Cannabis grows naturally upon this planet. As does koka leaves. As a "left-winger", I believe you should be allowed the freedom in life to put both in your mouth if you so decide. Both count as a slight poison that has slight consciousness-altering effects, in their natural unaltered form. As with ingesting any poison, there are negative effects.

However, both can also have positive effects, such as relieving pain or stimulating awareness when used correctly.

Were it not for the freedom to derive useful substances from stuff we can find growing around the place, we'd be too busy dying from various diseases right now to worry about this in the first place. But technically, if you ban cannabis and fun time mushrooms, you should ban, say, the penicillin fungi too.

Doesn't make any sense. The ban against these substances is contrived, and continuously enforced due to an uneducated and highly broadcast popular opinion.

Chemically refined products like LSD, GHB, and powder cocaine, however, is a different story alltogether. They're highly dangerous.

Oh and yeah. I forgot to mention since I'm a bird-brained left-winger.

Please leave the thread.

First, birth control saves taxpayers money. To quote a Republican politician: Secondly, if you want to be really technical, the government isn't funding birth control pill distribution. I'll say it again: the government isn't funding birth control pill distribution. The government has said that all HMOs will have to provide birth control pills, as well as provide other contraceptive care under private healthcare plans. The government isn't taking your money to pay for this (unless you count the toner ink they used to print out these rules). The government is simply saying HMOs, which are all private, must provide it to those who request it.
Always?

Thirdly, let's take a look at your claim that Western economies are doing badly. While there is no denying there was a recession, most economies are doing quite well right now.

Let's take a look at a few examples. I'll start with Canada. The Canadian unemployment dropped to 7.4%, announced just the other day. The Canadian debt-to-GDP ratio, which is an indicator of economic progress and stability is at 83.5% and is projected to fall by 2016. The Canadian GDP is steady and is on track to increase, albeit at a very, very slow rate.

We can also look at EU indicators. The EU's overall debt-to-GDP ratio is at 82.31%, and even though Ireland, Spain and Greece aren't exactly doing well (and Iceland wants to join the EU and adopt the Euro), the EU is on track to see its ratio fall by 2016 by the IMF. Countries such as Denmark are seeing steady unemployment rates (which, by the way, is arguably helped by the extremely generous labour laws). The EU overall is a mix of countries that are doing well, countries that are doing the same as usual, and the countries that are doing poorly. If we look at each country in the EU27 or the EA17, we can have a much more microscopic view of how the economy is doing.

There is no proof to back up your wild statement that Western economies are floundering. Again, I'll embolden this to make you understand: there is no proof to back up your statement that Western economies are floundering.

Finally, let's look at your use of the word "socialism". Now, while you might think of it as what the rest of the world does, and what you might suspect is whistling songs about how awesome it is to work in salt mines without pay, and the joys of wearing thick mustaches and speaking funny languages, it just isn't. Socialism, the core definition of socialism has been diluted to the point that any country you claim practices socialism (Canada, the Nordic countries, any country with universal healthcare) just doesn't. Just because Canada has a universal healthcare system that is single-payer and funded by general taxation doesn't mean that we are socialists. Far from it - our Conservative majority government is bent on emulating much of American social conservatism - starting with the "tough on crime" bill they've just passed yesterday.

You think that socialism means that people throw their hard-earned money into a pit known as bureacracy. You point to countries like Sweden, Denmark, Norway, and all you right-wingers call that socialist and unthinkable. Where do you think that money goes? It doesn't go into a black hole. It goes to funding healthcare, generous social security, a social safety net known as "flexicurity", and providing services to benefit the people. Americans like to think of the state as an intrusive part of their lives that is trying to take away their personal freedom. I think of the state as the kindly old man who makes sure everyone has personal freedom. Without the state, there is nobody to guarantee my freedoms. While I cannot speak for others in other countries, or even those in my own country, but I think that whatever this government model is, I like it. If you want to call it socialism, then I am happy to be a citizen of a socialist country.

You're probably not going to read all of this because you've already made up your mind about the way you want to think, despite facts and proof to the contrary, but I'm just getting this off my chest.

