“The real dangers” is a much better idea than “federal advertisements designed to enduce paranoid terror.”
Oh pahleeeeeeeeze. An anti-drug ad is put out by an anti-drug organization with a well known agenda, and I have to prove that their well known agenda which informs all of their PR projects is there in this one? How about you prove that their agenda, which is their reason for existing, was for some reason dropped for this one ad.
You and I have different standards of proof it seems.
Not being snarky. I’ve written my position in this thread, if you have questions about what I’ve written feel free to ask, but likewise, I have neither the time, patience or desire to go write the same thing two or three times.
Because then children realize they’re damn liars. And, much like the personal example we were given in this thread, some kids won’t trust their parents after that point.
Then tell the truth. The pure, unadulterated, truth. But by the same token, I’d bet dollars to donuts that it wasn’t drugs, it was the misuse of drugs.
To each their own. I’d make sure that they were using the pot safely, and I’d probably have a chuckle at them puking as long as they were otherwise okay. Much like a kid who wants to try his father’s cigar and ends up being green to the gills.
Ah well.
Having a keg at a slumber party is an invitation for irresponsible drinking. Also, as Arwin pointed out, sometimes parents helping is exactly the right thing to do. Gotta play it by ear.
Nah, but, again, the message “Drugs and alcohol are horrible, don’t ever do them!” is about as effective as “Don’t have sex before marriage!”
There is no knowledge which is not power.
A-fucking-men.
I dunno where you went to college, but we went home for the summers at ours. 
And a handful actually went there to learn.
It’s not the catchphrases themselves, but the lying and misinformation about the consequences of drugs and alcohol when kids ask “Why shouldn’t I?” that is the problem.
“Don’t get Drunk and Stoned.” Why not? Well, which is the truest answer?
A. Because you will end up homeless and passed out in the gutter every night and your brain will liquefy and fall out of your ears in small chunks and you’ll be raped by everyone who happens across your unconscious body and you’ll end up giving blowjobs for pocket change so you can buy Funyuns to survive and you’ll die alone behind a gas station covered in puke and dogshit and garbage before you’re 30. Do you want that to happen? DO YOU? And besides, if you buy pot, you support Al-Qaeda.
B. Because if you drink too much or smoke too much pot, it can impair your judgement, and you might do things you wouldn’t have done if you were sober; things that can cause you social or legal grief, and maybe things that could endanger your life or someone else’s. People have become dependent on these substances. People have lost their friends, careers and lives from misuse of these substances.
C. Shut up, kid. It’s bad, trust me. Just don’t, OK?
The message of groups like antidrug.com and D.A.R.E. tend to be either A or C, depending on the specific ad.
The message of the commercial in question, while aimed at parents, is just as panicky. “If you don’t tell your kids not to take drugs, they will end up smoking joints and partying with strangers and drinking too much and puking and passing out on someone’s bathroom floor - and maybe DIIEEEEEE.” Well, no, not necessarily. I never got “the talk” and still managed to avoid all that, 'cause I have a brain of my own, y’know.
Anyway, the commercial sounds kind of dumb. Assume that the girl’s partying and passing out is something of an alternate timeline to the one where her mom confronts her: what are they trying to imply that the mom did or didn’t do in the alternate timeline? Did mom find the pot, but decide not to say anything? Or did mom simply fail to snoop through her daughter’s things? Open communcation is the goal, but as someone pointed out earlier in the thread you shouldn’t be waiting to find a baggie of pot before you decide it’s time to talk. And if they’re implying you need to snoop on your kids, well, again, maybe you should decide it’s time to talk first.
And the tag-line “Action: The Anti-Drug” seems fairly unambiguously ahem anti-drug, rather than “let’s hear it for responsible use.”
By the way, here’s their position on talking to one’s kids about pot. (Which is, I think we can agree, the point of the ad?)
[
](http://www.theantidrug.com/advice/advice_talk_about_risks.asp)
Let’s analyze, shall we?
