Can anyone argue *against* the legalization of marijuana?

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by MrMrE *
**First off, by your postings, I had no idea that you were for legalization!

THis is why they tell you to read the whole thread. I can’t say I’m “for legalization”. I just don’t have anything at all against it. But the hemp advocates are not making a good case by lying and creating a myth about their product.

But as for your arguement against the use of hemp, all you did was go through the facts, declaring which are true and which are not, according to you.

No, I can present exact quotes on sevearl aspects of commercial hemp growth, wheras you have a University article on the strength of hemp board material.

You say “this is true BUT…” Other facts on the same page, you dismiss as not true. You claim the magazine articles you read were presented in a fair and unbiased way…that would be your OPINION.

So what does it mean when I quote Hemp magazine, or the International Hemp Association? IS this merely my opinion? I’d say its an opinion based on fact.

You say hemp advocates overstate their case. OPINION. (one which I sometimes agree!)

No, fact. I can find a hunderd advocacy websites for hemp with some serious misrepresentaions, half-truths and lies.

But as I’m sure you are aware of, opinions are like assholes, everybody has one, AND THEY ALL STINK!

Sorry, bucko, but if your debating style is going to be dismissing everyone’s arguements as being “opinion” and ignoring the hard facts that formed those opinions then you are going to have a very hard time on this board.

The simple fact is, despite the claims of the UWA, commercial hemp does have signifigant fertilizer requirements.

All that you have offered in the way of factual evidence are from vague references in magazine articles.

And the head of international hemp asssociation. Plus comments from several Canadian argicultural sources.

I never used the word conspiracy, as you have claimed I did twice thus far (so much for your reading comprehensive skills).

“It’s in the economic interest of big business to maintain the status quo”

You be the judge.

It’s just common sense. Universities are in business to educate and research,

Universities also have biases and can make mistakes. I accpet all the UWA info regarding the strength of the boards they tested. I do not agree with the unsupported assertion that hemp “requires little fertilization.”

while magazines are in business to sell advertising.
The companies that advertise in these mags have an interest in thier product remaining popular with consumers of said product, no? If a magazine starts printing articles that promote a different product, it only stands to reason that the company will STOP buying these adds, and that’s what supports a magazine! It is for that reason I cannot accept your sources.

Tell me what versted interests will cease advertsing in a farming magazine when they print a hemp article? Tell me what financial firms will cease advertising in the Financial Times when they do an article on Hemp. Tell me what advertiser in Hemp magazine is going to cease advertising when they do an article on growing Hemp!

Even the Journal of the American Medical Association, which does not accept advertising, has an agenda they must continue to support in order to insure the huge salaries of doctors. Magazines are just opinions wraped in a fancy cover!

And yet, unsupported comments from Universities are sacred.

If in my zeal I gave the impression I thought it was the savior of mankind, let me apologize. But I do find it mildly amusing that we can’t think of another plant that can be used for all the things that hemp can be used for! (Yeah, I know, there are better plants to use for each requirement, but nothing that does the work of all these things!) Hey, maybe it IS the savior of mankind!?!

Lines like that are what has made the hemp movement such a pack of lies. Look up the wonderful world of “Rolamite” from the early 70’s, there are eerie paralells to your comments to those of that “wonderful peice of engineering”. Rolomite was going to, and could “do everything” it was the new savior of our engineering world!

What happened to it? Same thing that happened to Hemp. It was the second best way to do everything. Often hemp isn’t even come up to second best.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by MrMrE *
**quote:

Please try to understand the scope of my question. One plant…that can be used for food, shelter, fuel, and medicine.

---

As has been evidenced in countries where hemp is legal, not well enough to be the miracles claimed by hemp advocates.

BTW…I take this respnse to be a qualified, YES, hemp is the only plant that can fill all these needs!

No, it cannot fill those needs at all. It can barely do fraction of them. Hemp is like a child in school who does a tenth of his homework in each class and claims he’s doing well in all his courses. The fact that it can be used in these with boatload of extra materials and help should be telling you something, but you seem determined to hang onto some of your faith.

I didn’t ask if it was a “miracle” plant! that was your qualification after the, albeit silent, YES. **

Congratulations, you are now fully qualified in the world of spreading ignorance.

