Ishtar wrote:But there' s nothing wrong with being high per se. What's wrong is when it's nasty and dangerous.
Perhaps. Probably the real problem with society (more so western and largely american) is over-indulgence. For example - very few americans I know can go into a bar, have a drink and leave. One leads to another to another to over-indulgence.
Forum Monk wrote:
Perhaps. Probably the real problem with society (more so western and largely american) is over-indulgence. For example - very few americans I know can go into a bar, have a drink and leave. One leads to another to another to over-indulgence.
But you can say that about anything. What about food in America? What are the current figures on obesity? That doesn't make food wrong. Making food illegal is not the answer.
What about the sex addiction clinics? Sex addiction doesn't make sex wrong, just the abuse of it. If you make sex and food illegal, you'll wipe out the human race is just a few days.
Do you see where I'm going with this?
If you take too much of anything, you'll get ill.
But this has nothing to do with shamans who take psychotropic plants under very strict and controlled conditions within an age old traditional ceremony that honours the spirit the plant, and doesn't seek to rob from her but to work with her in a mutually beneficial partnership.
It's the difference between rape and making love with a lover.
That's right Ishtar, I agree you can't legislate morality or wisdom. We draw the line, however, when one's indulgence crosses the line and one becomes a danger to oneself or society.
So is someone making it illegal for a shaman to practice his religion? Or is it just tough on the amateur practitioners looking for an excuse to engage in illicit activities?
Snake handling is a dangerous religious activity, outlawed in some jurisdictions, legal in others.
But really none of that was the point of this thread, as I felt openly extolling drug use as a means of enlightenment was irresponsible in light of our present drug "problem". Ninety-nine percent (not a literal percentage - for illustration) of people taking drugs do so for entertainment or escapism, not for enlightenment. A huge percentage of teenagers and preteens are under increasing pressure to try drugs and must weigh the benefits vs the consequences in order to make an informed decision. These kids are not shaman nor will they ever be. So why give them the idea there is benefit and value to a practice that will never lead to the same conclusions achieved by a religious practitioner under controlled circumstances?
We draw the line, however, when one's indulgence crosses the line and one becomes a danger to oneself or society.
We're selective about it though, Monk. Alcohol kills lots of people but it is still legal. Guns kill lots of people but that doesn't stop the gun nuts from wanting more of them everywhere. Fast food kills lot of people and sickens millions but that's legal.
No. Only with drugs that don't say Pfizer, Squibb or Merck on them do we suddenly get very holier-than-thou.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
I suppose because its much easier to outlaw something before millions are doing it, than afterwards. Prohibition is proof of that principle. There is something inherent in our nature that makes many of us want to alter our conscienceness, regularly and repeatedly. Some would call it a weakness or flaw, others... who knows what they think.
I suppose because its much easier to outlaw something before millions are doing it, than afterwards. Prohibition is proof of that principle. There is something inherent in our nature that makes many of us want to alter our conscienceness, regularly and repeatedly. Some would call it a weakness or flaw, others... who knows what they think.
Except cannabis doesn't fall into that category. Before prohibition (1935 or 1936) cannabis was the third most popular recreational substance in the US with alcohol and tobacco being first and second respectively. More than 70 years later the score is still the same. In fact, the study that you quoted claims that 31% of people aged 12 and older in 1992 (in America) had at least tried pot. The only reason cannabis remains a controlled substance is that they need it to continue the Drug War (or War Against the People as my side terms it). No other controlled substance has enough users to justify the billions of tax dollars spent on prohibition.
I suppose because its much easier to outlaw something before millions are doing it, than afterwards.
Possibly. Then again, I'm a cynic and I agree with Maher when he says that Eli Lilly corp does not want Prozac to have to compete with marijuana because Prozac would lose. They've invested a lot of money in developing Prozac and spent tons more bribing politi.....uh, making campaign 'contributions'.... to risk their profit margin to some weed.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
Prozac didn't hurt me quite as bad as Doxepin, but to compare the damage they did to my body and spirit would be splitting hairs. Cannabis is the best depression medicine, by far, that i ever used. The only thing that helped me more was exercise and sunlight. Changing to a healthy diet is up there too.
i just think medicine should not be a for-profit business.
i just think medicine should not be a for-profit business.
