Drugs a moral issue?

[FireflyInTheDark]

Person who takes recreational drugs = scumbag

Do you agree with this? Why or why not?
Why is there such a negative connotation with people who believe in legalization of marijuana, acid, etc. that makes them so disgusting to the masses?

Is it because of the war on drugs? ("DRUGS ARE BAD!" Does anyone ask why?)

Is it because of the issue of legality? (Letting the government think for you?)

Is it jealously? ("Life is hard for everyone. Why should he have an escape and not me?")

Is it the lack of productivity associated with stoners, etc? ("They just sit on the couch all day. Why don't they get a job?")

Is it fear? ("I don't know what they will do to me, so I'm going to stay away and everyone else should too!")

Everyone know that drugs can kill you. Everyone knows that most drugs are addictive. Everyone knows that most drugs are illegal. But does taking them really make you an evil person? A stupid person? A reckless person? A person with mental problems? Or are you just smart enough to understand moderation and come to your own conclusions? Obviously, you can't group everyone into the same category.
I am not advocating drug use (I do not use any drug at all except alcohol and that is only very rarely and intelligently-- yes, I paid attention in health class), but I am advocating the right of an adult to choose, providing it is an informed decision. I don't believe in the war on drugs. I think it's counterproductive to the drug problem, just like abstinence education is counterproductive to teen pregnancy and STD prevention. The difference I suppose is, teen sex is not illegal (until age is a factor, but that's neither here nor there), but to what degree is legality an issue? Laws can be changed. Why, not too long ago, there were laws allowing the beating of women and children (in some places they are still in place), but that doesn't mean they were/are right.
I've written you a book here, but I was thinking about this for a while, and the thread in RT about drug addiction and overdose got me to thinking I should post it and get a discussion going.
So, let's hear some opinions. While I have my own, I would love to hear some other viewpoints. It's really puzzled me forever...

[OneExodus]

I believe the legalization of most drugs. And not all are drugs are bad for you to a certain degree.

[Lady of the Freaks]

recreational drugs are against my morals because i believe it's immoral to harm my health, which i believe drugs do. but i still believe they should be legalized cuz you can't legislate morality...and because we each have the right to make our own moral decisions when no one else is harmed by our decision. i do believe in taxing the hell out of them though in cases where users often end up a burden on the system...which we all pay for.

[FireflyInTheDark]

Like cigarettes. I can dig that.

[clegg]

for some people it's pot (my case), for others it's alcohol, gambling, sex, chocolate, cigarettes, listening to music, etc etc etc ...

Everyone's entitles to their own fix every now and then, and it's different for all of us.. provided none of them are taken to an extreme, it's fine imo.

So, yeah, I think it would be silly to assume that someone who does recreational drugs is a scumbag.

[FireflyInTheDark]

And yet, the majority insists on it. Why?

[FreshDacre]

Because the majority is full of arrogant fuck wits that won't ever experience anything worth experienceing. There are alot of people in the world. How can you expect them all to understand truth?

[FireflyInTheDark]

But they all seem so sure of themselves. Where are they now to defend their position? I'm really surprised I'm not getting more opposition...

[clegg]

But they all seem so sure of themselves. Where are they now to defend their position? I'm really surprised I'm not getting more opposition...

I think it has something to do with the fact that you're asking the question on a Hip forum.. :D


If you want opposition, post the question in one of those ultra right wing christian fundamental forums, like theologyonline.com .

[FireflyInTheDark]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO rabble rousing! I like it! ;)
Haha, I might try that...
And I know it was the risk I took posting here, but I HAVE seen differing opinions on drugs on this forum before (maybe not THIS one in particular, but on the whole site), so I thought maybe the Ethics section would be neutral ground somehow... Guess not. :p

[missedit]

I think doing drugs is in someway immoral to yuorself depending on if you have a family or someone that depends on you. I think drugs are a personal choice (a bad one) that can lead to a really bad lifestyle that becomes nearly impossible to escape. So I guess doing them is not ethical.