[MrMrE]

QUOTE]*Originally posted by Mr. Miskatonic [/i

No, I can present exact quotes on sevearl aspects of commercial hemp growth, wheras you have a University article on the strength of hemp board material.

You can???Well when already??? I’ve been waiting and asking all this time! You have NOT yet to date supplied an author, article name, the sources of the information that the article was written from, (contrary to YOUR belief, magazines are NOT a primary source of information!), nor a web site that will support your view. If I have missed it, it’s not because I haven’t read the whole thread as you insinuated, for I have, but it’s been over the course of 2 weeks and I don’t re-read the whole thing anymore. The sources you have been suggesting, i.e. names of magazines with no reference to date and author etc. is not sufficient! Until those things are provided there is no other alternative than to consider your postings to be your OPINION, and nothing more. Rest assured, if you were to offer this as evidence in a court of law, Hemp would walk away a free man/woman today!
Now, I may or may not be spreading ignorance, but the stuff YOU’RE spreading would fertilize the fields of hemp for a long, long time!

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by MrMrE *
**QUOTE]*Originally posted by Mr. Miskatonic [/i

No, I can present exact quotes on sevearl aspects of commercial hemp growth, wheras you have a University article on the strength of hemp board material.

You can???Well when already??? I’ve been waiting and asking all this time!

NOt really, you’ve been insinuating things about my sources, but that is hardly the same as asking.

You have NOT yet to date supplied an author, article name, the sources of the information that the article was written from, (contrary to YOUR belief, magazines are NOT a primary source of information!), nor a web site that will support your view. If I have missed it, it’s not because I haven’t read the whole thread as you insinuated, for I have, but it’s been over the course of 2 weeks and I don’t re-read the whole thing anymore.

Commercial Hemp - Winter 1997 “Hemp as a fiber source in Nova
Scotia,” by Sara Francis reports that “Hemp did require the use of
fertilizers.”

Financial Times, October 26, 1994, says" hemp grown in Europe
is heavily fertilized."

In Hemp World magazine, Fall 1997 - Professor John M. McPartland reports that"Cannabis suffers over 100 diseases and nearly 300 insect pests. "

Hayo M.G. van der Werf, of the International Hemp Association in the
Netherlands reports that “Hemp has moderate fertilizer requirements.”

“A Cropping Guide For Farmers - Growing Industrial Hemp for the
21st Century” produced by Kenex Ltd., the Canadian company coordinating the 1998 hemp crop in Canada, “Poorly drained soils are not recommended as excess surface water after heavy rains can result in damage to the hemp crop. Hemp is extremely sensitive to flooding and soil compaction.” Further, the guide also notes that “Industrial hemp requires 105 to 130 lbs./ac nitrogen, 45 to 70 lbs./ac phosphate and 52 to 70 lbs./ac potash.”

This list was initially compiled by an annoyed environmentalist (not me). I have confirmed the Commercial Hemp articles and the va der Werf quote. I take it on established faith that the other quotes stand.

The sources you have been suggesting, i.e. names of magazines with no reference to date and author etc. is not sufficient! Until those things are provided there is no other alternative than to consider your postings to be your OPINION, and nothing more.

My opinion…considered to be fact by those who actually grow the stuff

Rest assured, if you were to offer this as evidence in a court of law, Hemp would walk away a free man/woman today!

This is not a court of law, and chest-beating statements like this are not going to convince anyone.

Now, I may or may not be spreading ignorance, but the stuff YOU’RE spreading would fertilize the fields of hemp for a long, long time!

The reason I held back on listing my sources is simple: I’ve seen your type before, no matter what I come up with you will find a way to dismiss it out of hand. You’ve already dodged around direct quotes (with name attached) from the IHA. You were denigrating the comments before you even knew the source as being “opinion”. You’ve declared that magazines, even trade magazines, are no good as sources (even when they are hemp growing magazines, it would seem) yet you seem willing to accept webpages as evidence? What’s up with that?

Why don’t you answer this: What forces can affect a Canadian Farming magazine and hemp growing magazines to say lies that denigrate their product?

Have you even read Cecil’s article on this matter? Or is he part of the bigbadconspiracy too?

