Marijuana should be legal, change my mind.

piloteer

@TKDB

You spelled "from" wrong.

piloteer

@TKDB

Ooo, too bad. You didn't have time to click the edit button before I posted the fact that you spelled from wrong.

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

Can any of the three of you explain to the public, as a whole, how a parent, or parents illegal, and legalized drug use, around their kids, or families, can maybe be viewed, as a probable safe, and stable environment?

Yes, in basic principle the parent or parents had been drugged without their knowledge to earn money or enslave their children placing them up for adoption. What does that have to do a malpractice in legislation of law?

TKDB

@piloteer

You're the one on the internet, apparently, defending parental drug use? 

While I'm defending the kids, children, and the families, that have, are being affected by their parents drug use around them?

"You don't seem to have any linear thought in any of your arguments. You are trying to claim that people who use marijuana around their children will somehow ruin their children's lives, yet you are not able to come up with one single scenario where that has happened. Instead you've opted to mock peoples mental illnesses, and are now attempting to argue that it is my parents fault that I am "pro drug use"?!?! Again, you use simple offensive banter to try and deflect the fact that you haven't got an argument. I'm rather saddened to see you call into question my upbringing. My parents are heavily involved in the church, and they donate food and volunteer at the food kitchen every week. If you wanna use offensive language with me, that's fine, I can take it. But it would break my heart if I found out that you do that to other people on this site. And I certainly hope you don't treat other people so badly as you often do me."

I tell you what, name a place, and a time, and I'll get into contact with a TV news channel in your area, and you can present your online pro marijuana ideology to a news anchor, and their camera operator, and get yourself some free publicity? 

And get some bragging rights, to promote your online pro marijuana ideology, even more? 

TKDB

@piloteer

And no response on the below?

Ooo, too bad, that you didn't respond quick enough, for me to point your delay out?

(You're the one on the internet, apparently, defending parental drug use? 

While I'm defending the kids, children, and the families, that have, are being affected by their parents drug use around them?

"You don't seem to have any linear thought in any of your arguments. You are trying to claim that people who use marijuana around their children will somehow ruin their children's lives, yet you are not able to come up with one single scenario where that has happened. Instead you've opted to mock peoples mental illnesses, and are now attempting to argue that it is my parents fault that I am "pro drug use"?!?! Again, you use simple offensive banter to try and deflect the fact that you haven't got an argument. I'm rather saddened to see you call into question my upbringing. My parents are heavily involved in the church, and they donate food and volunteer at the food kitchen every week. If you wanna use offensive language with me, that's fine, I can take it. But it would break my heart if I found out that you do that to other people on this site. And I certainly hope you don't treat other people so badly as you often do me."

I tell you what, name a place, and a time, and I'll get into contact with a TV news channel in your area, and you can present your online pro marijuana ideology to a news anchor, and their camera operator, and get yourself some free publicity? 

And get some bragging rights, to promote your online pro marijuana ideology, even more?)

maxx

@YeshuaRedeemed perhaps.  it is a drug though, just like alcohol. medical pot I do not have a problem with as long as it is strictly controlled; however; recreational use is a different item. The problem I have with that is the same thing will occur with pot as alcohol. it will , regardless of an age limit, find its way into use of young teens who now drink and smoke cigs. 

John_C_87

You're the one on the internet, apparently, defending parental drug use? Basic Principle marijuana is not a drug, Marijuana is a substance, 

Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol is the drug.

TKDB

@piloteer

So basically, you're against a Children's Bill of Rights?

Because apparently, your individual pro marijuana mindset, is more important to you?

In light of the below questions?

(Is it possible, that by being raised around your parents drug use, that their influence over you, helped to create, the mindset that you have currently? 

Do you view their influencing of you, when it came to their drug use, as being an equal, and fair, parental experience to you? 

Do you know of other people, who were raised around, their parents drug use, and that their parents drug use, influenced their similar pro drug use, mindsets as well?  

Thank you for educating me on how some adults can raise kids, around an adults drug use?)

piloteer

@TKDB

Actually, if a "childrens bill of rights" is written by anyone other than children, I most certainly will not view it as a legitimate document, because it wouldn't have been written by the demographic it's proposing to protect, therefore it would be utterly useless. I don't know how old you are, but if you're over the age of 15, I fail to see how you or any other adult could properly hash out a children's bill of rights because, well, you're simply not a child yourself, so you cannot be a proper representative of the child population. And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I do believe we live in a country that allows freedom of expression (the US). So if the child population were to ever write up a children's bill of rights, without the persuasion of adults without the proper credentials in child care and development, that would be the only legal form that I would recognize as legitimate. Any sort of "children's bill of rights" that is conceived by adults would not be legitimate in my mind.  