:-P
I don't know where you live, but if you think using contraceptives qualifies as a "sexual deviant" you should get out and meet people!

Also, although this may come as a surprise to a selfish christian like you, many generous atheists do work and don't mind that some of the money they pay in taxes are used for good things. In fact, in my country, where 40 - 50 % of the population don't believe in a god, we pay a lot more in taxes than you, yet income taxes are almost never an issue in elections.
We have a very high Employment-to-population ratio too, number three amongst OECD countries. So it is not that we are a nation of loafers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_rate

Do you seriously not know what censorship is? Please do yourself a favor and look in a dictionary. (Wikipedia works too, but you would probably consider it a socialist propaganda tool.)

Look man you are confusing the meaning of words. If you had gotten your knowledge from more objective sources like books or even Wikipedia you would better know what socialism is.

Socialism as in an economy that is a replacement for a capitalist economy is a failure. The Soviet Union failed. Cuba is not doing well. China did not fail, likely because they have mixed their socialism more and more with capitalism.

But the other way of using socialism (the one that you did) as in people paying taxes and some of thee taxes being used for common good projects like schools or roads or wealth redistribution like social security has not failed. By this definition the United States of America is also a socialist country. And did you know that the Scandinavian countries like Norway, Denmark and Sweden are ranked on many lists as some of the best places to live? Before the US. The Scandinavian countries have capitalist economies but use many socialist ideas like free primary education, free university education, mostly free medical assistance and many more.

If can assure you that homeopaths like Michael Savage and drug addicts like Rush Limbaugh does not know what is good for America. The are too far up their own asses or dogma to see anything clear.

You might believe the contrary, but no-one here hates you. All that people here are saying is that maybe the village pastor isn't right? Maybe Obama isn't The Devil (TM)?

There is no war between the "left" and the "right", all of that is history. Contemporary politics (and the resulting prosperity in wealth and in thought) is the product of moderation. I do agree and disagree with some of the things that the Republicans say, as I agree and disagree with many of the things that the Democrats say. In fact, in the last election I would have voted for McCain, but I do have my own personal reasons for that.

What you need to realise is that a singularity in thought is akin to poison. And it is what led to the Crusades, to Nazism, to Communism, to Colonisation / Imperialism, Jihad (do not elaborate on this as I am perfectly aware that this is a contemporary contention issue) etc. Everything that ever sucked in the history of mankind. The truth is that labels like "Democrat" and "Republican" and especially "leftist" are idiotic. They mean no more than the drivel of any politician.

So next time someone says something that you disagree with, use your own brain. Here I'd like to give you a loose quote from Nietzsche (cannot remember how it went exactly): "God wants companions, not followers."
I know that this particular philosopher is demonised in your school of taught, but you need to realise that only a minority of the world is Christian. And no-one is right or wrong as a result of that.

I certainly wish the christians in front of my University accepted that. I live with my Christian aunt while she dates a Catholic man while I'm atheist. That's three different viewpoints with very bad histories together. We fight sure, but never over religion. It's always related to difference in generation over things like punishment and social discipline.

The two guys who were brothers were giving away christian books. I decided to be nice to my aunt and grab one. They asked me a couple questions about what I'm looking for and I told them that I grabbed the book I did because it happened to be the biggest, I told them I was atheist. This led to about 3 different big long discussions about why I'm wrong and going to hell. As much as I disagree with the religion, I'm at least trying to be friendlier about it. They even tried to convert me right there in front of the university library. They gave me a pamphlet of arguments saying that the bible told history before we knew for certain that those statements were true. Short version: The answer was almost always "The Ancient Greeks came up with it first".

Also not fun, two people saying that I'm not morally sound because I'm doing so in my own power, I'm morally sound because there's a magic man who's stuck inside my chest telling me to be so (They later gave me more pamphlets, and I humored them by reading it. One of them said that God doesn't interfere with the Earth anymore, sooooooo conflict.) I finally got through the last one, and I still disagree with it. Scientifically, the arguments are wrong, the logic is unsound (One of which showed up a bit: The earth only being 6000 years old. With a little math I found that the nearest galaxy to us takes 25000 light years to reach us, so their arguments towards stars are invalid).

