Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Anyone here smoke?
( ) 1 Vote
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175747 is a reply to message #175746] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 13:05   |
 |
Lijitsu
Messages: 1575
Registered: April 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| j_ball430 wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 15:53 |
| SuperMidget wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 14:42 |
tard.
|
That's the pot calling the kettle black, eh?
Not to mention music is healthy for the body. You're more tranquil, happier, therefore, you're healthier. Yes, physically.
|
Actually, that's right. If I wasn't listening to music most of the time, every time my cable cut off when I was doing something, I would have normally either walked down to Cox Communications, which is easilly 10 miles away from my house, or broken something valuable. Like my Moniter.
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 22:30 |
I've been Nodbuggered. =( =( =(
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175763 is a reply to message #175684] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 14:16 |
 |
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Goztow wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 02:41 |
| Javaxcx wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 17:56 |
He's right Warranto. Didn't you know that you can't diss anything till you've tried it?
|
Let's go on on this. Can you dish non-smokers' opinions then because you haven't tried not to smoke for a couple of years? Not saying this to you but saying this to several persons in here that outed this opinion.
Not doing something has as much value as doing something...
|
I was clearly being sarcastic, you know.
As for the argument as to whether you are addicted to something or not, in this case drugs, warranto has a very valid point. You, me, and just about everyone else here is addicted to enjoyment (the imperative many, if not all of you have used to justify the action). Stop doing your precious drugs, and stop an easy route to enjoyment. That's why you won't stop.
I challenge you to find something to do with your time that doesn't involve intoxicating yourself. You obviously won't do it (and intimidation has no stature here, so I don't know where you got that notion) because drugs are a simple way for you to have fun. Nice and quaint, isn't it? I find enjoyment in construction, shooting, philosophy, nature, and debating. I could have chosen drugs as a way to have fun, and while enjoyment is relative, I can say with near absolute certainty that you are not special enough to fall into a category where you *require* drugs to have fun and nothing else. Somehow, I think you'll agree. But what baffles me is why you bother to do drugs when you could be doing something more enjoyable, relaxing, and maybe even productive.
Sniper Extraordinaire
Read the FUD Rules before you come in and make an ass of yourself.
All your base are belong to us.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
[Updated on: Fri, 21 October 2005 14:18] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175767 is a reply to message #175601] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 14:57 |
 |
Fabian
Messages: 821
Registered: April 2003
Location: Boston, MA
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| warranto wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 19:12 |
| SEAL wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 17:54 |
| warranto wrote on Thu, 20 October 2005 10:25 |
Give it a rest. Those people have as much validity to comment as people who are currently using the substance.
|
No they don't. You don't know why people are drawn to the experience the drugs create because you haven't had the experience yourself. So all you can do is whine about how it's unhealthy and a bad idea, and none of the people you're preaching to will take you seriously because you have no frame of reference.
|
And I assume using the substance will cause people to take you seriously? "You should use it because I use it." has less of a credibility than someone who says not to use it, and then gives good reasons. Of course you're going to suggest to use it, after all, if you didn't you'd be contradicting your actions, which would make you look bad.
Unless you're suggesting the addiction it creates somehow absolves you of any biased opinion towards the subject.
|
Where did I suggest you (or anyone) use drugs?
| Java |
I challenge you to find something to do with your time that doesn't involve intoxicating yourself. You obviously won't do it (and intimidation has no stature here, so I don't know where you got that notion) because drugs are a simple way for you to have fun. Nice and quaint, isn't it? I find enjoyment in construction, shooting, philosophy, nature, and debating. I could have chosen drugs as a way to have fun, and while enjoyment is relative, I can say with near absolute certainty that you are not special enough to fall into a category where you *require* drugs to have fun and nothing else. Somehow, I think you'll agree. But what baffles me is why you bother to do drugs when you could be doing something more enjoyable, relaxing, and maybe even productive.
|
I don't have nearly enough time to comment on all that bullshit. Just goes to show you that you really don't know what you're talking about because you have no frame of reference. Who here is saying that people who do drugs ONLY do drugs? Do people who drink on the weekends at parties because they have social lives make them alcoholics? Fuck you. Many people who smoke pot also enjoy other, more wholesome parts of life like the stuff you mentioned.
