Really, who has time to call their parents every day?  I certainly don’t.  And given the discussions I’ve had with my parents (who have just retired….) I think they’d get annoyed because I’d be cutting into their fun time.

It sounds like you and your siblings are the reasonable ones! 

 I never talk "smack" - I’m far to mature for that. I believed we were engaging in an exchange of opinions.

You know what RJB, there have been many, many topics that you and I have disagreed about over the months on WoW, but this post….this post and your statements disgust me beyond words. I have no respect for you nor your beliefs. ….. So you just continue to get drunk because it makes you "less shy" and you hang onto you belief and desire for chemical fun. And if it sounds like I’m judging you…. I am.

I believe it is the teens who ARE well educated about sex that don’t engage in it as teens.

 That’s simply not true.  Certainly there is a correlation between sex ed and the age at which a person loses his or her virginity, however the majority of people in this country lose their virginity prior to their 20th birthday.  

http://www.newstrategist.com/productdetails/Sex.SamplePgs.pdf

In my opinion it is the ones raised in permissive households, unfortunately those abused and those who believe they are 25 year olds stuck inside a 15 year old body - that engage in sex.

 You sound really down on sex….  <sarcasm> Of course the only reason a teen would ever think of having sex is because he or she was abused. </sarcasm>  I grew up in a fairly wealthy, liberal New England college town.  Most of my peers had the sort of white bread upbringing that many can only dream about.  And yet, most of us had sex.  I know I did and I certainly was never abused nor were my parents overly permissive.  (And with a mom who is an RN at a university, I had the sex ed discussion up the wazoo.)  Oh, and none of us ended up pregnant or with an STD, either.

 I believe 100% if marijuana was legalized we would indeed "see" more people under the influence and "high" because they won’t have to hide behind closed doors any longer.

 Just as when prohibition was abolished, people took to the streets with liquor and as you can see almost every neighborhood corner in America has a bar or tavern.

 Sure, but the results of Prohibition were pretty obvious.  They repealed it because it caused crime to skyrocket due to black market alcohol sales, and it didn’t really limit people’s drinking.  "When Prohibition was introduced, I hoped that it would be widely supported by public opinion and the day would soon come when the evil effects of alcohol would be recognized. I have slowly and reluctantly come to believe that this has not been the result. Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon; a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared; many of our best citizens have openly ignored Prohibition; respect for the law has been greatly lessened; and crime has increased to a level never seen before." - John D. Rockefeller Jr.  This is I think a great parallel.  Sure, people abuse alcohol now.  But, people did when it was illegal.  The only difference is that the illegality caused black market to form which leads to increased crime.  So, by making alcohol illegal, not only did the US lose a lot of tax money (over $500 M/yr by some estimates) but it cost most due to property damage, law enforcement and the like.

And we see this with pot right now.  Yes, if it’s legalized more people will smoke it openly … or at least they will in areas that allow smoking.  But, after an initial surge as people go out to try it immediately following legalization, I doubt we’ll see any great difference in abuse numbers.  But, there will be one less thing for the criminals to sell

Some people drink responsibly and some don’t - they abuse it. The same will happen with marijuana. But the question I have and will forever have on this issue is Why - why do people want to get high?

 It feels good.  This isn’t really rocket science.  Why do people have sex?  It feels good.

 You and no one else from this site can convince me that a person who knowingly sets out to get high, isn’t doing it to fill a void of some type. It’s escapism plain and simple, but done in what I define as a wreckless manner. Please allow me my opinion on this matter and accept we do not agree.

 You can say it all you want, and maybe that’s the reason you use alcohol, but that doesn’t make it true for everyone.  You claim it is wreckless, yet the statistics do not agree unless you also define the simple activity of driving a car as wreckless.

While I’m not Messy, I could’ve accepted that we didn’t agree yesterday before you decided that I was some sort of deviant pedophile and launched the person attacks.  Sorry, you’ve shown by your actions that you are not a person’s whose opinion should be respected because instead of discussing the issue in an adult and logical manner, you threw a temper tantrum.  The emotional response indicates that you are not as stable and as happy with respect to these issues as you’d like people to believe, as you feel threatened by people who have a drastically different take on life whom aren’t emotional wrecks.