[ol]
[li]Parents should tell their child that they do not want her doing pot. But they should stick to total abstinence-only education, and should not inform their child of how properly to use the drug should she come across it.[/li][li]In addition, her parents should lie. They should not say that some people are able to handle pot and get good grades, hold down jobs, have loving family lives… The parents should, instead, say that their child’s mind would disintegrate should she use pot. They are to tell her that it will do a number of definite things, and the only thing that’s a maybe is that it can cause her to disappoint the people who’re important to them. (Which is an interesting self serving guilt tripping little bit to throw in, isn’t it?)[/li][li]Scare the fuck out of the kid. Tell her that even if they just try pot once they might get so stoned that she’d lose her comprehension of time and/or space and get hit by a car. Do not tell her how to be safe. (ie. if they’re doing pot and don’t know how it effects them, don’t go walking around or crossing busy intersections.)[/li][/ol]
Now, I would again add that if a parent lies to their child, and loses their trust, the child may very well try other verboten things. “Well, if pot wasn’t as bad as they say it is, maybe coke is just as harmless, and I mean, heroin can’t be that bad.” They don’t even need to try it to realize that. One time finding out that some honor student or another smokes pot is enough to shatter their myths.
Pot is a gateway drug because we have made it into one.
And just to fight some ignorance:
In my experience, it’s always the fact that pot is forbidden that makes it so appealing to novice users. They get a kick out of doing something they’re not supposed to be doing. Then, if they take to the experience (and not all do,) they continue doing it because they realize that they enjoy it. A small number become pseudo-addicted to it, and need to be doing it all the time just to enjoy activities, but most are moderate.
I never had any peer-pressure experiences with marijuana or felt the need to do it because I liked the taboo of it. I went until my senior year before smoking pot, took two hits one night with friends, and nothing happened. Then that summer, I bought some, of my own volition, from a coworker.
I took about six hits of it, and had a horrible experience. I had only seen the pop-culture and comedic representations of marijuana’s effects at that point - I assumed it would just make me giggly and that it would be sort of like being drunk. I was totally unprepared for the tsunami of thoughts that came crashing down on my mind, and the altered time perception, and the racing heartbeat (-and the paranoia - I thought I was having a heart attack!) I swore
never to do it again.
When college began, though, I tried it again, in a more moderate dose, and found it to be more enjoyable. I still got nervous and paranoid, but I was determined to give it a chance, and with more frequent use, I came to enjoy the change of consciousness and the increased enjoyment of music and conversation that it brought.
I did it regularly all through the semesters, some weeks doing it every night and some weeks doing it only on the weekends, and some not at all. But it never interfered with my schoolwork, or anything else in my life (in fact, one Jewish History paper I wrote the outline for while stoned got an A+ [comparing the Talmud to the modern concept of case law, as part of a justification for Mendelssohn’s belief that Jewish scholarship was compatible with Enlightenment philosophy.])
The point of all this is, marijuana can absolutely be used responsibly, and it has jackshit to do with getting drunk at a party and throwing up. Alcohol is what fucks up people’s lives and causes problems for teenagers, not pot.
monstro is clearly a wiser poster than I. And yet, I feel I must respond to our dear Finn again.
You seem to be having a hard time processing my posts, FinnAgain; so I’ll make a nice little set of lists, just for you.
Potential reasons to use a mind-altering drug:
-Peer pressure
-Wish for alternate consciousness/reality
-Boredom
-Immortality complex/conviction that everything said about drugs is wrong
-Other(?)
Reasons not to use a mind-altering drug:
-Long term medical side effects (varying both in identity and intensity from drug to drug)
-Lack of self-control, possibly leading to illegal actions by or against the drugged-up person (rape, impaired driving, etc.)
-Psychological effects
-Incentive to commit crimes for money (because drugs are expensive)
-It’s illegal, and punishment tends to be ridiculously severe
Conclusions:
-The most valid cause for drug use here is the wish for alternate consciousness, and there are significantly safer ways to achieve such a state.
-The “reasons not” list outweighs the “reasons to” list. Even an apparently stupid teenager like myself is smart enough to see that, when the lists are compared.
