![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sathorAll I see is bias.
Bias, bias, bias.
You know, there is no right anymore. There's only opinions of right. I guess I say 'anymore' because I hold on to a thread of an idea that there was a right at one time, a real right, the kind of right that people all over understood and abided by.
I think that right was survival and happiness.
To deny either of those is to deny life itself. One cannot be sure what makes another happy, so one should not say (nor should the majority say) that something is wrong because it doesn't make them happy or they abstain from using it to assist in being happy.
Drugs for example. Okay, it might theoretically shorten my life expectancy (though they cannot deny the possibility that I could still live to 103 smoking marijuana every day, or dropping acid, eating shrooms, whatever)
However, if it makes /me/ happy...by them making it possible for detrimental effects to occur that normally wouldn't occur for me (jailtime, forced rehab), they are making my happiness level even worse, therefore obstructing my ability to be happy, therefore denying my right to live.
There are responsible drug users in this world, whether you people want to acknowledge it or not. I know two parents, one who used to love to drink, the other who loved to smoke weed. They both did it responsibly, and you know what - When the one needed a steady job to support his family, he quit smoking so he could pass the random piss tests. And when they had children, the other stopped drinking liquor and partying and both went to the occasional beer. That's a testament to responsibility.
Gay marriage is another example, and it reigns supreme when it comes to bias. They fight it with the bible and they fight it with 'research'. However, the research isn't based in the real world, so it can't be used. And everyone knows the bible creates a majority of hypocrites, so it should be thrown out the window as well. The only reason people fight it is because they feel it infringes on their idea of life. However, to deny others the type of life they want...well, that's wrong. How would the straight people feel if Gays reigned supreme, and everyone used artificial insemination and adopted, they were the only ones who were allowed to be married? It's not the way it is, and highly unlikely to ever occur, but it's a vision for you straight people to see what it's like to be opressed and told you can't do what others do because you aren't like them.
It's ironic, but the only reason this country exists today is because of opression. Our forefathers left because they couldn't worship the way they wanted too. Our government is as bad as britain was in those days. It's time for children to be raised open-minded and free. I'm sick of the mind control.
Bias, bias, bias.
You know, there is no right anymore. There's only opinions of right. I guess I say 'anymore' because I hold on to a thread of an idea that there was a right at one time, a real right, the kind of right that people all over understood and abided by.
I think that right was survival and happiness.
To deny either of those is to deny life itself. One cannot be sure what makes another happy, so one should not say (nor should the majority say) that something is wrong because it doesn't make them happy or they abstain from using it to assist in being happy.
Drugs for example. Okay, it might theoretically shorten my life expectancy (though they cannot deny the possibility that I could still live to 103 smoking marijuana every day, or dropping acid, eating shrooms, whatever)
However, if it makes /me/ happy...by them making it possible for detrimental effects to occur that normally wouldn't occur for me (jailtime, forced rehab), they are making my happiness level even worse, therefore obstructing my ability to be happy, therefore denying my right to live.
There are responsible drug users in this world, whether you people want to acknowledge it or not. I know two parents, one who used to love to drink, the other who loved to smoke weed. They both did it responsibly, and you know what - When the one needed a steady job to support his family, he quit smoking so he could pass the random piss tests. And when they had children, the other stopped drinking liquor and partying and both went to the occasional beer. That's a testament to responsibility.
Gay marriage is another example, and it reigns supreme when it comes to bias. They fight it with the bible and they fight it with 'research'. However, the research isn't based in the real world, so it can't be used. And everyone knows the bible creates a majority of hypocrites, so it should be thrown out the window as well. The only reason people fight it is because they feel it infringes on their idea of life. However, to deny others the type of life they want...well, that's wrong. How would the straight people feel if Gays reigned supreme, and everyone used artificial insemination and adopted, they were the only ones who were allowed to be married? It's not the way it is, and highly unlikely to ever occur, but it's a vision for you straight people to see what it's like to be opressed and told you can't do what others do because you aren't like them.
It's ironic, but the only reason this country exists today is because of opression. Our forefathers left because they couldn't worship the way they wanted too. Our government is as bad as britain was in those days. It's time for children to be raised open-minded and free. I'm sick of the mind control.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-12 07:55 pm (UTC)i'd like to nit pick
the puritans got their asses kicked out of the UK
and they came here.
they got kicked out because they were too uptight!
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 06:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 06:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 09:06 am (UTC)In general, I agree with you - our countries' laws are too harsh for no particularly good reason, which is particularly hypocritical in the case of the US, considering its motto. (Canada's makes no promise of liberty, heh.) However, I don't agree with what you define as oppression. In order for society to function, we need certain controls, and yes, some of them get in the way of happiness - happiness is not a God-given right, and 90% of the world barely has even the potential to feel it. You should feel blessed simply to live in a part of this massive globe where you have the opportunity to be peaceful, happy, and free, even if you aren't. Y'know?
Anyway, that's off-topic. What I was going to say is that we can say that everyone should have the freedom to do whatever they want, but when the chips are down, we don't really want that. Here's an example: I have a brain tumour, dangerously-placed but operable. Do I want my neurosurgeon to be a drunkard, an acidhead, or even a casual dilaudid user? Hell, no, I don't. That's the kind of thing that leads to people leaving their scissors inside of their patients, or deciding to carve their initials into your abdomen. That man or woman has to be on top of things completely, or my chances of waking up a vegetable will be greatly increased. Being aware of this, there's no way I can condone people doing whatever drugs they want, or I am a massive hypocrite, I think.