[FreshDacre]

^^ See you are pretty much just putting all "drugs" in the same catagory, in the way that they are "bad" but that is a huge matter of opinion, most people would agree that most drugs have advantages and disadvantages, depending on the individual and how it is used, whether it be recreation, medicine etc.

The only real consequence moderate use of drugs might give you is a slight change in body/brain chemistry, if that is the issue than the individual needs to learn how to be able to cope with the new perception, and if they are not weak willed they will continue their life in the same manner that they would.
If drugs somehow lead the individual to a "bad" lifestyle, then that is just the result of their abuse, in other words they took more drugs than they could handle. Everybody should be aware of their limits and research new drugs and then there will be no consequence whatsoever.

[FireflyInTheDark]

If drugs somehow lead the individual to a "bad" lifestyle, then that is just the result of their abuse, in other words they took more drugs than they could handle. Everybody should be aware of their limits and research new drugs and then there will be no consequence whatsoever.

This is my general perception of them, but the ones I worry about are the super dangerous ones, like heroin, that you can become addicted to in a day or can immediately kill you. I don't really know how I feel about something that could kill you after one dose (heard horror stories about huffing paint and some about Ecstasy). I think real research should be put into finding out which are safe and which aren't- something unbiased that finds out what the real risk factors are and lets users decide for themselves, like cigarettes and alcohol, rather than just saying "THEY'RE BAD!"

[FreshDacre]

This is my general perception of them, but the ones I worry about are the super dangerous ones, like heroin, that you can become addicted to in a day or can immediately kill you. I don't really know how I feel about something that could kill you after one dose (heard horror stories about huffing paint and some about Ecstasy). I think real research should be put into finding out which are safe and which aren't- something unbiased that finds out what the real risk factors are and lets users decide for themselves, like cigarettes and alcohol, rather than just saying "THEY'RE BAD!"

See thats alot more reasonable approach to put drugs into their own catagories and judge them from there. Some drugs are just too toxic to even be worth putting into anyone's body. For example the ones that come to my mind is jimson weed, or meth. two drugs ill never do.
I think a drug like herion is kind of ok drug, just because if you only do it once then it won't do any real notable damage. A drug like this though, people have to be fully aware of how potentially dangerous the addiction can be, and would have to have full confidence of their willpower no matter how good it is. I don't plan on doing this drug ever, i am deathly afraid of needles. The hardest drug i have done is coke, i had no problem doing that once and not be tempted again. But using logical thinking, i might do coke a few more times in my life.

[behindthesun93]

ah!
I had to do a project and I had to write a letter to an organization, so I chose DARE and wrote to them about how they need to teach unbiased, true information so that if kids were to do drugs, it would be as safe as possible.

The kids in the class thought I was nuts. One kid asked if I was saying that drugs are okay.. ugh...

I don't think that people really know much about drugs. When people think of drugs, they think of cocaine and heroin addicts. People aren't educated on how they've been used thoughout history, and the different ranges of drugs, and the effects of each.

pot makes your eyes bleed
lsd makes your brain bleed

etc etc

I don't think that many people know what ayahuasca is or that native americans ate peyote. if you told people that those things were drugs, they'd immediately slap a label on them as "TERRIBLE OMG THEY KILL YOU!"

obviously LSD has more benefits (if youre mentally healthy, and you have a good trip) than cocaine or meth. people dont realize this
it happens because the negative stands out more than the positive. people hear negative things about cocaine (a drug) and then they think all drugs have bad things, like that cocaine does. And it is because organizations like DARE, th DEA, and th government put this all in your face. obviously drugs CAN be bad, but they aren't always. too much of anything is a bad thing. and that is why DRUGS ARE BAD. because they are used too much. have you ever heard of someone all of a sudden having kidney failure after shooting up (a safe dose of) heroin only once? I don't hear about al lof the horrible stories of people going to mcdonalds daily and getting so many health problems that it kills them. and people can get addicted to food.

ugh.