As far as my parents being the reason I am "pro-drug"? Perhaps. Or perhaps I'm a grown adult with the faculty to make decisions without my parents influence or consent. They don't live anywhere near me, and I don't frequently converse with them, so it's sort of difficult to rely on their consultation on every matter or choice I may come in contact with. Are your parents the reason your so anti-freedom, or anti-consensus building debate? Maybe you still live with your parents(I'm willing to bet you do), and I'm sure some day they would probably want you to go out into the world and make decisions for yourself, like a grown adult does. You asked, was my parents marijuana use an "equal and fair experience" for me?!?! Nothing about my parents was "equal and fair", they were my parents, so they had the last word on what went on in their house, how I behaved and conducted myself in school, or in public, or with friends. However unequal and unfair that may be, I don't find this to be very unsettling or strange, that's kinda how parents are. They make the rules, it's naturally unequal and unfair. You asked if I new people whose parent used marijuana in front of them when they were children. Yes, several in fact. Some of them use marijuana themselves, and some don't. Some of them are OK with responsible adults using marijuana, and some are not. That's the thing about grown adults, they get to forge their own ethical standards without their parents consent. If you have proof that parents who use marijuana will automatically make their children use marijuana, feel free to put it on display for us to see. 

 I'd like to point out the dead end logic of your argument. You're arguing that legalized marijuana will cause parents to use in front of their children (without proof, I might add), but you're only assuming that marijuana use is objectively harmful. Not only to the users themselves, but any children who may bear witness to its use. Unfortunately for you, that's not an objective fact. The medical community didn't embrace the medicinal aspects of marijuana because they were "lit up on a blunt". They came to their conclusions after careful consideration and research, and experimentation. One thing I find so great about all this, is the fact that the medicinal community didn't take into consideration any social taboos that have stigmatized marijuana. All they considered was the benefits that marijuana offers as a medicine. Another point that's hurting your case, is the lack of evidence from you that even insinuates that marijuana causes permanent harm to recreational users. Beyond that point, there's also the problem of you proving that marijuana use in front of children (which isn't technically what this debate is about, but for some reason you brought it up) can cause permanent harm to the child, or psychologically influence them (which I pointed out that it didn't happen to me. I don't use marijuana, and I don't still live with my parents). So, because the supposed harm caused by marijuana is not an objective fact, and it hasn't been proven by you, or anyone that a child who witnesses it's use is harmed or influenced in any way, your argument is indecorous

While TKDB is looking up the definition of indecorous, I'd like to also point out that this debate has nothing to do with marijuana use in front of children, and certainly has nothing to do with marijuana use for children (barring medicinal purposes), so this argument is dead on arrival. So sorry kiddos, you'll just have to wait to get high (we sold our souls for rock and roll by Black Sabbath is a great album to have on hand when you do). If a state were to legalize recreational marijuana, with the exception of using it in public, or in view of children, I don't think that would be out of line. This argument is about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults, in the privacy of their home, or in a privately owned establishment that allows it. If TKDB, would like to join in the actual discussion, and stay focused, and leave the kids out of it, I hope TKDB feels free to do so. What we really need from TKDB, is evidence that recreational marijuana use for adults is harmful to the users, and/or society as a whole. Thank You!

TKDB

@piloteer

If you want to believe in your own pro marijuana rhetoric, go right ahead.


"This argument is about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults, in the privacy of their home, or in a privately owned establishment that allows it. If TKDB, would like to join in the actual discussion, and stay focused, and leave the kids out of it, I hope TKDB feels free to do so. What we really need from TKDB, is evidence that recreational marijuana use for adults is harmful to the users, and/or society as a whole. Thank You! "

I'm not leaving the kids out of your conversation to appease your individual argument.

The kids in this country deserve better, than how you want your pro marijuana rhetoric to be talked about, because of your apparent, personal opinion?

When it comes to a parent, or parents using illegal drugs around their kids, there a failure of sorts, being utilized around their kids, and those same kids as well deserve, a safe, and illegal drug free environment, to be raised, and grow up in? 

Regardless of the some view the above pro kid, pro children, and sober parent, or parents point of view? 