As a physicist, I expect to be treated with respect (or lack thereof) based on my intellectual merits, not on whether I can follow some arbitrary social conventions when it comes to clothing.  Whether I am correct or not is completely independent of what I’m wearing.  Personally, I’ve dreamed that I could dress like a movie star or a politician’s wife.  Were I to be a multimillionaire, my clothing choices would remain unchanged because it is simply not important.  One the most respected theorists in my field often gives her lectures wearing a t-shirt and gym shorts.  She’s brilliant and amazing.  Anything else isn’t relevant.  

 The issue is that you don’t see men dissing other men for their clothing choices.  They critique each other based on their abilities.  If we want to compete, we need to do so in a constructive manner and not criticize women for choices that show no reflection on the job they do.  I can’t imagine someone commenting on what type of clothing Obama, Bush or any other male politician has worn.  And yet, instead of discussing Hillary’s actions (good or otherwise), we discuss her clothes.   No wonder sexism still exists.  Women continue to show that we’re bobbled headed ninnies.  Let’s stop.  It’d be nice if my daughters were judged by the same criteria as my sons.

And how many people have committed murders in the name of their religion?  Obviously if they hadn’t been brainwashed they wouldn’t have done so, so maybe we should ban religion.  After all, it’s known as the opiate of the masses.

 In any case, I fail to see how this is an argument against legalization of pot. Let’s say that what you say is absolutely true, that the drugs they took turned them into murderers.  Not all drugs are equal.  So, one that turns a person into a homicidal maniac doesn’t necessarily mean the others will.  So, we do have to consider the effects of each drug individual.  Secondly, they were getting their drugs illegally anyway.  So apparently the legality of the situation really didn’t come into play.

http://stats.org/stories/2003/research_gateway_jan30_03.htm

In short, it’s a question of causation and correlation.  Certainly if you look at people who use cocaine, they are more likely to have smoked pot as teens than if you look at people who do not.  Does this mean pot smoking lead to the cocaine use?  Maybe.  But, it also could be that the sort of person who is willing to use one illegal drug is also willing to use another, and pot just happened to be one of the easiest illicit drugs to get until fairly recently.

In any case, it does not look like it acts as a gateway drug except when it comes to very young users (<=13 years).  Since I don’t think any advocate for the legalization of pot thinks that it should be available to people under 18, this isn’t really a problem.  In fact, the legalization of pot will make it harder for young children to get a hold of because there will be no black market for it any more.  After all, you can’t buy beer on the black market and most stores are pretty good about not selling to teens because they can make so much more of a profit on their legal customers if they are not in jail.  Whereas, someone who is selling pot is already willing to break the law about who they’re selling it to, so it doesn’t much matter if the person is 12 or 40. 

Technically there are teenagers who are legal adults (18 and 19) so I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say that I’m advocating that children should have sex.  But, we have to look at this from a biological standpoint.  What makes a person an adult?  Functionally, people achieve adulthood by about 14 or 15.  Now, we’ve developed a society where these individuals don’t have the rights or responsibilities of an adult, and thus we’ve raised them to not be mature enough to necessarily handle adult decisions, but this does not change millions of years of evolution.  And I think that you stretch things when you imply teenagers are children in the same way ten year olds are children with your tone….

In any case, I don’t think anyone should *have* to experience sex.  But, I do not see a problem with a 15 or 16 year old experiencing consensual (with a barrier method of bc) sex with another teen roughly the same age. There is a lot a person needs to learn about themselves before they can pick a mate, and I think depriving teenagers who would have been considered adults in any other century the chance to start on their life is a bit silly.

I do not find the argument that "it’s against the law!" sufficient explanation for the morality of a situation.  Until recently, it was against the law to have sex with someone of the same gender.  Did that make it wrong?  Did it all of a sudden become morally correct after Lawrence vs. Texas?  I think that one of the reasons that the US has more problems with teens and 20 somethings binge drinking is precisely because of the way alcohol is treated in our society.