I can disagree with religion, but I can also disagree with people, and that doesn't come down to religion or political stance. It comes from whatever we as people choose as what's correct. I'm always going to rationalize my statements the best I can, to where I've seen that the republican party isn't really that healthy for my family, or the people I know. But everyone has some good points, republicans wanting to cut waste funding for example. Issue here is, what they consider waste and what the democratic party considers waste. It's the same thing here in this thread. Guy up there attacking anyone who even seems like they're arguing against his view point and coming out of no where to do so, making himself look like a jackass and having his own statements been proven wrong by things he supplied himself. That's not to say the rest of us are innocent since all of us got into this fun internet yelling match, but what good comes out of nobody looking for a better, or a different solution?

Why are these different? Yes, they're potent, but it's a rare person I get to know professionally that hasn't used at least one of these heavily at some point and some of them still use them. Okay, I actually don't know anyone who uses roofies recreationally, is that even possible? But LSD and Cocaine? Sure. I doubt those are the only ones, either. They're just the most common.
What you call "reality" sounds an awful lot like looney toons to a whole lot of people.
Why does it seem atheists actually care more about human beings than Christians? I know that sounds like flamebait, but no, really, why? I hardly know any Christian right-winger that doesn't straight up stop giving a shit about anyone after they're born (save the very few that actually go physically to church with them on Sunday, and even then that's not a hard and fast rule), unless they decide they'd like euthanasia in their declining years, then they'll give a shit long enough to make sure they can't get it (but won't pony up for pain medication or anything) then stop giving a shit again.

I swear, I don't get it, is that really what they think their Christ wanted them to do?

They're for the most part a lot more potent which is the main thing. You don't have to misjudge your cocaine dosage by all that much before you have an overdose and immediate threat to life on your hands. You'd have to chew a hell of a lot of koka leaves to do that. You'd probably lose all sense of touch in your mouth and be unable to chew before it ever happened.

Cocaine isn't the worst example, sure. Meth is.

The point is, if we're going to fight something, fight these substances that people are cooking up in makeshift chemical labs. They're the ones that's going to cause most of the havoc. Leave the stuff you can find growing in the woods anyway alone.

I remember an incident from around here from a couple years ago. Someone noticed a few cannabis plants just growing on the roadside somewhere. Like, 4-5 of them, probably just off some stray seeds. When the police found out, they dispatched a unit to go cut down the plants. Like the plant wasn't allowed to grow on it's own. Fucking ludicrous.

Well, legalizing these drugs would eliminate the makeshift labs (drugs would be so cheap there'd be no point in using your bathtub to make them) and the nasty shit, like meth, wouldn't be made, it's a substitute for "better" drugs that cost too much for normal people. It also happens to be relatively easy to make (another benefit to making them available for mass market sale, the ease of manufacturing at home wouldn't play into the decision of what drugs to take).

Providing standards checked drugs would avoid most ODs, people OD because they accidentally get shit that, for some reason, hasn't been cut as many times as the stuff they normally get. ODs on many drugs can be treated safely, even heroin ODs can be treated safely well over 95% of the time if competent medical staff is available. Making people not afraid of going to the hospital might go a long ways towards people seeking medical attention early.

No drug has caused more problems in the US than alcohol, no, not even meth. I see no reason to limit any of it, we've lost far more than we've gained. It'd be cheaper to provide safe clinics to go to for this type of thing, sell, and restrict it from minors. That would avoid the nastiest of it.

In the end there will still be dumb tragedies. We had a local store chain founder die a few months ago around here, hit in the middle of the night through no fault of his own. Tragic, but the person responsible was simply drunk. Shit like that will continue to happen, we can't hide from everything.

Just because you're selfish doesn't mean you should try to push it on us.

Haha, yeah, that's totally what Jesus did, he let the 2000 starve (no loaves and fishes for you! in his best soup nazi voice), he never ate with sinners and publicans (boo his! I bet they were hippie, liberal commies too!), he didn't spend his life helping others and tell his followers to do likewise.

You, sir, are a biblical scholar!

Yeah, because when you pay tax you get absolutely nothing in return.

My 2011 federal income tax (just federal income tax) was 5 figures, quit being a baby.