[Ask the Gulch] AS is true. I see so many people even management level in my store who are stoned. It is a food store and the machine is breaking down. People who smoke or not are suffering. It's very scary to me. I knew this was coming. Legalization is destructive.
Posted by deleted 9 months, 3 weeks ago to Ask the Gulch
My brother is a daily toker, is just younger than I, and doesn't even have a job. He's just waiting for mom to die. Has never owned a home. Never got married (I'm sure habitual weed lowers testosterone).
Once a harmless recreational drug it now, because of its potency, can cause issues making it impossible for someone to hold down food. I know someone who encountered this using legal pot and the resolution was to stop entirely, which, IMO he never should have started anyway.
Side note: fed law prevents gun ownership for legal pot users.
Real or not? At least funny.
But yes, drug users will destroy the 2nd Amendment, I mean the Government will use the excuse that guns must be eliminated because of stoned people---WHICH THEY ALLOWED AND ENCOURAGED.
(I'm not yelling at you Abaco. At the machine.)
She broke it off, and the rumors were simple. After going out and doing anything, he had to get high (even before). And in that state, he simply could not perform, and could care less that he could perform... He was blissed out, so to speak.
As a 17 yo boy, I would have crawled through broken glass to get CLOSE to this "Goddess"...
It did NOT REGISTER. How could getting high, turn off such an innate desire. (He was 26, but still).
Well, I think there is a lot of truth to what this stuff does to you, and your drive.
20+ years later, he never married, he moved to Florida, to live with his mom, and work enough to pay for his weed habit. Never heard about him after that. He would have probably made a great father w/o the weed habit. He was a really decent person.
And earth will go on. Who knows what species will ultimately prevail? Probably not humans.
(You don't have to SHOUT to be heard.;^)
To me it's kind of like alcohol. Anyone with any sense at all will not drink or smoke during hours when they need to be doing something. But again, I am surprised that there's not more open usage than I have seen.
Also, my daughter has experienced a very strong change of personality since she started using weed. That in itself makes me hate it passionately. I literally do not even know her any more.
But if we are going to have a "you're on your own" society, well then by all means, smoke your head off, let the strong survive, let the weak fail.
But your daughter, that's on my mind. It should be illegal. Thie rights of a cancer patient to comfort do not outweigh the rights of a father to have a heathy daughter. I guess the same in reverse? Complex.
The problems cited on this thread were occurring long before pot was semi-legalized. Prohibition has created a massive amount of more serious problems, such as ruthless drug gangs, prison time for mere "possession", diversion of law enforcement resources from more serious crimes, and high rates of theft, embezzlement and armed robbery by addicts in order to support their habit.
The drug war has been a total failure. In the end, we can't save everyone from the consequences of their own decisions, nor should we be required to. We have the right to live in freedom, as long as we do not violate the rights of others. Period.
Right on, brotherman!
Am with you all the way on your post and
Thanking you
I do fall on the freedom side, but then, it's like a Darwinian society, and we have to protect ourselves from stoned drivers. So how free are we? If we say you are free to use pot, but not drive, we know many will drive anyway. And now we have lost freedom, because we might be killed by stoned drivers.
If I may say, she was a victim of too much freedom. We actually need less freedom now.
"Rules are what set us free." Even in The Gulch. There must be rules or it is chaos.
SOMA
What is soma in Brave New World by Aldous Huxley? In the context of the novel, soma is a recreational drug that several of the main characters take throughout the story. The government in Brave New World strongly encourages individuals to take soma as a way to increase the happiness and complacency of the population. Soma can be taken as a pill or as a powder and can also be released as an aerosol. It is freely available to everyone in the novel. Its inclusion in the text is central to the novel's themes of complacency and resistance in society as well as the theme of escapism.
https://study.com/learn/lesson/what-i...
I never thought to look up the etymology of Soma before. I found this:
soma
1 of 2
noun (1)
so·ma ˈsō-mə
: an intoxicating juice from a plant of disputed identity that was used in ancient India as an offering to the gods and as a drink of immortality by worshippers in Vedic ritual and worshipped in personified form as a Vedic god
Etymology
Noun (1)
Sanskrit; akin to Avestan haoma, a Zoroastrian ritual drink, Sanskrit sunoti he presses out
Noun (2)
New Latin somat-, soma, from Greek sōmat-, sōma body
The stuff allows an individual to remain in a persistent state of hazy-reality... not quite reality, not quite the zero ... the grave. Stuff just doesn't matter and so everything sort of just Goes to Pot. I like reality and clarity -- Objectivity. So I refrain from being a dope.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04ulu...
Oh that's right, I'm living in the past and a different reality...
What we have is this pendulum that the global parasites (elite, my ass) tend to swing violently from one extreme to another ... prohibitions, then total acceptability and even promotion. Just leave people alone and the folks will sort themselves out -- the irresponsible will over-do it and end up as the casualties of excess. Let them be models for what to avoid.
1) Legalize all drugs (Libertarian perspective)
2) Employer immunity to terminate workers under the influence.
