• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

Moral question: Should we permit everything that doesn't "harm others"?

  • Everything should be permitted that doesn't "harm others"

    Votes: 28 68.3%

  • We should have some societal standards based on morals

    Votes: 8 19.5%

  • We should have more standards than what we have now

    Votes: 4 9.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 5 12.2%
  • Total voters
    41
lizzie said:
Actually, once they removed themselves from the equation, as a result of their stupidity, society would probably function better.
Click to expand...
They breed well.


JasonI said:
I think one of the biggest problems with legalizing drugs and all these other things is, what would we do with all these prisons? This is BIG BUSINESS!!! Wall Street has been noticing this over the last 10 yrs and is lobbying hard to privatize more and more of them. This is already a breeding ground for corruption, just think how much worse it would be once it's privatized...People think we are building more prisoners because more people are breaking the law when it's pretty clear that our gov't is creating more laws to fill up more prisons...
Click to expand...
I believe that the profit incentive is actually the primary, if unspoken, motive behind the current anti-legalization mindset. Not just private corporations, but public employee unions as well.
 
radcen said:
If somebody were to "die on the street", would you leave them there to decay and cause very real potential harm to YOU and and your family in the form of disease from the unsanitary conditions? Or, would you rather the taxpayer kick in something for the common good and at least properly dispose of the body?
Click to expand...

Dying in the street was a figure of speech, but yes, public safety is a proper use of taxpayer funds. The family could get the body to bury it, or we could burn it to dispose of it.
 
JasonI said:
I think one of the biggest problems with legalizing drugs and all these other things is, what would we do with all these prisons? This is BIG BUSINESS!!! Wall Street has been noticing this over the last 10 yrs and is lobbying hard to privatize more and more of them. This is already a breeding ground for corruption, just think how much worse it would be once it's privatized...People think we are building more prisoners because more people are breaking the law when it's pretty clear that our gov't is creating more laws to fill up more prisons...
Click to expand...
This is actually a point that I agree on with drugs. Many corporations want more prisons because it makes them money and they keep putting their money in the pockets of politicians. All of this happens at the expense of a huge portion of society (often on certain racial lines) who end up in jail for drug crimes. It is, as you say, a breeding ground for corruption and legalizing drugs would crush it. Such legalization would also take out the huge distraction of the drug trade from those poorer and often black/Hispanic neighborhoods.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
This is actually a point that I agree on with drugs. Many corporations want more prisons because it makes them money and they keep putting their money in the pockets of politicians. All of this happens at the expense of a huge portion of society (often on certain racial lines) who end up in jail for drug crimes. It is, as you say, a breeding ground for corruption and legalizing drugs would crush it. Such legalization would also take out the huge distraction of the drug trade from those poorer and often black/Hispanic neighborhoods.
Click to expand...

I remember back in the mid '90s, they passed a law basically saying that crack cocaine was 100 times worse than powder cocaine and sentences should be based on that...that was clearly going to affect minorities more...in 2010, Obama changed the law a bit, making it almost equal in comparison to previous legislation, but it is still skewed which it shouldn't be...
 
In general, I would say the government should not prohibit things that don't harm others. But, as always, there are some grey areas. I can imagine a situation where there is a drug that has a 50% chance of killing you each time you take it. I wouldn't object to the government outlawing the sale of such a drug.
 
JasonI said:
I remember back in the mid '90s, they passed a law basically saying that crack cocaine was 100 times worse than powder cocaine and sentences should be based on that...that was clearly going to affect minorities more...in 2010, Obama changed the law a bit, making it almost equal in comparison to previous legislation, but it is still skewed which it shouldn't be...
Click to expand...

Do you have firsthand experience with drug addiction, like opioid based? As people mature and gain life experience they're less likely to become slaves to chemicals that appear to help cope with life. But at younger ages they're much more susceptible and likely to do irreparable harm to both their physical and mental health, family life and careers. Personally, I'd destroy the use of drugs for recreational experience on a global scale if allowed because they're the scourge of human kind.

Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization, Fact 6
 
grip said:
Do you have firsthand experience with drug addiction, like opioid based? As people mature and gain life experience they're less likely to become slaves to chemicals that appear to help cope with life. But at younger ages they're much more susceptible and likely to do irreparable harm to both their physical and mental health, family life and careers. Personally, I'd destroy the use of drugs for recreational experience on a global scale if allowed because they're the scourge of human kind.

