should at very least want to outlaw some hard liqueurs. I am sure there are some people who can feel the effects after one glass of wine. There are some wines that have over 20% alcohol. Imagine the effects of one shot of 190 proof everclear.

I would like for you consider two possibilities.
1. If the pot is low potency (scraps at the bottom of the bag) and I take a small enough drag I might not feel the effects at all. Or if the THC was deluted enough in brownies I could eat a small bite and not feel the effects. So would you consider the possibility that a small amount of THC can be ingested without feeling the effects?

2. Is it possible that a petite woman who has never drank alcohol could drink one average size glass of wine that is 20% alcohol and feel the effects?

Let me finish by making sure you realize a few things. I am a conservative Christian.
Click to expand...

There is only one kind of Christian, and they acknowledge the Word of God as the Truth. What does God say about getting high?

I am not a pot head who says that pot has no adverse effects, is not addictive and has never harmed anyone. Pot is a drug that can be used responsibly or it can destroy lives. Just like alcohol.

I am a fan of Bob's and he encourages people to let him know if he is teaching something that
is incorrect. I believe this is one of those times. Maybe I am wrong and he is right. But like him I only seek truth. Please keep this in mind when conversing with me. The insults are not needed.
Also, I am sorry I missed your post concerning the Bible using the word "pharmakia". You post alot. I can't keep up. I will look into that matter.
Click to expand...

Pastor Bob Enyart put a lot of research into this topic. You really should clear your head of all of that THC that's accumulated inside of it and read and reread his articles, as they make a lot of sense.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Other than High Times magazine and Libertarian Party Headquarters, I'm not aware of any employers that don't give drug tests as part of their hiring process. Perhaps you could list a few? (if there are any).

shagster01 said:
The US unemployment rate is 5.5%. Colorado's is 4.3%.
Click to expand...

shagster couldn't list any because employers still do drug tests as part of the hiring process (and many do them during employment if the situation warrants it) because workplace accidents skyrocket with employees that are dopers.

What Are the Costs Associated with Marijuana Legalization?

Sept. 1, 2014

"A federal report on workplace drug testing by SAMHSA states that employees using marijuana cause 55 percent more accidents than those who do not, and positive drug tests showing THC in the employee's system verifies 85 percent more on-the-job injuries by marijuana users (Autry, 1998). This same report lists increased absenteeism and loss of work productivity as additional costs to the U.S. employer. While the National Drug Intelligence Center reports that substance abuse costs this country upwards of $193 billion each year, these costs are limited in scope and do not include the costs of associated destructive behaviors, such as child abuse or domestic violence (National Drug Intelligence Center, 2011)."
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2014/09/01/marijuana-legalization.aspx

Regarding the CO unemployment rate:

It does take people to work at all of those rehab centers.
 
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
aCultureWarrior said:
How is that relevant? Amongst other things it's already been shown how destructive marijuana use is to individuals and employers.
Click to expand...

The cost of marijuana illegalization is relevant if the cost is greater than the benefit.

What is the cost of marijuana illegalization? Post a study on that one.
 
shagster01

shagster01

New member
aCultureWarrior said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Other than High Times magazine and Libertarian Party Headquarters, I'm not aware of any employers that don't give drug tests as part of their hiring process. Perhaps you could list a few? (if there are any).



shagster couldn't list any because employers still do drug tests as part of the hiring process (and many do them during employment if the situation warrants it) because workplace accidents skyrocket with employees that are dopers.

What Are the Costs Associated with Marijuana Legalization?

Sept. 1, 2014

"A federal report on workplace drug testing by SAMHSA states that employees using marijuana cause 55 percent more accidents than those who do not, and positive drug tests showing THC in the employee's system verifies 85 percent more on-the-job injuries by marijuana users (Autry, 1998). This same report lists increased absenteeism and loss of work productivity as additional costs to the U.S. employer. While the National Drug Intelligence Center reports that substance abuse costs this country upwards of $193 billion each year, these costs are limited in scope and do not include the costs of associated destructive behaviors, such as child abuse or domestic violence (National Drug Intelligence Center, 2011)."
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2014/09/01/marijuana-legalization.aspx

Regarding the CO unemployment rate:

It does take people to work at all of those rehab centers.
Click to expand...

Hollister
Buffalo wild wings
KFC
Outback steakhouse
Shoprite
Jimmy John's
Cheba Hut
Cisco (In fact, most IT jobs don't)
I didn't take one at the bicycle shop I used to work at.
President or congressman


Those are a quick list of the ones I know of... I'm sure I could find hundreds more
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Other than High Times magazine and Libertarian Party Headquarters, I'm not aware of any employers that don't give drug tests as part of their hiring process. Perhaps you could list a few? (if there are any).

shagster01 said:
Hollister
Buffalo wild wings
KFC
Outback steakhouse
Shoprite
Jimmy John's
Cheba Hut
Click to expand...

Q:
What do you want to be when you grow up Johnny?

A:
I want to work the counter at Jimmy Johns and have enough money to smoke dope while I live in my mom's basement.


Cisco (In fact, most IT jobs don't)
Click to expand...

This Cisco Systems?
http://www.testclear.com/dtcompanies/companyDetail.aspx?CompanyID=3243

I didn't take one at the bicycle shop I used to work at.
Click to expand...

Did they allow you to bring your dope vaporizer to work with you?

President or congressman
Click to expand...

If that's true, that explains a lot.

Those are a quick list of the ones I know of... I'm sure I could find hundreds more
Click to expand...

It still doesn't show anything in regards to work related injuries and absenteeism amongst drug users.
 
shagster01

shagster01

New member
aCultureWarrior said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Other than High Times magazine and Libertarian Party Headquarters, I'm not aware of any employers that don't give drug tests as part of their hiring process. Perhaps you could list a few? (if there are any).



Q:
What do you want to be when you grow up Johnny?

A:
I want to work the counter at Jimmy Johns and have enough money to smoke dope while I live in my mom's basement.
Click to expand...

So what if a guy chooses to work at Jimmy John's?

Does everyone need to aspire to be mall security like you?
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
shagster01 said:
So what if a guy chooses to work at Jimmy John's?
Click to expand...

Those kind of jobs (unless you work your way up into the corporate offices) aren't considered careers, they're jobs that younger people take while in college or while trying to find something that they'd like to do for a career.

Does everyone need to aspire to be mall security like you?
Click to expand...

Here's the difference between you and me doper:

I can walk into any company's HR Dept. and pass a pre employment drug test.

You on the other hand would hear these words:

"I hear that they're hiring at Jimmy Johns".
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
User Name said:
Including the hangover, the effects of alcohol last longer than the effects of marijuana.
Click to expand...

My my, someone has been indoctrinated by High Times magazine.

I'll drink two beers the night before going into having a pre employment drug test, you smoke a joint, let's see who passes the test and who doesn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top