So when a parent, or parents indulge, in their illegal drugs, around their kids, does this mean that those very parents, are providing their kids with a proper, safe, and responsible home environment?

Website's like Parents Opposed to Pot, and CALM, (Citizens Against the Legalization of Marijuana)

These very websites, are the ones giving those kids, a voice, while there are the other websites, that give the recreational marijuana user's a voice, and the Legalization of Marijuana rhetoric, a voice as well? 

I'm pro family, pro kids, pro children, pro drug free public, and pro law abiding.

Are you the same? 

piloteer

@TKDB

No, I am not the same. I seek objective scientific research which proves that using marijuana causes permanent harm to adults who use it recreationally. Just as I seek objective research that proves that if recreational marijuana were made legal, it would cause parents to use it in front of their children. Also, research that proves marijuana use in front of children will cause harm to them physically or mentally, or influence them so irreversibly that it leaves them powerless to not use marijuana themselves would work wonders for your case. If you feel the need to be a voice for the children, that's fine, I respect that. But sorry to burst your bubble, without objective facts that proves all those things I've just mentioned, your only letting the children down, and your self important clarion call is a wash. If what I ask of you is scientific research of the harms of marijuana use, that kinda takes POP and CALM out of the running for a viable source of objective fact, wouldn't you say? Subjective "reasoning" is of no value when it comes to public policy. Peoples feelings are not only useless, they're nothing more than chemical reactions in the body which can be influenced by something like a tumor, or something as simple as an injury (which I hope you have neither). So peoples feelings must be ignored when it comes to making public policy.

Is what your saying any kind of objective fact that's written in stone, rendering it an indisputable law that all human kind must follow, or is it just your opinion?

I'm going to go ahead and fill in the correct answers for you to save time. Your welcome!! The correct answer is no, what your saying is not an objective fact. And yes, it is just your opinion.

Can you scientifically prove that just me simply talking about legalizing recreational marijuana for adults is harmful to children?

Don't worry my G, I got this one for you. No, you cannot.

Can you provide any evidence that proves marijuana use causes permanent harm to adults who use it recreationally?

Just to be sure you don't foul this one up, I'll put the correct answer for you here. Nope, you cannot.

Can you prove that when children witness their parents using marijuana, it causes them to lose all control of their freedom of choice, and marijuana use will become a predetermined outcome for them?

I'm sure you don't want to slip any further down the social ladder on DI, so I'll get this one for you too. The answer is, nope you cannot.

Just to be clear here, I'm not arguing that parents should be allowed to use marijuana in front of their children, and if social services feels the need to regulate those kind if circumstances, I think that's OK. But I don't feel the need to forbid responsible adults from using a safe drug in the privacy of their home, or at a marijuana bar.

John_C_87

YeshuaRedeemed said:

While I don't want to use this product, I think other people have the right to do so, if they get it from a doctor.

Marijuana should be legal.

In basic principle Marijuana is legal as it does not hold a united state as illegal. This is in spite of the fact that people have been caught getting High using marijuana as the source of  Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol for decades. TDKB for what ever reason you give the whole truth is you are simply taking part in an attack of United State Constitutional law. The same would go for YeshuaRedeemed What is self-evident is neither of you truly understand your rights as they have been explained to you in this matter.

The reregulation of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol needs to address its independence from aditives illgal and legal narcotic. This is a state of the union made in regulation that is taking place now.

TKDB

@piloteer

So these websites are lying to the public, then about marijuana?

And you're telling the (Truth,) based upon your pro marijuana opinion? 

The below websites are lying, and are maybe in a sense are trying to corrupt your pro marijuana points of view? 

Website's like Parents Opposed to Pot, and CALM, (Citizens Against the Legalization of Marijuana)

These very websites, are the ones giving those kids, a voice, while there are the other websites, that give the recreational marijuana user's a voice, and the Legalization of Marijuana rhetoric, a voice as well? 
 
I'm pro family, pro kids, pro children, pro drug free public, and pro law abiding.

No your aren't the same, 

Because this appears to be your concluding talking point, that @Plaffelvohfen rewarded you with a fist bump over? 

"But I don't feel the need to forbid responsible adults from using a safe drug in the privacy of their home, or at a marijuana bar."

How responsible is the parent being if the use their illegal weed, or cocaine, meth, heroin, Opioids, or medical weed around their kids? 