[MrMrE]

I’m having problems submiting a message. I will atempt a 3rd draft!
Well…at last! Something of substance to work with! I’ve seen policemen have an easier time getting a confession from a criminal! And why? Because “you’ve seen my type before”…yes, the type that demands disclosure of evidence, that’s me! I’m sorry our type disturbs you so! How can I “dismiss your arguement as opinion” if you refuse to supply your sources?
First, please tell me where I said hemp requires NO fertilizer? My comment, which was culled from what you piously refer to as “a website”, but is actually a published work from a well known University, was hemp requires MINIMAL fertilizing. Your own source, this van der Werf fella’ from the Netherlands, states hemp requires MODERATE fertilizing. Not enough of a difference to bother me, and easily explainable as we shall soon see. Then, you quote the Financial Times, saying hemp in Europe is HEAVILY fertilized. Now, I think we can both agree that Netherland is STILL part of Europe. This contradiction in your own evidence was discovered in two seconds. No wonder you were reluctant to reveal it!
Sara Francis statement that hemp requires fertilizer does not denigrate the product in any way. All plant life requires individual amounts of N-P-K. These nutrients are found naturally in soil in varrying levels. These levels differ according to the location of the plot of land being used. I’m personally not familiar with the soil conditions in Nova Scotia, or the Netherlands. But the land in Washington (state of) is rich and fertile. Part of it is located in a rainforrest with a temperate climate. Thus, the explanation of different fertilizer requirements in different areas of the world. See…easily explainable, once you look under the wrapper. I’m sure that in Washington, the fertilizer requirements are MINIMAL.
Your source, Cropping Guide for Farmers looks interesting, thanks for finally sending it! The figures you claim the guide states for fertilizer requirements are slightly higher than those supplied by Manitoba Agriculture and Food, thus bolstering my claim of different needs for different locations.
This just leaves me to deal with the eminent Prof. John M. McPartland, which I promise to look into soon. His statement concerning the pests and diseases that hemp is suseptable to may turn out to be true…but is it abnormal? Does it make the product unworkable? Are they pests that don’t effect other crops? There are a lot of questions raised by one single statement, taken out of context.
I will send this now to insure it’s arrival and will continue shortly

[musicguy]

Do you guys realize just how off-topic you are? Just wondering.

[MrMrE]

Oh yes! I’m well aware or it! Hemp advocates are desperately trying to seperate the two issues. But as following this thread will show, the issues are intertwined (ha!) as a disscussion on one eventually turns into a disscussion on both. As I see it, hemp is marijuana without the THC content. That may be why some people are so against it. I think the acceptance of this plant as both a fiber and medicine is essential.
Besides, this puts me in mind of the Monty Python sketch…
Man walks into an office…Man 1…“I’d like to buy an arguement please…” Man2… “No you don’t!”…#1…“Yes I do” #2…“No you don’t”…etc. till man 1 realizes this IS the arguement! Then they start argueing over what constitutes an arguement! One of my favorites!
I feel I’ve made a sufficient case for the use of hemp at this point, so please Musicguy, bring us back to the original question at hand with some insightful comments

[Mr.Miskatonic]

*Originally posted by MrMrE *
Well…at last! Something of substance to work with! I’ve seen policemen have an easier time getting a confession from a criminal! And why? Because “you’ve seen my type before”…yes, the type that demands disclosure of evidence, that’s me! I’m sorry our type disturbs you so!
How can I “dismiss your arguement as opinion” if you refuse to supply your sources?

I never refused, you simply did not ask. Re-read your posts and you will see little in the way of requests. Instead you headed right into an attack on magazines in general.

First, please tell me where I said hemp requires NO fertilizer? My comment, which was culled from what you piously refer to as “a website”, but is actually a published work from a well known University, was hemp requires MINIMAL fertilizing.

Where have I accused you of saying “No” fertilizer?

Your own source, this van der Werf fella’ from the Netherlands, states hemp requires MODERATE fertilizing. Not enough of a difference to bother me, and easily explainable as we shall soon see. Then, you quote the Financial Times, saying hemp in Europe is HEAVILY fertilized. Now, I think we can both agree that Netherland is STILL part of Europe. This contradiction in your own evidence was discovered in two seconds. No wonder you were reluctant to reveal it!

Heavy, moderate. Gee, such a grand contadiction. :rolleyes:

What the FT states is that commercial hemp in Europe is heavily fertilized, the IHA says modertate. Like I said, the IHA may be watering things down in the name of advocacy, but at least the IHA is being realistic that fertilization is needed.

As I see it, hemp is marijuana without the THC content. That may be why some people are so against it.