-Thus, a teenager who decides to get high anyway either:
(a)hasn’t bothered to find out anything about what they’re putting into their system. That’s not very likely; even if drug ed. is boring, we all know drugs are illegal, make you lose control/do illegal crud, have at least some side effects, etc.
(b)doesn’t care.
-So you’re either putting something into your body about which you know zilch, or you don’t care about the effects. Both are intensely irresponsible.
-Sever irresponsibility is a sign of immaturity.
-THUS, those teens who take drugs are by definition not mature enough to do so.
An aside: a high school or junior high school student should be considered seperately from a college student because:
-Most college students are legal adults. Most HS/JHS students are not, except for their final year.
-Most college students live away from their parents or guardians. Virtually all HS/JHS students live with a parent or guardian.
-Thus, most college students are in a position in which they are, to an often-limited point, in charge of their own lives and not subject to their parents… unlike HS/JHS students.
-The advert mentioned in the OP was geared toward parents of students who were living with them. As I recall (I haven’t seen the ad for a while), the girl in the ad was definitely not of college student age.
There. Unless you can add a truly earthshattering new reason to toke up, or any rational argument against this post, I suggest you get off your little bent on how stupid I am.
In case you weren’t aware of it, alcohol is a drug in the same way that caffeine is a drug, except times one hundred. That is to say, caffeine is just fine in small doses, nothing wrong with it at all, but drink ten pots of coffee and you will both hurt your health (over time, of course), and be hyper and out of it. Alcohol, on the other hand, is good for your health in moderation. Ten shots later (generally much less), you’re drunk as a skunk, as messed up as if you had gotten high on any other drug. Over time, your liver and brain will suffer horribly. For this reason, I consider alcohol not a drug, but a potential drug. Any objections? There is no point other than to get high from marijuana or cocaine, LSD, meth, etc. Or do you like the flavour?
Wow, man, I don’t think I’m in a place to address the last three parts of that. However, even someone as irrational and angry as yourself should know perfectly well that morality is not maturity.
Correct me if I’m wrong: you went straight onto attack, right after one post. Actually, you were angry right from the start, going off at Silenus right out of the blue. You made it clear that you took drugs as a teenager; this is presupposed in your “everybody has done it” statement. I suppose that you feel a need to defend yourself from all of us meanies who think that getting high isn’t a good idea. You regard our comments as a personal attack. I’d like to correct that impression. This is a personal attack: get over yourself. An important part of growing up is realizing that certain things one did as a younger person were stupid, immature, or both. That’s the only thing that makes eustachian≠fallopian at sixteen years any more grown-up than eustachian≠fallopian at ten years.
The upside is that if this is true (and I’m becoming more and more sure that it is) I can talk to you as equal in age. Whatever has happened to you after your sixteenth birthday hasn’t done much if you can’t see past mistakes.
See, that’s the thing about being anti-drug. I’m not disappointed that some of my friends use drugs, though I hope that they won’t get hurt. See, they’re my equals, and I know it. That said, I will be truly disappointed if they still choose to take drugs (disregarding addiction, which is a bit harder to break) when they’re, say, forty.
eustachian≠fallopian, have you ever smoked marijuana?
It’s one of those things that nobody could possibly understand if they’ve never done it before. It’s nothing like alcohol…and unlike alcohol, you can’t die from doing too much of it at once.
Is there any point to drinking alcohol other than getting drunk? If you can enjoy the flavor of a drink I don’t see why you can’t enjoy a smoke for roughly the same reason. I mean, they have a magazine for Cigar Aficionados… 
The answer, at least with marijuana, is yes: you can use it moderately and not be wasted or in an “altered state of consciousness.” Most of the people I know who smoke pot just do it to relax a bit, or smoke a little before concerts because they say they enjoy the music more if they’ve had a few puffs. I don’t extend the same attitude to all drugs, and I don’t even do them myself. But I disagree with the attitude you’re displaying here. It seems typical of the DARE drug education philosophy to treat all drugs as if they’re the same damaging thing. I notice “it feels good” is not on your list, but that’s the reason most people I know smoke weed.