 In any case, to return to the subject at hand, this is often the argument that people attempt to use against smoking pot.  It’s wrong because it’s against the law.  Laws are just a construct and thus a discussion about morality shouldn’t include them.  You are claiming it’s wrong because it’s bad for you.  Fine.  Is eating oreos wrong?  How about ice cream?  Is driving 75 mph on the freeway wrong?  How about having 4 cups of coffee a day?  My point is that people make many choices that are not optimal for their health, and we as a society do not seem to mind.  Smoking some pot falls into the same category, so unless you can come up with a coherent reason why it’s wrong to smoke pot but it’s not wrong to not exercise, your logic is bogus.

 As for the personal attacks, I find it amusing that you talk about respect and then post comments like a raving animal simply because I disagree with you.  A bit hypocritical….  In any case, given some of your posts about men and relationships, I don’t think that I agree that your growth as a sexual being wasn’t hindered.  But, to give further details would be to descend to your level.

At one point during a discussion about sex, someone told my husband that he didn’t masturbate because he didn’t have to.  My husband’s response was, "I don’t masturbate because I have to.  I do it because I *like* to."  I don’t have to get drunk, but occasionally I like to.  I also like to life weights, play judo, read novels, play video games, and eat ice cream.  I don’t *have* to do any of those, but I like to. 

If you actually believe escapism by way of reading a book, watching a movie or hanging out on the internet equals that of ingesting drugs that have a detrimental affect on your body and mind, you won’t understand my answer.  

 Ah, but most other forms of escape cause the body to manufacture its own drugs and thus bring pleasure.  Taking drugs merely shortens the process.  Certainly taking drugs can have a detrimental affect on one’s body.  So can eating too much, not exercising and not using sunscreen.  Should we pass laws requiring people to work out at least an hour a day to avoid the detrimental affects of too little exercise?  It’s really all a question of balance.

 gain I say, the answer isn’t to legalize it, but to instead question why people like you feel the need to escape from what you know as your reality? Instead of spending the money on drugs, why not try and straighten your life out so that you don’t feel the need for drugs?

 Oh, my life is as straight as I want it.  And the only drug I take on a regular basis is coffee.  I’ve never used pot and while I do like to get drunk on occasion, it’s fairly rare.  Why do I do that?  It feels nice.  It stops (mostly) my brain from working through physics problems while I chat with people.  It allows me to be less shy.  And I generally have a lot of fun.  Sure, it’s not good for me, but I enjoy it and feel that once every two months or so isn’t any more detrimental than the myriad other things my fellow Americans do.  After all, I work out on a regular basis and aside from copious amounts of coffee, I have a relatively healthy and balanced diet which does not consist of cow and fried food like most.

 Those minutes of pleasure you get by cutting your skin, strangling yourself or smoking weed COULD lead to your death. 

 And so could driving my car to work.  Should we ban driving?  More people die in car accidents (and despite what MADD tries to claim, most of those accidents are not the result of alcohol) than due to smoking weed or kinky sex practices.  And, much like driving, many of these activities (aside from cutting) can be practiced in a fairly safe manner.  Life is risky.  We can’t all live in little plastic gerbil balls.  Personally, I think our efforts to remove all risk from a person’s life is detrimental to their well being.  This is why we have people climbing mountains and doing other risky adventures, there is a general lack in their lives.

 Have we changed as a nation for the better in terms of women’s rights, equal rights among races, Gay rights, etc. etc.? Yes. But in the process of evolving socially we continue to struggle on a moral basis. We make allowances for bad behavior in the name of progress. I allow my teens to have sex, drink and do drugs. Why? Well you know, they’re going to do it anyway.

 Teens have been drinking, having sex and using drugs for thousands of years.  This is hardly indicative of a decline in our morals, now.  In any case, I don’t consider it too awful for a teen to have sex as having sex is part of learning to be an adult.  I also don’t see a problem if they drink with supervision occasionally, because I think it’s good for them to learn that alcoholic beverages can be consumed in a responsible manner, like a glass of wine with dinner.  The children raised by straight-laced parents are the ones that often go crazy with booze once they leave home.