Dick Cheney will call you a communist.
Something is wrong here. War, disease, death, destruction, hunger, filth, poverty, torture, crime, corruption, and the Ice Capades. Something is definitely wrong. This is not good work. If this is the best God can do, I am not impressed.
Forum Monk wrote:
But really none of that was the point of this thread, as I felt openly extolling drug use as a means of enlightenment was irresponsible in light of our present drug "problem". Ninety-nine percent (not a literal percentage - for illustration) of people taking drugs do so for entertainment or escapism, not for enlightenment. A huge percentage of teenagers and preteens are under increasing pressure to try drugs and must weigh the benefits vs the consequences in order to make an informed decision. These kids are not shaman nor will they ever be. So why give them the idea there is benefit and value to a practice that will never lead to the same conclusions achieved by a religious practitioner under controlled circumstances?
I wasn't extolling it as a means of enlightenment. I was putting the shaman's point of view of this, as it is equally valid as the one that says it's all just an unreal hallucination. Next to no scientific work has been done on how psychotropics change our consciousness since the Sixties, when the only lab produced pseudo psychotropic, LSD, (which would not work for shamans because it is artificial) was made illegal.
A huge percentage of teenagers and preteens are under increasing pressure to try drugs and must weigh the benefits vs the consequences in order to make an informed decision. These kids are not shaman nor will they ever be. So why give them the idea there is benefit and value to a practice that will never lead to the same conclusions achieved by a religious practitioner under controlled circumstances?
As I said before, if there are any teens reading this (which I strongly doubt!) I don't take drugs myself or condone the taking of ayahuasca as a recreational drug outside of it being taken by shamans in a controlled and ceremonial setting. But this is not for health reasons, as ayahuasca is not addictive or harmful to health. It is because taking ayahuasca in a recreational casual way, just for the sake of getting high, shows a disrespect to the spirits of the plant.
But just because some people do abuse it in that way doesn't make why shamans take it an illegitimate area of discussion of a board of adults, inho. And to ban psychotropics for the same reason is inconsistent and illogical unless you also ban food, shopping and sex.
Last edited by Ishtar on Wed Mar 19, 2008 8:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
dannan14 wrote: The only reason cannabis remains a controlled substance is that they need it to continue the Drug War (or War Against the People as my side terms it). No other controlled substance has enough users to justify the billions of tax dollars spent on prohibition.
That's a very good point!
There's nothing wrong with illegal cannabis that also isn't wrong with legal cigarettes, ie. the smoke can cause lung cancer.
But cannabis has added benefits that cigarettes don't have - such as the relief of pain and anti depressant properties. So why are cigarettes legal and cannabis not? Doesn't make sense.
Ishtar wrote:But cannabis has added benefits that cigarettes don't have - such as...
Distortion of time and space
Wonderfully true
audible and visual hallucinations
Not sure what you're smoking with this one
slowing of reaction times
Possibly, but not in every situation. It isn't like the effect of alcohol on reactions as alcohol prevents oxygen from getting to the brain while cannabis does the opposite.
Ishtar wrote:But cannabis has added benefits that cigarettes don't have - such as...
Distortion of time and space, audible and visual hallucinations, slowing of reaction times, and copious munchies.
That's been my whole point. It's never been proved (or even studied by scientists to find out) whether it's a distortion of time and space. It may be a greater reality. I don't know about the munchies, although the experience through psychotropics does, apparently, reduce the serotonin in the brain, and shamans eat a lot of bananas and fish to replace it. That their excuse anyway! Maybe they're just into bananas and fish when they get the munchies!
FM, I had a dream about you last night. You were actually very nice....