[Stabby]

No advocating the legalization of drugs isn't immoral for me. People are ultimately free to decide what they put into their bodies and solely responsible for any harm they do. Legalization of drugs would minimize gang violence and make doing drugs safer as well. It's immoral to continue the war on drugs.

And ethically, the only thing that is immoral for me is harming other people. The indirect harm that I cause other people by hurting myself is their own fault, not mine. If I had dependents like children it would be different, but I don't.

[opel diamond]

i don't think all drugs should be legalized. the burden on the health service for treating cancer in smokers and drinkers is bad enough and fridays nights in A&E at least in my country are always full of people who've had a bit to much alcohol and need there stomach pumping. legalizing drugs like cocaine, heroin, crack etc is bound to up that rate, and costing thousands of pounds a year to tax payers. Legalisation will bring about more usage of hard drugs as people will be likely to experiment more. also, people don't do moderation. on a friday night i go out and see people doing nothing else except wanting to get fucked up. it's not a chill social thing, its to get as drunk as possible. if they applied those rules to other drugs the consiquences could be bad.

i smoked weed at school and moved on to take lots more drugs because that was me but i know lots of my other friends never took anything else expect weed as it was harder to get hold of and more dangerous, as dealers of harder drugs were more 'scary'. if these products were all available on the shelf the 'fear factor' would be removed for a lot of people and they may move on to harder drugs and soon addiction can take hold.

i don't have a problem with people who take drugs, thats there decision as long as they are not harming anyone else, people with children who sit around in a heroin puddle all day subjecting there kids to it, i do have a problem with though and i just think legalizing drugs would make it to hard to police and know if others were in danger.

now police can target gangs of dealers and will be able to pin point more accuratly the customers and wether children etc are endangered by drug use.

however like stabby said, to minimize gangs would be a good thing. although i'm skeptical as to if it wasn't drugs, it would be something else. and a lot of gang related crime in my country tends to not be drug related but more to do with football teams, territories and just hating each other.

anyway thats my input. :)

[Stabby]

Good point. There would have to be some study to figure out what would cost the country more, combating illegal hard drugs or legalizing them. I really don't think that many people would suddenly head down to the corner store for some heroine if it was legal, but that's just speculation.

[yangiskon]

Ok, so I am a not ashamed, frequent recreational drugs user. I also am not a bad person. I was a student and now I work and I go out and enjoy life at concerts and festivals, raves and clubs. And yeah when I got out and party I party hard but its just all fun ..some of us can handle ourselves and we should be allowed to live the way we want to live. Legalize and taxing drugs would be safer to users as a whole and would help stop the violence of the underground drug trade.
The people who use and are ADDICTS do not need jail time they need fucking treatment. That shit has helped many many people I have seen it first hand.
The fact that most of the US looks down on drug users rly pisses me off. Some of the greatest people in our history have been drug users. Not every fucking person using heroin is a homeless junkie.. and you know what.. I think even there not bad people they just need some help.
Legalize it, tax it, open more health centers and rehabs instead of jails. Don't think it would work? LOOK AT FUCKIN EUROPE'S POLICES. Sorry for the anger in this, this topis is just a hot one for me.
<33

[mastercylinder]

drugs and morality and racism have been linked scince the beginning of the century---black people rape white women on coke=coke bad----mexican fruit pickers smoking pot during the deperssion when whites needed the jobs= pot bad and on and on--drugs are good if you want my opinion mostly they grow from the earth--when man fucks with them that can make then too strong--so bad--- but fuck em all--i do em cas i like em do em anytime i want except driving so fuck all u haters




^^^^^plus i agree with what the above poster said--known many a junkie who maintained and just went about their buisness with no one the wiser

[Hoatzin]

Not arguing with you personally, just covering the points:


Why is there such a negative connotation with people who believe in legalization of marijuana, acid, etc. that makes them so disgusting to the masses?