[Updated on: Fri, 21 October 2005 15:10] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175770 is a reply to message #175710] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 15:09 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Spoony wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 09:42 |
| warranto wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 02:12 |
Here, I'll prove that even you are addicted to it.
I challenge you to give up any and all drugs for the rest of your life.
I bet you won't accept. Why? It doesn't matter, whether it's because you "like it", or "you simply don't want to", that's proof of the addiction. Refusal to stop. An addiction doesn't have to be physical. It can be just as psychological.
|
That's the biggest pile of crap I've ever heard.
If you challenged me never to watch television ever again for the rest of my life (something I do extremely rarely anyway, we're talking a handful of times a year here), am I addicted to television if I say no?
|
I'll quote this, simply because it answers others relating to addiction. Yes. If you use it, and refuse to give it up that is an addiction. Not all addictions are bad, but they are there. Why would you refuse to give up television (in your example)? Because it's "fun", "provides entertainment", "nothing better to do", whatever. You are addicted to something when you refuse to give it up. Can you be addicted to food? Yes, and everyone is. Some people just take that addiction too far. Even if you can grow tired of something over time, you can still be addicted to it in the present (relating to the hamburger suggestion). What you people are doing is getting a physical addiction (such as nicotine) mixed up with a psycological addiction (refusal to stop, regardless of what it is). People have a psycological addiction to food (primarily out of necessity), they are not physically addicted to it, but they can not stop eating.
As for taking breaks in the usage, that doesn't matter. You still go back to it. Heck, that would be even more suggestive of a psycological addiction.
Class has started, so I'll comment on the other stuff later.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175772 is a reply to message #175237] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 15:18 |
|
Lijitsu
Messages: 1575
Registered: April 2005
Location: Georgia, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
Class has started? I left school to get out of that shit, I don't need it here. If you want to teach someone, teach yourself. If what you say is true, than everything you've ever done twice you are addicted to. This includes playing a game, breathing, blinking, taking a shit, taking a leak, burping, farting, sitting down, standing up, moving your fingers, moving your toes, having your heart beat, moving your legs, arms, eyes, head, feet, hands, etc etc. You can't be addicted to that, because if you don't do it you'll die. I'm not addicted to food, but I like it. If I was addicted to food, I would always crave at all ages. I'm a teenager right now, so I'm always hungry, but I know when I need to stop eating. You need to think of what you say before you say it.
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Wed, 31 May 2006 22:30 |
I've been Nodbuggered. =( =( =(
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175776 is a reply to message #175767] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 15:43 |
|
Javaxcx
Messages: 1943
Registered: February 2003
Location: Canada, eh?
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| SEAL wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 17:57 |
I don't have nearly enough time to comment on all that bullshit. Just goes to show you that you really don't know what you're talking about because you have no frame of reference. Who here is saying that people who do drugs ONLY do drugs? Do people who drink on the weekends at parties because they have social lives make them alcoholics? Fuck you. Many people who smoke pot also enjoy other, more wholesome parts of life like the stuff you mentioned.
|
Whoa, calm down there turbo. Your "frame of reference" argument was already crushed, and crushed severely. Yet you insist on it, why?
I'll make it plainly clear to you, because it seems that no amount of persuasion, logic, or reasoning with you will ever change your one dimensional, and ultimately (and justly) moronic view that what you're doing is all right. You commit willful selfish acts that have harmful (you can ask ANY, and I mean any physician why inhaling concentrated carbon-based elements directly into your lungs is harmful), habitual, and more over ILLEGAL activities to appease your silly concept of having a good time. Yet you also admit you don't need to take drugs to have a good time (or at least you implied it)... so why are you still doing drugs? The "because everyone else is doing it and I want to have a good time" argument is thin and subject to more rhetoric then you can cram into John Kerry's forehead.