Ah, the sweet smell of a post addressed to me that is pleasant, and worth answering, and makes neither me nor the poster look idiotic. As I said, I’ve never been drunk, so the difference is irrelevant to me. The thing for me is that a loss of control makes me unsettled and frustrated; thus, getting any sort of high isn’t something that I would find fun. Granted, the only highs that I’ve experienced are things like oxygen deprivation (from asthma). I also don’t like halucinations (which sometimes come with fevers)- I enjoy using my imagination, but it’s a bit much when my imagination starts using me! Nonetheless, I maintain that meditation or the practice of spinning around until you feel like you’re standing still or even a good, relaxing massage are just as good “alternate realities” or “different perspectives” as a chemical high. Perhaps more importantly, it’s much easier to snap out of these than a chemical high.
I’d be more than happy to admit that I can’t fully understand why certain friends of mine actually enjoy what they do- and thought beforehand that they’d enjoy it enough to outweigh the many side effects. The frustration I tend to have comes from the thought, “There are better ways to seek peace with reality”. Nonetheless, I have somewhat less respect for those who do drugs as a social thing, or to feel grown-up, etc, than those who think drugs might do something for them.
Potential reasons for doing anything: You enjoy it, and you, for yourself in your glorious individuality, view it as an acceptable risk. I’m not going to address the propaganda you’re putting out, it’s boring.
No. You’re a tool, a fool, and an uneducated lout. You have no idea how to construct an argument and seek to dictate how other people should value the very substance of their lives, which experiences they should view as valid because you say so. Your position is bankrupt your ‘facts’ are flights of fancy or fear your schema of classification reeks of government cubicles and grey suits.
Oh, quite rational, I assure you. And yes, loud mouthed ignorance is somewhat revolting. I find your haughty little moral absolutism to be profoundly distasteful, and I have no problem letting you know that.
Did I point out you were being stupid as of your first stupid post? Yes.
I’m glad you can discern my emotional state. Keep polishing the crystal ball Kreskin, you’ll get the hang of it sooner or later.
You are a liar or an idiot. I have said no such thing nor have I implied any such thing. Never have I said, or implied, that “everybody has done it”. Quite the contrary, I gave specific statistics.
Defend myself? From what… exactly? I find your attitude odious, your mouthpiece nature repugnant, and your eagerness to tell other people what value judgements they should make to be, simply, ugly.
Swing and a miss. I regard your comments as slimey drippings of willful ignorance. Yes, you’re young, but a desire to manage the nervous systems of all of humanity is a slimey trait no matter how young you are.
You wound me
Here’s one for you: you are a tool of ignorance and fear. There are real reasons to use drugs, and real reasons not to use drugs, and real reasons to be responsible in your drug use… but you see in black and white, and demand that everybody else follow your preferences.
“I’ve lived so damn much in such a short time that I must be just like someone ten years older than me.”
No kid has ever felt that before. Nope.
Yeah, I’m sure their personal enjoyment of their own life over the next twenty some odd years pales in comparison with your approval.
Well…look. I mean you no dierespect whatsoever. But you’re operating on a few fallacies here.
One is that a “high” makes you “not in control.” I disagree that the marijuana high makes you lose control. It affects different people differently, but I can say with certainty that at least on my part, high does not mean a loss of coordination, motor skills, or cognition. It’s just…well…HIGH. I can’t explain it to you if you’ve never been high. But there’s a reason why it’s called “high…” it elevates your senses, and heightens your perceptions. The opposite of what being drunk does. And if you’ve never been drunk, you won’t understand that either, but I can use the two examples that you’ve given:
Marijuana is closer to meditation. Alcohol is closer to spinning around.
But neither of those really comes close to describing what those things actually feel like. If you’ve never felt what it feels like to be drunk or high, how can you be debating about either one of them?!
Being stoned - on good weed - has nothing to do with “hallucinations” or the way you might feel if you’ve been deprived of oxygen. It has everything to do with, frankly, just feeling awesome. And feeling in touch with your emotions and everything around you.
I have to pick a nit here. It was actually:
(Visual) Empty frying pan (Condescending voiceover) “This is drugs.”