Is that what proper, safe, and healthy parenting looks like? 

Smoking a joint around a newborn, a toddler, a kid, or children, under the very same roof? 

So basically you're using the internet to give your pro marijuana platform a voice, and defend your pro marijuana mindset at the same time as well, right? 

See, you treat your pro marijuana mindset, with your own type of fair and equal, self rationality?

"I seek objective scientific research which proves that using marijuana causes permanent harm to adults who use it recreationally."

What is so scientifically sound, about a parent, or parents who use their illegal or legalized marijuana, around their own kids, or families? 

John_C_87

@TKDB ;
Again TKDB you are making a rather big unconstitutional statement to address air pollution. The air pollution should be addressed on the rating system set for air pollutants. To be truthful when people start contributing to much larger problem overacting, like taking a persons child, or a family members property for air pollution, this is not a reasonable response in any sense of the word.

Again the threat that spreads fear in any translation is the death we let run ramped by the very negligence created by overaction to a problem. So is the effect of Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol more or less lethal then chlorine? Are there known cancer causing chemicals legislated into marijuana that would link the United States of America directly in chemical warfare of its own citizens, or change the status of air pollutant?  

TKDB

@John_C_87

So you are personally classifying a parent, or parents, illegal marijuana use around their kids, children, or families in general as air pollution? 

"Again TKDB you are making a rather big unconstitutional statement to address air pollution."

A second "Scientific argument" from another pro marijuana promoter? 

piloteer

@TKDB

If a parent is using cocaine, meth, heroin, Opioids, or reading disinformation like POP or CALM, around their kids, I would consider that all very irresponsible. Marijuana is legal in the state I live in, so it wouldn't be considered illegal. I am absolutely saying those websites are lying to the public, because sensationalized untruths is how you get ad placements. If we are going to reject scientific truth to make our arguments, what are we left with? Is it safe to say that all we're really left with is our uniformed opinion? Let me get this one for you hombre. Yes, that is all we're left with. Nice job avoiding the questions I asked you. I guess it will go down in history that the answers I filled in for you are the ones you agree with. 

piloteer

@John_C_87

I think I agree with what your saying. The biggest "crime" pot smokers are committing is contributing to air pollution, which absolutely does not warrant taking someone's children. It's an abhorrent overreaction. Plus there are g-pens and vaporizers now, so there's no smoke involved at all now, so no crime is being committed at all. 

TKDB

A challenge to the adults or to a parent, or parents, who have maybe used both illegal marijuana, or legalized marijuana around your kids, children, or your families, or the children of other families, around your drug use:

Would you be willing to defend your recreational marijuana, or illegal drug use overall, on the internet?

And respond, to the below questions? 

How responsible is the parent being if the use their illegal weed, or cocaine, meth, heroin, Opioids, or medical weed around their kids? 

Is that what proper, safe, and healthy parenting looks like? 

Smoking a joint around a newborn, a toddler, a kid, or children, under the very same roof? 

Is there a drug using parent, or parents, willing to take on, those questions, and defend your drug use? 

TKDB

@piloteer:

Why not file a lawsuit against CALM, or Parents Opposed to Pot, and call them out for feeding the public, with their acts of irresponsible disinformation, via their website? 

"If a parent is using cocaine, meth, heroin, Opioids, or reading disinformation like POP or CALM, around their kids, I would consider that all very irresponsible."

Plaffelvohfen

@piloteer

You know, I think our friend here has never actually interacted directly with a cannabis user... I'm under the impression that his views on this, are entirely based on the movie Reefer Madness... Sad really...

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

My views, are from seeing teenagers, adults, and who were maybe closeted marijuana addicts, smoking weed in their vehicles, on 10 separate occasions. 

One of the car's had a Handicap placard in the car, and the marijuana smoking teenagers didn't look very handicapped to me?

Some of the adults, I guess felt the need to get high, before going grocery shopping, shopping at the mall, or before illegally driving their car while high?

Maybe some got paranoid, over someone calling the police over their illegal drug use?

I wonder if maybe, some of the adults were maybe parents? 

My additional views are from some of the pro marijuana individuals, that have educated me, and some of the rest of the public, via the internet? 

"I'm under the impression that his views on this, are entirely based on the movie Reefer Madness... Sad really..."