Hemp does have THC content, especially in its flowers and leaves. If there is no THC, it is not hemp. Candanian farmers must power wash their equipment after washing to remove such contaminents.

I think the acceptance of this plant as both a fiber and medicine is essential.

I certainly do not feel it is “essential” and it is these kinds of absolute statements are my objection to hemp advocates as a whole. The world would find hemp handy, but hardly “essential”.

On a medical level, medicine would find straight MJ plants to be of much greater use.

Anyway, that’s enough of this arguement. You may have the last word if you must. Then this can get back on topic as musicman so craves.

[MrMrE]

Thank you, that’s an offer I can hardly refuse…but please help me understand…rather than search the whole thread again, I ask: If , as you say, you have NOT accused me of saying it needed NO fertilizer, why do you keep hammering home things like “at least the IHA is being realistic and saying that fertilizer IS needed…”? OF COURSE FERTILIZER IS NEEDED, AS IN ANY CROP!The amount depends wholly on the soil that you use! That would explain the different results in published studies!
You might not realize the difficulty in arguing with a being so supreme, he can pick out the parts he doesn’t like of a university study and dismiss them with a wave of his hand! Please note that I did not question the verasity of your sources…I accepted them at face value and used them to strengthen my argument. These are two very different aproaches to critical thinking. I think your problem was in trying to paint me as a “hemp radical” rather than treating me as just an interested third party. ( I am aware that hemp has a minute amount of THC, but not enough for a narcotic effect. However, thank you for clearing that up.)
I would be remiss if I did not close by making the following point. in question form. (rhetorical) …If, as you have claimed here, hemp is such a pain in the ass to grow, needing “heavy fertilization”, suseptable to pests and disease, etc., …Why are there plots of feral hemp growing in the mid-west U.S., untended, unwatered, UNFERTILIZED…some 55 years…FIFTY FIVE YEARS…after it was abandoned? They even have tried to ERRADICATE it, but it STILL grows wild! That doesn’t sound like it needs very much of anything to me!
BTW…I took your advice and looked up Cecil’s thoughts on the subject. I found them to be informative and amusing, as usual. So a quote from this suggested source is in order…(Ahem…)
Cecil: “It grows pretty much everywhere, doesn’t require much tending and produces plenty of strong fiber”.
And one last BTW…I DO believe that Cecil exists in humanoid form and as such can on occasion (though I’m sure rarely) supply false information. To paraphrase, he said the long spindly plants are indicative of industrial hemp, while the smoker’s look for the short stubby ones. While this is true on face value, there are many strains and sub-strains. The short stubby plants I believe he refers to is a Cannibus Indica variety, that is usually cross-bred with a Sativa variety to produce a bud form. But there are also varieties of Sativa with high THC content that are long and
spindly like the industrial hemp plant that he described. Just a minor mistake, but for the sake of accuracy I must correct it. Thank you all for your time and indulgence.

[MrMrE]

I thought this article may revitalize the discussion:

Britain eases up on pot smoking
Policy decriminalizes possession, use, though sales are still illegal

T.R. Reid, Washington Post
Thursday, July 11, 2002
©2002 San Francisco Chronicle.
URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/07/11/MN18781.DTL

[MEBuckner]

Moderator’s Note: MrMrE, please do not post entire copyrighted articles on the SDMB. You can post links to articles on other web sites, and you can post short quotes, be we ask that you respect the intellectual property rights of other people.

I have deleted the text of the San Francisco Chronicle article you reproduced from your post above; anyone who wants to read the article can follow the link to the Chronicle’s web site.

[MrMrE]

I beg your pardon, and thank you for the instruction on a proper post.

[waterj2]

While we’re at it, put blank lines between paragraphs. After reading through this thread, I think I might need to go “cure some eyestrain” if you know what I mean.

[sbic56]

MrMrE

I saw what the UK is doing. I see it as a move in the right direction, at least. Even if I thought marijuana were harmful, I believe keeping it illegal in no way is going to make the situation better and in fact compounds the issue. For such a great country we sure aren’t very progressive in some respects, are we?

[MrMrE]

So, Waterj2…Our work here is done! Let’s ALL go and cure some eyestrain today! Then perhaps, sbic56, our great country can lighten up on this issue and consider some progressive changes. (welcome to the board, fellow newbie!)