 A politician cheats on his taxes or spouse. It’s just a sign of the times.  

 Oh, come on!  This is hardly a new problem.  I suggest you read: http://www.amazon.com/Treasury-Great-American-Scandals-Tantalizing/dp/0142001929 .  The author is fun (I loved Royal scandals as well), but it will certainly remove any notion you have that politicians had perfect morals until recently.  What has changed is technology.  We hear about it more because of the internet, and it’s easier to "catch" people because of cell phone cameras, email, etc.

 nstead of arguing for the legalization of drugs as you are, I would say your energies would be better spent on encouraging your fellow men and women to live life to the fullest.

You are assuming that people don’t smoke pot and do the things you’ve mentioned now, and that they will if it is legalized.  Do you believe that people who break the law and smoke out aren’t also breaking the law and driving high?  In any case, we already have laws in place for people who operate machinery, automobiles or otherwise, while impaired.  Legalizing another drug won’t change that.  For instance, you can get a DUI if you are high on prescription drugs that you’ve legally obtained.

All that happens when pot is illegal is increased crime due to black-market sales and increased usage by children as it is easier to obtain than booze. 

What’s wrong with getting high?  You claim that it’s a problem because it’s escapism, but I fail to see why a little escapism is bad.  People practice it in so many ways.  Some people drink, some use pot, some people read books, others watch movies, some play video games and others spend hours at a time hanging out on the internet.  Escapism only becomes a problem if a person isn’t facing reality at all.  So, if a person is playing Wow to the point where they can’t hold down a job and where their relationship with their family deteriorates, that’s not good.

You say that it’s disturbing that we’re a nation of, "if it feels good, do it", but I don’t understand why this is a problem. Should we do things that feel bad?  The only question we should ask is whether it is inherently harmful to other people for someone to exercise this right.  Otherwise, we’re saying it’s ok to feel good by going to church, or by having a PBR at the pub with some friends, but not to kick back and smoke a joint and what is the sense in that?

Social morals are not on the decline.  They are merely changing to reflect the changing society.  Change does not mean decline.  People have been claiming that morals are declining for hundreds, if not thousands of years.  And yet, things have only improved.  When I look at how much progress we’ve made with respect to sexism, homophobia and racism in my life, I can’t believe some people claim that we’re in a decline.  Certainly there’s still a lot of work, but I’m extremely hopeful.

Mmm.  I don’t know if I’d say that it is crap.  Given that we don’t know how old these people are, how many serious relationships they’ve had or how long it was between his break up and when he started dating the LW, I think there’s a chance that he might honestly believe what he said.  Sure, he’s wrong, but if this was the girl he dated all through college and his only serious relationship, he might actually think that way.  Especially if he’s not in love with the LW.  I’ve had friends who honestly thought they were broken in that fashion … it’s one of those silly stages young people often pass through.

But, you’re correct.  They should move on because if he’s not in love with her now, he’s certainly not going to be later and continuing to date him will only increase her mental baggage.

How a person indulges in MJ is a separate issue from its legality.  A person who is smoking pot in an enclosed room with a 12 year old should get in trouble.  Not because they’re smoking pot, but because they are endangering a child.

 Certainly there are detrimental effects for long time users who smoke out on a regular basis.  Just as there are long term negative effects for people who drink a lot on a regular basis or even people who smoke regular cigarettes.  That’s not enough for us to ban them.  Should we ban fast food and cookies because obesity is unhealthy?

I challenge you to find a report where someone smoked too much pot and then went home to beat up or abuse someone while high on exclusively pot.  I’d be mightily surprised if you can find even one incidence of this happening.  The rate of abuse is much higher for people who get drunk.  Heck, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that a child is more likely to be physically abused by someone who is perfectly sober than someone who is high on pot.  That’s just not the way the drug works.