Those parents using weed around their kids and families, are the sad ones.

piloteer

@TKDB

What makes your form of trolling so heartbreaking for the rest of us to witness is the fact that you don't even realize you're a troll. You think you're serious. And that's what hurts the most my friend. Your argument has reached the castle steps of absurdity, and I don't think I am able to follow inside my friend. I'm not as brave as you. This has all become like a poorly written Khafka story. Why the hell would I file a lawsuit against a website that's exercising their freedom of expression? Where was it in my argument that gave you even an inkling of a hint that just because I disagree with those websites that I would want to try and circumvent the rules of the US justice system and sue them for doing things that are totally legal to do? Is that really your world vision of ethics, we go around suing people who we disagree with or don't like? Are you even aware that this is so far off subject, I'm actually nervous that I might get kicked off the site for even following with you.  

Please TK, come back to us. When are you gonna land? 

piloteer

@Plaffelvohfen

It is a good movie. At least for entertainment value, you know, when you're really baked. But personally, If I'm going to get really stoned out of my mind and watch a movie, fantasia, the Disney movie would be more fun. Stanley Kubrick movies are really fun when you're really baked too. Easy rider is a classic stoner movie with a great soundtrack. The people who did the animation for the wall by Pink Floyd actually did a very entertaining movie before they did the wall. It was called heavy metal, and it is endlessly entertaining when you're high.

Plaffelvohfen

@piloteer

Ever watched the movie The Fountain? That's another good one!

piloteer

@Plaffelvohfen

I have not. I will give it a looksy though. Thanx

TKDB

@piloteer

rel·e·vant

/ˈreləvənt/

adjective

1. closely connected or appropriate to what is being done or considered.

Are your below responses, revelent to the theme of this forum?

"It is a good movie. At least for entertainment value, you know, when you're really baked. But personally, If I'm going to get really stoned out of my mind and watch a movie, fantasia, the Disney movie would be more fun. Stanley Kubrick movies are really fun when you're really baked too. Easy rider is a classic stoner movie with a great soundtrack. The people who did the animation for the wall by Pink Floyd actually did a very entertaining movie before they did the wall. It was called heavy metal, and it is endlessly entertaining when you're high."

"What makes your form of trolling so heartbreaking for the rest of us to witness is the fact that you don't even realize you're a troll. You think you're serious. And that's what hurts the most my friend. Your argument has reached the castle steps of absurdity, and I don't think I am able to follow inside my friend. I'm not as brave as you. This has all become like a poorly written Khafka story. Why the hell would I file a lawsuit against a website that's exercising their freedom of expression? Where was it in my argument that gave you even an inkling of a hint that just because I disagree with those websites that I would want to try and circumvent the rules of the US justice system and sue them for doing things that are totally legal to do? Is that really your world vision of ethics, we go around suing people who we disagree with or don't like? Are you even aware that this is so far off subject, I'm actually nervous that I might get kicked off the site for even following with you.  

Please TK, come back to us. When are you gonna land?"

Or maybe more self relevant, to your individual points of view, that are outside of the theme of this forum? 

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

So you are personally classifying a parent, or parents, illegal marijuana use around their kids, children, or families in general as air pollution? 

No I'm not you are saying it is air pollution. Listening to your grievance it is what you explaining to everyone in basic principle.

TKDB

@John_C_87

John, when it comes a parent, or parents smoking weed, around their kids, are you pro kid, children, pro family, or pro public, or are you pro marijuana, and pro parent, or parents, who smoke weed around their kids?

John_C_87

.@TKDB ;

It wouldn't matter how anyone answers your question you are wrong, it is that simple. In the defining of limitation on personal liberty I have already address the issue with standard of pollution as a united state. 

TKDB

@John_C_87

Its not a hard question.

But you seem to be having a difficult time with it?

"It wouldn't matter how anyone answers your question you are wrong, it is that simple."

Prove I'm wrong, and provide a counter argument? 

John, when it comes a parent, or parents smoking weed, around their kids, are you pro kid, children, pro family, or pro public, or are you pro marijuana, and pro parent, or parents, who smoke weed around their kids?

TKDB

@John_C_87

@piloteer

@Plaffelvohfen

Bringing to you NORML, which I'm going to guess, that at least, one of you is maybe familiar with this organization? 

This website as well, has shaped my views on marijuana, around kids, and children.

The NORML Board of Directors has adopted a set of principles called the "Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use," and the first principle is "Cannabis consumption is for adults only; it is irresponsible to provide cannabis to children."

https://norml.org/about

About NORML

NORML's mission is to move public opinion sufficiently to legalize the responsible use of marijuana by adults, and to serve as an advocate for consumers to assure they have access to high quality marijuana that is safe, convenient and affordable.