Because the media and other non-authorities chooses to associate relatively innocuous drugs with extremely addictive and dangerous ones.

Is it because of the war on drugs? ("DRUGS ARE BAD!" Does anyone ask why?)

Yeah, people do. Very often they are unable to get objective answers because of the "war on drugs" mentality. Official advice is biased, and "unofficial" advice reacts to this often by presenting a distorted alternative, an overly optimistic view of recreational drug use that downplays or denies any negative consequences purely because they know the "other side" will blow them out of all proportion. Either way, the fixed idea leads to a debate that is too polarised and politicised to be useful or constructive.

Is it because of the issue of legality? (Letting the government think for you?)

Well, to be fair, we do that all the time. The cop in the head didn't just appear, it comes from somewhere. Authority has always had some role in reminding us to be good to each other when it seems to be to our personal detriment. However, a lot of the justification seems to stem from cyclic logic - e.g. that drugs have to be illegal because they encourage other illegal
behaviour, even though for the most part, legalisation would lessen this illegal behaviour.

Is it jealously? ("Life is hard for everyone. Why should he have an escape and not me?")

I doubt this. Most people who oppose drugs seem to be in favour of "health" pursuits (i.e. whatever they do at the weekend), and see drug users as people who lack such hobbies or whatever. I think if there's jealousy involved, it's quite often the old envying and resenting the young, wishing for a misspent youth that they feel they missed out on.

Is it the lack of productivity associated with stoners, etc? ("They just sit on the couch all day. Why don't they get a job?")

Well, smoking pot isn't an excuse for being unemployed. I think an opposition to those who voluntarily remain unemployed is understandable, even if we don't necessarily agree with it.

Is it fear? ("I don't know what they will do to me, so I'm going to stay away and everyone else should too!")

That does sound kind of sensible and healthy. I know HipForums' key demographic is keen on experimentation as an ideal, but they do so within well established parameters and with word-of-mouth guidance, experimenting largely with things that have already been experimented with. It's a more persuasive argument than most of the others. Stopping others from doing the same... I don't know, I don't think there's anything wrong with urging caution, but obviously someone should not claim to know what they merely suspect.

Everyone know that drugs can kill you.

Everyone does. However, I know that my own generation has been given such an exaggerated and unrealistic assessment of the dangers of drug use - typically anti-drug films/theatre which invariably ends with someone dying for reasons that were never really clarified - that, once we found out that ALL of our parents had tried one of these supposedly ultra-fatal drugs at some point, we had no idea what to believe. For this reason, while I know that everyone is aware than drugs CAN kill you, I feel that teaching everyone that drugs WILL kill you has led to a complete lack of awareness in many people of what the actual risks are.

Everyone knows that most drugs are addictive.

Not everyone knows the difference between "addictive" and "habit forming", however. I believe that there is a medical definition of both, but certainly some drugs lead to biochemical dependency on the drug. I think a lot of people do not know the difference between this and psychological addiction, or even just really liking something and not feeling the need to give it up.

Everyone knows that most drugs are illegal.

I think they do now, but when marijuana was "declassified" a few years back, a fair few people didn't seem to get that that wasn't the same as it being legalised. There are a lot of misconceptions about this, and I do wonder whether it's the same with those who don't use. The news presents every other issue in an alarmist fashion designed to scare a certain type of person into believing that society is going to hell in a handbasket, so why not this one?

But does taking them really make you an evil person? A stupid person? A reckless person? A person with mental problems? Or are you just smart enough to understand moderation and come to your own conclusions? Obviously, you can't group everyone into the same category.


I think you can group a lot of people into a lot of those categories at once. The mental health issue is a BIG one, and I wonder how much research has been done or even COULD be done into establishing whether people with latent mental health problems are drawn to marijuana at a time when their condition is likely to worsen anyway, rather than the widely publicised "cannabis psychosis" theory.