(Visual) Egg splats into frying pan (Condescending voiceover, sing-songing) “This is your brain on drugs.” (egg sizzles) “Any questions?”
The civil poster first.
It’s the side effects to yourself and the people around you that lead to the real objection here. My point was that it isn’t in the slightest necessary to get high off of chemicals. That’s all. Nothing ground breaking.
Now then, onto our beloved Finn.
There’s your example. We can all agree “we all did” means the same thing “everyone has done it”. So… I have just proven that you made a false statement. Are you going to retract it, or the conclusion you got from it? Yeah, that’s a bit much to expect. Still, people getting to quote your posts… that must just suck for you.
And whether you retract that statement or not, you clearly implied in that statement that you yourself took drugs or got drunk. A little knowledge of grammar tells me that “we” means either “me” plus “you” or “me” plus “them”.
Man, do you even read my posts before you respond? The reason that we’re effectively the same age is because you have yet to get over your teen-age years, as shown by your insistence on defending teenage immaturity. As I said, what makes people get older or more mature or really get anywhere is their ability to see the mistakes of their earlier years. You clearly can’t. You’ve gotten nowhere.
Nope, I’m sixteen. I know it. I can’t add years onto my age. But I hope that, unlike you, I can learn from my mistakes.
All right, why do I have to repeat myself twice? Yeah, we could talk about underlying moral issues that come with taking drugs. We’re not. We’re talking about side effects, responsibility, and maturity*. NOT MORALITY! Get it into your head that I’m not talking about morality! Why is this difficult? Since we’re at it, you have yet to give a decent example of “loud mouthed ignorance”.
See, this doesn’t tip the scale either. You choose to do drugs because temporary enjoyment trumps long-term effects… it’s… it’s… (gasps)… an immature teenager? :eek:
If you don’t address what you actually disagree with, you’re not contributing anything other than spittle-covered accusations to what’s normally an educational message board. Really, you’re just letting your anger go on a random poster—and where your anger comes from is beyond me. It’s just not realistic to think that two posts could get someone as riled up as you appear to be. I mean, what the heck?
*Well, kind of. It’s been a couple posts since you actually made any substantial argument on any topic other than my being a “tool”. Such is life, I suppose.
Way to completely miss the point of this entire thread.
No. You’re being stupid again. Sorry I can’t civily tell you that you’re an idiot. Such is life. In any case, getting drunk is not the same thing as using drugs.
You can agree with whoever you really want.
we, as in those os uf who aren’t straightedge.
That includes drinking a bit too much alcohol at some point between birth and the end of college.
Still reaching I’m afraid.
Nah. But, damn, when a monkey gets its hands on a keyboard it can sure fling some quotes pretty hard. Good for you.
Of course I got drunk before I was donw with college. But, by the way, that was not what you said.
We band of brothers who, wait, shit, we means everybody evidently. Shit!"
Nah, just pick random phrases via a dart board of magic and fun.
And you wonder why I say you’re an idiot?
Again, you arrogant prick, your desire to be more ‘mature’ than your peers is obnoxious when expressed in these terms. Lo and behold, just because you realize that teenagers will be curious about sex and drugs, and state the facts on 'em… doesn’t mean you’re defending ‘teenage immaturity’. Teenagers aren’t supposed to be mature. Going to camp/school at the local university is not adulthood even though you’re living away from mommy and daddy and you can now be drafted.
As defined by you. An idiot.
Clearly.
And just as clearly, you know what level of personal understanding I have achieved and my introspective awareness of whatever mistakes I did or did not make.
Even more clearly, if I don’t come to the same conclusions as to behaviors/situations/motivations/etc… as you do, I’m not ‘on the proper level’.
You’re an ignorant arrogant child who talks too much, and no I won’t sugar coat it. Deal. Post less, read and thinik more.
Yep, I don’t agree with your bullshit view of disaster and danger lurking around the corner, so I must obviously be, well, whatever, it’s the thought that counts, right? Yes, I had you pegged, you’re a schmuck, a moralizing schmuck.