Adopted by the NORML Board of Directors, June 29, 2013 

Policy Statement

NORML supports the right of adults to use marijuana responsibly, whether for medical or personal purposes. All penalties, both civil and criminal, should be eliminated for responsible use. Further, to eliminate the crime, corruption and violence associated with any "black market," a legally regulated market should be established where consumers could buy marijuana in a safe and secure environment.

NORML also supports the legalization of hemp(non-psychoactive marijuana) for industrial use.

"What about kids and marijuana?

Marijuana, like other drugs, is not for kids. There are many activities in our society that we permit adults to do, but forbid children, such as motorcycle riding, skydiving, signing contracts, getting married and drinking alcohol or smoking tobacco. However, we do not condone arresting adults who responsibly engage in these activities in order to dissuade our children from doing so. Nor can we justify arresting adult marijuana smokers on the grounds of sending a message to children. Our expectation and hope for young people is that they grow up to be responsible adults, and our obligation to them is to demonstrate what that means.

The NORML Board of Directors has adopted a set of principles called the "Principles of Responsible Cannabis Use," and the first principle is "Cannabis consumption is for adults only; it is irresponsible to provide cannabis to children."

And if maybe one of you are here from NORML, maybe you could provide an answer to the below questions?

How responsible is the parent being if the use their illegal weed, or cocaine, meth, heroin, Opioids, or medical weed around their kids? 

Is that what proper, safe, and healthy parenting looks like?

Smoking a joint around a newborn, a toddler, a kid, or children, under the very same roof? 

Is there a drug using parent, or parents, willing to take on, those questions, and defend your drug use?  

@Plaffelvohfen:

Do you maybe view the efforts of NORML, as irrelevant? 

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

No it hasn't, there are still marijuana user's who don't want to pay for weed, along with the taxes, so they are still getting their weed from a drug dealer.

Sound familiar, it's like those cigarette sellers, who sell the loose cigarettes on the streets?

"Lastly, the legalization and taxation of it also puts an end to those that deal, and/or push it. It therefore also helps to reduce drug-related crime."

So it would appear, that the drug related crimes, are still thriving, and ongoing. 

TKDB

From NORML:

Local Decriminalization

"Campaigns to liberalize municipal marijuana possession penalties in states where cannabis remains criminalized have become increasingly popular in recent years.

Since 2012, over 50 localities in a dozen states have enacted municipal laws or resolutions either fully or partially decriminalizing minor cannabis possession offenses. This total does not take into account citywide ordinances in jurisdictions that later moved to either decriminalize or legalizemarijuana statewide. "

Look at this particular use of words:

"Campaigns to "liberalize" municipal marijuana possession penalties in states where cannabis remains criminalized have become increasingly popular in recent years?

So basically, in a sense, the democracy of the United States, is being "liberalized" to suit the needs of the marijuana user?

I wonder how many pro marijuana Polls, were used to sell that pro marijuana rhetoric to the overall public?

Maybe one Poll, or maybe more? 

In one state, the pro marijuana talking heads pushed 8 pro marijuana Polls to make sure that the illegal marijuana users got their plights of self created legal problems heard, by those polls, to get the rest of the public to maybe feel sorry for them?

See, the pro marijuana talking heads, worked hard via their talking head speeches to help get the marijuana user their drug of choice legalized for them?

@Plaffelvohfen

@ZeusAres42

@piloteer

@WordsMatter

@John_C_87

Care to comment? 

Plaffelvohfen

Do you guys hear anything? It must be windy...

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

"Do you guys hear anything? It must be windy..."

Are you familiar with NORML?

They are a pro marijuana organization.

I thought for sure, that any pro marijuana individual, would be showing NORML some respect, for their efforts, like this one?

"Campaigns to liberalize municipal marijuana possession penalties in states where cannabis remains criminalized have become increasingly popular in recent years."

Do you maybe work for NORML, @Plaffelvohfen? 

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@John_C_87

Its not a hard question.

But you seem to be having a difficult time with it?

"It wouldn't matter how anyone answers your question you are wrong, it is that simple."

Prove I'm wrong, and provide a counter argument? 

John, when it comes a parent, or parents smoking weed, around their kids, are you pro kid, children, pro family, or pro public, or are you pro marijuana, and pro parent, or parents, who smoke weed around their kids?