As an aside, anyone who opposes gay marriage really mustn't understand what it's like to want to marry someone, or they're so blinded by their biases that they can no longer feel empathy. I've heard some reasonable civil arguments against it, but none of them hold water. (This is where I went to class.) However, I don't think you can equate something like that - where no one -can- get hurt, except when it comes to their religious views - with drug use.
The whole issue is "do what you want so long as it harms only yourself," right? Well, that doesn't justify condoning everything, or even legalizing it. Sadly, there are many people who aren't as responsible as the parents you mentioned, and for them, legalized acid/shrooms/whatever would simply make them people who would be useless in society, if not downright hazardous. Then you get into conditionals - "acid is legal if you're not in a profession that requires constant vigilance" - and that's even less fair.
To be honest, I'm not even sure where I stand. However, I do know that if the guy coming toward me with a scalpel has an acid flashback, my open mind toward drugs is going to close pretty fast. ;)
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 10:00 am (UTC)Thanks for the comment
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 12:28 pm (UTC)I'm inclined to agree with Noxi here. Yes, everyone should respect everyone elses opinions. And frankly, I agree on the topic of gay marriage. Exactly why does it matter what gender my lover is, as long as we're in love? Statistically speaking, however, gay men are far more promiscuous and less likely to remain in a long term relationship than heterosexual men.
However, no, I don't believe that mind altering substances need to be legal. First of all, there's the danger factor. This is easily averted by demanding mandatory drug testing every two or three months, including a spinal tap for Acid. Once one test comes up positive, you get fired. Because there is no way my Doctor is going to be flashing back to anything. Second, there's the problems it causes in the regular world. As it is, I have to carry an inhaler with me to walk down the street in Berkeley and probably in Vancouver too. That makes me unhappy.
At what point of respecting all opinions do we draw the line? Reverend Phelps has an opinion. The Right Wing is nothing but an opinion. Do you respect them? After all, they're up tight, but still just an opinion.
Like religious freedom, opinion is a hard thing to pin down. What if my religion demands human sacrifice? There are several historical religions that are receiving a great deal of attention and being remade that all originally involved sacrifice. Do you respect my religion demanding human sacrifice? What if the sacrifice is willing?
What about animal sacrifice? I mean, I do practice Vodoun, and that does involve animal sacrifice. From spilling the blood of a chicken to drowning a goat for Agwe.
At what point does my freedom end and yours begin?
At what point does my right to have an opinion end, and yours begin?
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 03:20 pm (UTC)Though it's not like my opinion makes a difference, I think human sacrifice and doctor assisted suicide is perfectly fine if the person that is going to die is okay with that. Not that i'd reccomend dying prematurely on purpose in all circumstances but whatever...that's just the way i see it. Animal sacrifice, fine, if it's your animal. Animal sacrifice doesn't affect other human beings, so I don't see how that relates to freedom at all.
As long as you /aren't affecting anyone else physically in a detrimental way/ with your actions, that's where the line should be drawn. And if you're going to do drugs all day and not get a job and whatnot, well then, YOU suffer the consequences. See, you are both of the idea i think that society should force people to be successful...well, you can't force everyone regardless, and if people really want to be druggies, go right fucking ahead and let them waste their lives...that's their personal choice, it's not really affecting you (Though it might if they are on welfare, but that program needs revamped anyway)
I don't believe in the obsession with telling people what's good for them and what's not. That's a choice people have to make for themselves, it's not a choice the government should be making for them. I agree, a doctor probably shouldn't be dropping acid, but the fact is for you to say, 'Just because he dropped acid it means my risks of survival of dropped' That's a big assumption, a very big assumption indeed. There are millions of different variables and possibilities. For us to be judging them is like us to be playing god and deciding what's going to happen over very little information at all.
That's my opinion and I really don't think there's anything wrong with it honestly. Though i definitely think it doesn't have a chance of happening in my lifetime and it's more of an idealist outlook...big deal. I'm not the only idealist in the world.
At least I get to see a bit wider variety of views on the matter from this.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-13 05:01 pm (UTC)And second of all, you obviously haven't done your research. Acid attaches itself to the fat in your body, and stores itself there. If you have a particularly strenuous activity, burning fat, the acid releases itself back into your system and you have a flashback.
You are also neglecting that we did not say that you had a flashback every day once you had dropped acid. But the point of this is that he/she MIGHT have a flashback while working on me. And that is NOT ok. Besides, we neglect addiction. Which is the real kicker. What happens if the doctor is addicted to alchohol? Not a risk I want to take, really, with freedom there.
In an idealistic view of the world wherein everyone behaves and has control of themselves, having absolute freedom MIGHT work.
But this isn't that world.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-14 09:19 am (UTC)... then all the idiots out there can OD themselves into whatever afterlife awaits them.
A utopian society awaits a society that cannot die. Death is the only thing in the way of legalizing drugs, suicide, murder, malpractice, etc..
Jake, pick up a copy of Tanith Lee's "Biting the Sun". I think ya might enjoy it.