Sorry, but no. You are saying, for other people, what behavior is right, and what risks are acceptable and not, what they should want the very fabric of their lives, the consciousness of their experiences, to be. . That is a moral determination.
See just about anything you’ve posted in this thread.
had you pegged, you’re a schmuck, a moralizing schmuck.
No, yet again.
See, everybody exists and gets to make up their own minds, regardless of what you want. I know, it’s amazing. But wait! There’s more! Adults can use drugs responsibly. Teens can use drugs responsibly. Not all drugs are the same. Even if someone was to make a personal decision to abuse their health at some point in their life, that’s their call. We all live our own lives, and die our own deaths.
You dont deserve a careful refutation. I disagree with your fundamental premise of being able to dictate a value scheme for other people to live their lives by. I disagree with your willful ignorance of facts and insistence on thinking in absolutes. I disagree with your fucking smug moralizing. Go educate yourself before you pontificate. Go check out the actual effects of various drugs. Some are bad, some depend on use, some are mild and have no major effects on health or quality of life if used responsibly. Go educate your damn self before you see fit to tell other people how to live their lives.
I’ve made quite clear what behaviors of yours I find objectionable. You may not understand why I react as I do to some smug moralizing brat, but that’s not my concern.
I’m not riled up. You’re an idiot. This is the Pit. I pointed out that you’re being an idiot. I told you to fuck off in varied and colorful combinations of pointing out your idiocy. I find you unaesthetic, like stepping in a steaming pile of dog shit. I’m not angry, I just don’t like the smell.
I’m not going to argue with propaganda. You cast the argument in terms which are absolutist and which ignore the actual realities of life. You presume to dictate what others should value, how they should live their lives, what risks they should find acceptable, and even what mental states are ‘good’ ones and which are bad ones.
What is there to carefully refute? Hell, you still refuse to admit that it’s possible to use a drug responsibly.
How is it possible to know that when you have never experienced a high from pot? I’ve had pot, and I’ve had a massage, and there is no comparison. Massages are not nearly as good.
Yet almost no way to achieve exactly the same state. I don’t know of anything else that produces exactly the same mental state as pot.
I’ve never done a damn thing on pot that I haven’t done completely sober. About the only thing it inspires is a phone call to the pizza shop.
This is true of every single medication that you’ve ever taken for any reason. You either didn’t know about the side effects, or knew and took it anyway. From Advil to Zoloft, there’s not one legal OTC or prescription drug that anybody takes and you can’t apply that statement to.
I’m twenty-seven. I have a degree in engineering and a career. Do you have any idea how smug and immature you sound when you pretend to have the kind of life experience to tell someone like me that I’m childish if I smoke a joint on the weekend?
You’re sixteen years old. What do you know of holding down a full-time job, supporting yourself, paying the rent, food on the table, clothes on your back, advancing in your career and enjoying some saturday afternoon bong hits? That’d be nothing. Here’s a hint for you: people you would never, ever suspect of it toke up. They use pot responsibly. They are engineers, doctors, lawyers and other professionals. They have fully functional lives. There are a lot of pot smokers you’d never guess were, because these people are nothing like the lies you see in the DARE program.
I’ve told my son that a few drugs are harmless, a few drugs are very dangerous, and most are somewhere in between and make good servants and bad masters. And that whether a drug is legal or not has nothing to do with how dangerous it is. I think this theory accounts for both the abusers who ruin their life, and happy, healthy recreational users. It’s also a long way from the official position of DARE.
I can’t find a cite, but some people believe the extensive drug use in the 60’s was because of the strong anti-drug messages of the 50’s. When people tried drugs like pot and realized the horrible effects they had been preached about were not true, they were more willing to try other drugs.
What I find offensive about the ad in the OP is that the mom needs to talk because she found pot even though all the of the negative “drug” behavior in the ad is because of alcohol. That commercial could be exactly the same by replacing pot with beer.
I would prefer that my children not use pot or alcohol, but if they had to chose one, I would prefer that they use pot. There’s less potential for abuse than with alcohol. With alcohol, it’s easier to get to the point of puking and passing out. With pot, you’d have to be determined to do yourself some damage to get to that point.