I can’t prove your wrong, the reason I can’t prove you wrong and the reason why you want to believe I can’t prove you wrong are not the same. You are simple setting a strange that marijuana creates and original issue that religion, alcohol, and air pollution do not already create as a united state in society. Thus justifies unproportionable legal precedent.

You are not asking a multiple choice question the question is an open question and you are not paying attention to any response unless it is what you want. 

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

His below answers, are non counter arguments.

"I can’t prove your wrong, the reason I can’t prove you wrong and the reason why you want to believe I can’t prove you wrong are not the same."

"You are simple setting a strange that marijuana creates and original issue that religion, alcohol, and air pollution do not already create as a united state in society. Thus justifies unproportionable legal precedent."

"You are not asking a multiple choice question the question is an open question and you are not paying attention to any response unless it is what you want."

Come on NORML, please help with the argument? 

Because Religion, alcohol, and air pollution, have nothing to do, with a parent, or parents, using their illegal, or legalized marijuana, around the kids, children, or their families, in general, do they? 

So why use the pro marijuana defense argument tool, of pulling Religion. Alcohol, and air pollution, into the conversation as a defensive measure, to self protect the pro marijuana individuals talking points?

Because it's a liberal defense, right? 

So basically, maybe, you and others are trying to liberalize the rest of the public, with your unfair and unequal pro marijuana, liberal philosophies right, yes, or no? 

Those kids, children, and the families, who have been dealing with their parent, or parents illegal marijuana using around them, deserve better, than to be liberalized by an adults illegal marijuana use, dont they, yes, or no? 

Plaffelvohfen

John_C_87

TKDB said:

@Plaffelvohfen

His below answers, are non counter arguments.

"I can’t prove your wrong, the reason I can’t prove you wrong and the reason why you want to believe I can’t prove you wrong are not the same."

"You are simple setting a strange that marijuana creates and original issue that religion, alcohol, and air pollution do not already create as a united state in society. Thus justifies unproportionable legal precedent."

"You are not asking a multiple choice question the question is an open question and you are not paying attention to any response unless it is what you want."

Come on NORML, please help with the argument? 

Because Religion, alcohol, and air pollution, have nothing to do, with a parent, or parents, using their illegal, or legalized marijuana, around the kids, children, or their families, in general, do they? 

So why use the pro marijuana defense argument tool, of pulling Religion. Alcohol, and air pollution, into the conversation as a defensive measure, to self protect the pro marijuana individuals talking points?

Because it's a liberal defense, right? 

So basically, maybe, you and others are trying to liberalize the rest of the public, with your unfair and unequal pro marijuana, liberal philosophies right, yes, or no? 

Those kids, children, and the families, who have been dealing with their parent, or parents illegal marijuana using around them, deserve better, than to be liberalized by an adults illegal marijuana use, dont they, yes, or no? 

Exactly my answers are non counter argument, the corrections is made on mistakes which took place on an unconstitutional legislation. The same mistakes you want to exploit. A separation on marijuana is to be made on influence of the chemical 9-tetrahydrocannabinol. I might even agree on the reasons for the negligence as chemical substance abuse needs a level to be defined as lethal alcohol holds this level in the blood stream and it is legislated by law in a way that can set a precedent.

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

Come on NORML, please help with the argument? 

Because Religion, alcohol, and air pollution, have nothing to do, with a parent, or parents, using their illegal, or legalized marijuana, around the kids, children, or their families, in general, do they? 

So why use the pro marijuana defense argument tool, of pulling Religion. Alcohol, and air pollution, into the conversation as a defensive measure, to self protect the pro marijuana individuals talking points?

Because it's a liberal defense, right? 

So basically, maybe, you and others are trying to liberalize the rest of the public, with your unfair and unequal pro marijuana, liberal philosophies right, yes, or no? 

Those kids, children, and the families, who have been dealing with their parent, or parents illegal marijuana using around them, deserve better, than to be liberalized by an adults illegal marijuana use, dont they, yes, or no?  

You don't have an answer? 

TKDB

@John_C_87

I didn't exploit any mistakes.

The parent, or those parents, who are using their, illegal, and legalized marijuana, around their own kids, children, or families, is what exploitation, and the mistake making looks like.

"The same mistakes you want to exploit."

