Originally Posted by
Shadow Nexus
Oh, to me weed is more or less like wine, you know, substances that can be used sometimes to alter and or multiply individuality, create a certain sensation of pleasure that, if abused, can be a disaster.
Of course, I cannot deny it is a risky substance, as is any alcoholic drink anyway. As Barbeau said, intelligent men do not need the use of such substances to arise from the vulgarity, yet however, I would say the reaching of such status in a natural way is very different to the artificial paradises created by consuming soft drugs. The sensation of plenitude, too, was easier to find in another time, not in the dehumanized modern industrialized society, where oftenly the use of such substances is the only way to attain a peace of mind, mainly because the object and the subject are too far away to feel in any harmony.
In fact, marijuana dosen't make me act like an idiot and go like "lolz i am soooo h¡gh i am crazyyy lolz". In fact, quite opposite, first I laugh, but then comes a very deep sensation of calm, and I feel my sensitivity and capacity of abstraction enchaced to the point I can almost feel what I think. It shines a new perspective on things without disorting them into dadaism. In fact, it opens the cage of logic and creates the harmony between object and subject, it makes you the hypnotizer and the hypnotized, the cause and the effect, it removes the noise from the mind and becomes a temporary but effective remedy to the illness of the mind.
However sometimes the remedy, if abused, can become a problem worst than the one it tries to solve. Weed creates psychological addiction, and that is why it must be used with care.
And here is where I rise a question: why exaclty should the state ban such substances? I can understand it in case of stronger drugs such as cocaine, where the damage you make to your body is extreme, but in the cases of alcohol or marijuana, to me banning such substances is plain state paternalism. Does it suppose a risk? Yes, it does, every substance does mean a risk, and not only wine and marijuana, fast food is a risk too, I don't see it being banned. Why can't we be assumed as responsible? Of course it has dangers, but hell, it's probably more dangerous to drive a car through a highway (specially if drunk :rolleyes). I'd rather prefer to be the one that takes the decisions over the remedies I take and the dangers the abuse of such tings creates, instead of having Papa Goverment over me. Up to some age, I believe most people have achieved a level of maturity high enough to know what they are doing, and thats the reason why most of the population isn't alcoholic.