Personally, I think moderation is important, and I think that a lot of people who use drugs don't understand it, just as a lot of people who drink don't understand it. That is to say, they don't understand that moderation is a movable feast - that most people believe that they are "moderate" rather than excessive, regardless of their intake. The average person drinks more than the healthy limit of alcohol, for example; most won't accept this, for whatever reason.

I'm sure it's the same with weed. You can have the same conversation with someone who's had a couple of joints in their life as with someone who visibly looks uncomfortable if they know they're not going to get any weed for more than a day, and they all think that, yeah, some people smoke way too much and it makes them a mess.

[Skizm]

Drugs are not a moral issue. However when you stray into the realm of super-addictive drugs (opiates, amphetamines) then I'm not sure. Haven't given this much thought...

More later

[Vanilla Gorilla]

Moral crusaders usually come in two forms, those that have no real clue about the subject they are crusading against, and those that are just hiding behind the facade.

[Skizm]

Moral crusaders usually come in two forms, those that have no real clue about the subject they are crusading against, and those that are just hiding behind the facade.

Don't forget those who are part of what they are crusading against.

[Royaltramp]

Drugs have nothing to do with morals. People who value their drugs over their friends and family however are another matter altogether.

I've met people who use and have used every drug under the sun. Some of them are nice people, some of them aren't nice people. Drugs don't dictate personality or social situations, don't you agree that it's wrong to judge someone for the food they eat?

Judge man by his actions, and not the clothes he wears, the food he eats, or the drugs he takes. :)

-Matt

[FireflyInTheDark]

Don't forget those who are part of what they are crusading against.

Those are my favorite! :cheers2:

[FireflyInTheDark]

I've met people who use and have used every drug under the sun. Some of them are nice people, some of them aren't nice people. Drugs don't dictate personality or social situations, don't you agree that it's wrong to judge someone for the food they eat?

A vegan might not think so...
Come to think of it, has anyone ever studied the ecological impact of certain drugs apart from the moral/health issue? I remember hearing something about cocaine being linked to deforestation or some weird thing like that...

[mastercylinder]

there deforesting right here in "the golden triangle" here in Cali---saw it on nat geo--thousands of illegal pot garden with no regard for maintaining the land--the forest rangers couldnt care less about pot--just hating on the damage caused by profit seeking cartels

[FireflyInTheDark]

:(

Why do they always have to set a bad example?
But then, the government doesn't set a very good one itself. Farming in this country is all kinds of bassackwards with equal disregard for what it does to the environment- plowing the hell out of the ground and planting resource-gobbling crops every year without a break causing erosion, saturating the ground with chemical fertilizers that seep into the water and poison wells, choke rivers with algae overgrowth that kills the fish...
When are people going to wise up?

Anyway... drugs...

[PsychedeliaSmith]

There are so many variables that would change my opinion that it's almost impossible to answer.

Basically...

For your average person in a sound state of mind using something like cannabis, LSD or mushrooms once in a while is not a problem but for someone who isn't in a great place, I dunno maybe they lost a loved one or something, using heroin or alcohol as an escape is only going to lead to a lot of trouble.

[Stabby]

Indeed. The morality of drug use, like most things is subjective. Dependent upon the person, not on the act of using drugs. Some drugs like crack and heroine are more likely not to be moral endeavors than drugs like LSD and marijuana and therefore a less wise decision in most cases, but the overall morality of drug use is still dependent upon the subject. Using hard drugs like crack is only immoral insofar as it is a detriment rather than a positive.

[FireflyInTheDark]

I agree with this.
But then cigarettes should be banned for sure, as I have yet to find a positive in smoking them. This is only the chemically-infused cancer sticks sold by the government, though. Careful tending of your own natural tobacco plants and use in moderation could possibly be on par with marijuana use or drinking: benefits in reasonable quantities, but overdo it and you're screwed.
There really are no absolutes here.