Now if you're going to post, but don't have enough "time" to respond with sound reasoned arguments, then spare the universe your ad hominem and make time.
Sniper Extraordinaire
Read the FUD Rules before you come in and make an ass of yourself.
All your base are belong to us.
You have no chance to survive make your time.
[Updated on: Fri, 21 October 2005 16:23] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175796 is a reply to message #175772] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 17:28 |
|
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
| Lijitsu wrote on Fri, 21 October 2005 18:18 |
Class has started? I left school to get out of that shit, I don't need it here. If you want to teach someone, teach yourself. If what you say is true, than everything you've ever done twice you are addicted to. This includes playing a game, breathing, blinking, taking a shit, taking a leak, burping, farting, sitting down, standing up, moving your fingers, moving your toes, having your heart beat, moving your legs, arms, eyes, head, feet, hands, etc etc. You can't be addicted to that, because if you don't do it you'll die. I'm not addicted to food, but I like it. If I was addicted to food, I would always crave at all ages. I'm a teenager right now, so I'm always hungry, but I know when I need to stop eating. You need to think of what you say before you say it.
|
Natural body functions don't count as you have no choice in the matter. Playing a game, yes. If you have the inability to stop (to make it clearer, since the obvious isn't so obvious to you, BY CHOICE). Oh, I'm thinking very much about what I'm saying. I'm curious, do you ever eat outside of your normal eating times (ie. Breakfast, lunch, supper.)? Because if you do, it's not because you NEED to or you'll die, it's because you WANT to. You feel the desire to satisfy that hunger. THAT is an addiction.
Anyways, to comment on what I didn't have time for prior to class (oh, by the way, Lijitsu, what's wrong with furthering your education?)
| Quote: |
Where did I suggest you (or anyone) use drugs?
|
I didn't; read what I said.
| Quote: |
I've been around people sober when they are high too... they acts different yes, but not in a bad way. They are having more fun, not acting like a fool, I suppose it is one opinion so we can't really settle this argument.
|
Agreed, how one person perceives another is up to that individual. Personally, I have never seen someone who was high act anything other than, well, "moronic"
| Quote: |
There are tons of things in society that people take that are non beneficial to the body. Cigars + Cigarettes, alcohol, even some fast foods have little to no health benefits.
|
Hence why all those things are deemed bad for you. I fail to see how drugs are any different.
| Quote: |
Dude, now quit being retarded. Life isn't a math book of problems. People that can afford it, buy it. People that can't, don't. It's as simple as that. They either find others that will smoke them up for free or save up enough money until they can. It's called budgeting. It's no different they buying other luxuries, like a chocolate bar at the grocery store, or a boat to cruise in. You set a goal, save, and buy! So according to your theory, buying anything that is not a human NEED 'eats at an income' (in a negative way, as you put forth that gesture).
|
You inferred it means something worse than it does. The only "bad" thing meant by it was that it is an unnecessary expense. Everything you purchase "eats into your income", yes; however, there are some that are used to purchase needs (ie. shelter, water, (healthy) food, medication,etc.) but most are used to purchase wants and desires. Those are the "bad" things that I'm reffering to when I use that phrase. Things that do not benefit you for reasons other than desire and want.
| Quote: |
The key words in here that you failed to read here is MINOR.
|
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/
Go into the Criminal Code and look up anything that states "Summary Conviction". those are everything that the law considers to be "minor" offences.
| Quote: |
Of course I'm not going to accept, who are you to challenge me to stop? To me you're just some person (kid or otherwise) on a computer named 'warranto'. OOooo I'm so intimidated... I better quit right now to shut this guy up. Gimmie a break.