"Exactly my answers are non counter argument, the corrections is made on mistakes which took place on an unconstitutional legislation. The same mistakes you want to exploit. A separation on marijuana is to be made on influence of the chemical 9-tetrahydrocannabinol. I might even agree on the reasons for the negligence as chemical substance abuse needs a level to be defined as lethal alcohol holds this level in the blood stream and it is legislated by law in a way that can set a precedent."

Where is your cooberating evidence, to support, your claims? 

Plaffelvohfen

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition"

(Come on NORML, please help with the argument? 

Because Religion, alcohol, and air pollution, have nothing to do, with a parent, or parents, using their illegal, or legalized marijuana, around the kids, children, or their families, in general, do they? 

So why use the pro marijuana defense argument tool, of pulling Religion. Alcohol, and air pollution, into the conversation as a defensive measure, to self protect the pro marijuana individuals talking points?

Because it's a liberal defense, right? 

So basically, maybe, you and others are trying to liberalize the rest of the public, with your unfair and unequal pro marijuana, liberal philosophies right, yes, or no? 

Those kids, children, and the families, who have been dealing with their parent, or parents illegal marijuana using around them, deserve better, than to be liberalized by an adults illegal marijuana use, dont they, yes, or no?)

I'm sorry, are you maybe uncomfortable with those benign questions? 

Plaffelvohfen

@TKDB

I tell you what, name a place, and a time, and I'll get into contact with a TV news channel in your area, and you can present your online pro-fascist and anti-freedom ideology to a news anchor, and their camera operator, and get yourself some free publicity? 

And get some bragging rights, to promote your online pro-fascist and anti-freedom ideology, even more? 

Because apparently, your individual pro-fascist and anti-freedom mindset, is more important to you?

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

Prove it, back your rhetoric up with some real world facts? 

"Because apparently, your individual pro-fascist and anti-freedom mindset, is more important to you?"

Prove that I'm a fascist, or that I'm anti freedom minded, because I refuse to cater, pander,  or coddle your liberal, pro marijuana mindset?

Why should the rest of the country have to live according to the liberalizing mindset? 

Why should the kids, children, or the families, of a marijuana using parent, or parents, have to be liberalized by the marijuana using parents?

Go to NORML, and gather up some additional pro marijuana talking points to use as your next argument fodder? 

Plaffelvohfen

@TKDB

Prove you're not! Back your rhetoric up with some real world facts! 

Why should the rest of the country have to live according to your anti-freedom mindset? 

TKDB

@Plaffelvohfen

Why don't you ask NORML, to do your arguing for you?

Make them do your debating for you, because that's how sad your argument tactic is.

Invite them to this forum? 

Here you go:

Contact Us

Please contact us!

We welcome your questions, comments, and most importantly your support. 

Mailing Address

NORML and the NORML Foundation
1100 H Street, NW
Suite 830
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 483-5500

Email NORML

General Inquiries: norml@norml.org
The NORML Foundation: foundation@norml.org
Media Requests: media@norml.org
Chapter Inquiries: chapters@norml.org
Membership/Donation/Product Questions: orders@norml.org
Legal Questions: legal@norml.org
NORML Director: director@norml.org
Adverstising/Sponsorships: advertise@norml.org
Website Questions: website@norml.org 

Invite them.

ZeusAres42

One or more of the people in this debate seem like they're currently on Marijuana.

TKDB

@ZeusAres42

You talk a lot, and your argument shows it.

"One or more of the people in this debate seem like they're currently on Marijuana."

Why should the rest of the country have to live according to the liberalizing mindset? 

Why should the kids, children, or the families, of a marijuana using parent, or parents, have to be liberalized by the marijuana using parents? 

Why don't you ask NORML, to do your arguing for you?

Make them do your debating for you, because that's how sad your argument tactic is.

Invite them to this forum? 

Here you go:

Contact Us

Please contact us!

We welcome your questions, comments, and most importantly your support. 

Mailing Address

NORML and the NORML Foundation
1100 H Street, NW
Suite 830
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 483-5500

Email NORML

General Inquiries: norml@norml.org
The NORML Foundation: foundation@norml.org
Media Requests: media@norml.org
Chapter Inquiries: chapters@norml.org
Membership/Donation/Product Questions: orders@norml.org
Legal Questions: legal@norml.org
NORML Director: director@norml.org
Adverstising/Sponsorships: advertise@norml.org
Website Questions: website@norml.org 

Invite them. 

ZeusAres42

@TKDB

Lighten up, take a joke. Grow up and get overit.