Yes, #2 would give the employer the complete right to terminate any employee that shows up for work in an impaired state. Furthermore, that cause would be sufficient to terminate things like pensions too. Any accrued pension would have to be paid our immediately, but the employer's obligation would end right there.
Yes, we would need some sort of appeals process if the termination was for a person who is approaching retirement. But statistical analysis would be the tool of choice. And employers found to have acted maliciously would be laid open for multiple damages.
My point is if you value your career, stay clean, and live in a way that everyone that knows you knows that you are clean.
But if you value your high, then you should expect to be walking on very thin ice. What happens when a stone(er) is dropped on thin ice? It sinks.
My whole tirade is based on the war we lost. (Not Vietnam) The War on Drugs. Yes, the war that the US Government lost to a bunch of stoners.
Timothy Leary, the Harvard professor and self-proclaimed “High Priest of the LSD Cult”, was jailed for narco-crimes. His wife was partnering with the Weather Underground to have him released.
Leary’s research into the effects of LSD was financed by Sidney Gottlieb’s MKULTRA program. While Gottlieb looked to secure the global supply of LSD, millions of American students were taking LSD regularly, and attending the anti-war protests. LSD was the drug being used at the same time by the CIA to hypnotize their human test subjects:
4 yr delta Q post
#3426
Jul 12, 2019 11:10:54 AM EDT
Link to this story…
Taegan Goddard
@politicalwire
How QAnon Makes People Miserable
http://politicalwire.com
How QAnon Makes People Miserable
Vice: "One of the most disheartening signs of our advancing hellworld are the thousands of people who wholeheartedly believe in the deranged conspiracy known as QAnon.""It's near impossible to...
10:00 AM · Jul 12, 2019
Try Harder!
Nothing can stop what is coming.
Nothing!
Q
And
Same date Q posts
"FIND OUT THE PEOPLE THAT WENT TO THAT ISLAND."
-POTUS
Anons know.
Q
And FFA this timely nugget from Q
[New York Society For The Prevention Of Cruelty To Children]
Q
If this Name was an accurate description of what it’s about you would remove the prevention of. But the Sound of Freedom has the Narrative seeded with the villagers.
War is and has been underway for several years … see my Trump takes down the king_or _Trump cuts the head off of the snake posts for clear evidence .
I think people should be free to ingest substances at will.
In a tightly associated thought, I think that the INDIVIDUAL is the party that is responsible for EVERY consequence() of taking those drugs!
If you injure or kill a person because you are operating DUI you're screwed! Show up to work glassy-eyed, you're fired! Tee Martooni lunch; yerrrrrr out-a-here!
I'm past the point where I have of even want to have any sympathy for WILLFUL substance abusers. And I think it's way way past time for society to impose that sympathy on people like me.
() Unrelated to unintended consequences from commercial product contamination, etc. where there would still be simple liability if the manufacturer is negligent. But I digress
“My whole tirade is based on the war we lost. (Not Vietnam) The War on Drugs. Yes, the war that the US Government lost to a bunch of stoners.”
The US Govt intelligence brought the drugs in. How can the US Govt lose a war ,when fighting itself.
Next , you think the big Pharma poison pushers should have total immunity. From your reply ( I think that the INDIVIDUAL is the party that is responsible for EVERY consequence() of taking those drugs!) When drug companies push their substances with advertisements filled with flowers and sunsets. After willfully hiding negative reactions in efficacy testing. Than you realize your capitalized pronouncement “EVERY Consequence “ is ridiculous and then talk about manufacturing process in an afterthought.
Btw no value to what you sympathize with or not. I doubt you ever sympathized in the first place.
You're correct. I've never been sympathetic to substance abusers. I was just being polite.
So you do understand the issue. That said, I'm not looking to go down the rabbit hole of therapeutic drugs of any stripe. That's a different BATTLE. Not a different issue but t a very different fight.
You know full well that I'm discussing drugs that are taken solely for getting high. Yes, I know that lots of those people try to wrap that usage under the disguise of 'treating their mental health' but as you so astutely recognized -- I DON'T CARE! ;^)
You can blame Big Pharma, but what I see is a collection of corporations that were savvy enough to place themselves into what is known as a 'rent seeking' position and earn the government's stamp of approval. That's lawful business.
But like it or not, lawful or unlawful, it's going to happen. All evidence proves that to be true.
In my store people will be sent home if high, but allowed to come back.
My point is that employers that don't want addicts on the payroll are no longer PROHIBITED from dismissing the addicts.
Right now the employer's hands are tied. The employee can claim a ;'substance abuse problem' and the employer can't fire them, and if they are big, they MUST provide addiction services.
and we are stuck with these hunter biden types....
I treasure the clarity of my mind's operation and protect it from spurious infections. Consuming chemicals that would shortcircuit my brain's functions in exchange for a dubious sensation is easy to resist under those priorities. Evolution seems to be sorting us out by progressive criteria for survival. Do you want to stay in?