|
The point wasn't to intimidate. The point was to prove it was an addiction. As would be suggested by your last statement:
| Quote: |
The reason I start up again is again to have some fun, or the midterm is over, or at a party, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175800 is a reply to message #175237] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 17:40 |
 |
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
That's freakin' absurd. I don't have to eat if i wanted to die. do I? are you saying that it's impossible for some people to not eat? that's so absurd it's baffles me how you can even come to that conclusion. if for example i said, "ok i agree to not watch tv for the rest of my life, and on the last day of my life i watch tv, that i was addicted to it? being addicted to something means you're dependent on it. I'm not dependent on TV. I can go without it if i really had to. But given the choice to prove some retard (who i don't even know) that i can go without TV for the whole of my life, just to prove what a dumbass he was for saying such a stupid thing. i would have to go with watching TV. there's a difference between can't refuse something and won't refusing. I won't refuse to give up TV, because it's my choice. If he says he can quit for 6 months and decides he wants to smoke a doobie, or whatever, then i do believe he's not really dependent on it if he can go without it for 6 months. Got it? On the other hand if he >>can't<< refuse it, it means that after some time it becomes sp unbearable that he can't choose to stop and MUST take it, no matter if he truly doesn't want it.
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175803 is a reply to message #175237] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 17:52 |
|
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
*sigh*
Once again, stop confusing a physical addiction with a psycological one. a PHYSICAL adiction means you are dependant on it. (withdrawl, etc.) a PSYCOLOGICAL addiction means you DON'T have the physical dependance, yet you are unable to stay away from the thing.
If you went back to tv on th elast day of your life, why? "Because I wanted to" (or some varaiation thereof). Exactly. That is a psycological addiction. Stopping only to later find some reason, and convincing yourself that it's proper, to go back to the thing. There is no withdrawl from not doing it, there is no physical reaction, such as depression, there is no sign of the dependancy. However, you fail to stay away. You may, while not engaged in the action, feel a desire to return. You may not act on it, and you may not have any side effects or complications from that desire, but the desire is still there.
I said it was impossible for some people to not eat? Where did I say that? All I stated was that:
| Quote: |
You feel the desire to satisfy that hunger.
|
Not actually eating itself.
[Updated on: Fri, 21 October 2005 17:52] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175805 is a reply to message #175237] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 18:10 |
|
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
you said everyone is addicted to food. I still dont' really even see your point.Are you saying it's a complete disaster if you had weed every 6 months? the definition that you are seriously using here can be used for anything, like you said, food. but you're complaining to a guy who says he can stop for 6 months(or however long he wants to) So i don't see why if a person can stop and start whenever he feels like it is much of a problem. If you want to go and say it's an addiction, go ahead because it's besides the poitn with what definition you are using it. If it was a person who couldn't refuse to stop than you might be making a point against him. When the guy has the ability to quit whenever he wants to(this includes if he wants to quit forever, if one intended on making a bet on saying he couldn't quit forever) than whatever the fuck addiction it might be, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference, now does it? the whole flaw is the part where if you ask someone to give it up for the rest of your life. I mean if it was someone like a lover that said this, it might be logical and would certainly make sense. the very fact is that if the need arrived to stop than he would no doubt make that choice. but there is no need to stop because some guy he didn't know told him to.
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Anyone here smoke? [message #175814 is a reply to message #175237] |
Fri, 21 October 2005 18:28 |
|
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
I already stated that i fully understand it but what is the point of saying it's an addiction if you mean it's psycological and has the exact same meaning if you said it about food. I am just trying to understand why you would bring it up that it is a psycological one when it means nothing in this case. As you can see he can stop at will just like he could if he wanted with TV, or food. In this case there is no difference between his addiction to food and anyone's addiction to food. My question is simply why did you even bring it up if it means so little
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri May 10 10:03:59 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01287 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
. Thank you very much.