Speaking Out Against Drug Legalization, Fact 6
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what your point has to do with mine...To answer you question, no, I have never had a drug addiction of any kind...I would be surprised to find out that addiction to prescription drugs is more prevalent in youths than adults...

Thanks for your opinion...
 
JasonI said:
I'm not sure what your point has to do with mine...To answer you question, no, I have never had a drug addiction of any kind...I would be surprised to find out that addiction to prescription drugs is more prevalent in youths than adults...

Thanks for your opinion...
Click to expand...

If you were ever seriously addicted you might question the idea of making potent drugs cheaper and easier to acquire. Prescription drugs are starting to get harder to acquire from the medical profession and cost so much on the streets, that most pain pill addicts who aren't substantially wealthy have to turn to a cheaper product like heroin. Marijuana, alcohol and tobacco are so ingrained in our culture that they would be difficult to eliminate, though a 20+ year battle on tobacco is turning the corner.
 
grip said:
If you were ever seriously addicted you might question the idea of making potent drugs cheaper and easier to acquire. Prescription drugs are starting to get harder to acquire from the medical profession and cost so much on the streets, that most pain pill addicts who aren't substantially wealthy have to turn to a cheaper product like heroin. Marijuana, alcohol and tobacco are so ingrained in our culture that they would be difficult to eliminate, though a 20+ year battle on tobacco is turning the corner.
Click to expand...

I don't remember where I made the statement that I want potent drugs to be cheaper and easier to acquire...

do you think marijuana is worse for you than alcohol and tobacco?
 
JasonI said:
I don't remember where I made the statement that I want potent drugs to be cheaper and easier to acquire...

do you think marijuana is worse for you than alcohol and tobacco?
Click to expand...


Do you have any experience with marijuana?
 
JasonI said:
That's brilliant! I asked you your opinion and you don't have one unless I'm a user...is your answer going to change based on my level of recreational use or abuse?
Click to expand...

If you don't know anything about marijuana, except what you've read, then why would I care about your opinion of my opinion? You would be commenting on a subject on which you have no real knowledge.
 
grip said:
If you don't know anything about marijuana, except what you've read, then why would I care about your opinion of my opinion? You would be commenting on a subject on which you have no real knowledge.
Click to expand...

But isn't the entire point of coming to this site to debate issues and learn things you don't know? I've never been a politician, should I not comment on them? I've never met god, should I not talk about her?
 
JasonI said:
But isn't the entire point of coming to this site to debate issues and learn things you don't know? I've never been a politician, should I not comment on them? I've never met god, should I not talk about her?
Click to expand...


Not all subject matter requires direct experience but if you've voted or kept up with political debate you have some knowledge. And if you've had some religious experience at least you doing as well as most. If I deny to teach you because you lack experience with something that's my choice.
 
There is no major illegal drug category that I don't have experience with.

There is no major drug category that I can't acquire within 3 hours despite all the laws.

If drugs were legal and required a prescription, I would have been much less likely to experience them. Legality would destroy the black market and I wouldn't have casually gone for a Doctors appointment. Indeed, my MD offered me a marijuana license recently (68 and arthritic) and I just couldn't be bothered since I can buy pot anytime I want anyway and I don't feel like paying for the license.
 
grip said:
Not all subject matter requires direct experience but if you've voted or kept up with political debate you have some knowledge. And if you've had some religious experience at least you doing as well as most. If I deny to teach you because you lack experience with something that's my choice.
Click to expand...

Well then, I think your rules for discussing topics are fairly immature so we'll just stop now...and you don't know whether I have the experience or not, you're just assuming...

Good to know that since I've never been to church or read the bible, I shouldn't discuss religion...
 
Last edited:
ThePlayDrive said:
I don't remember saying that. Are you one those dishonest posters who attributes arguments to people that they haven't made? If so, we can end this now because I'm not in the mood.
Click to expand...

Do you trouble comprehending my statement? I never attributed any argument to you. I asked you a very simple question. Would you do heroin if it was legal tomorrow? Legalizing drugs doesn't turn every member of society into a drug addict. We're not all alcoholics, are we?


I claimed that a society of addicts would be harmful to society. The consequences of addiction alone are substantiated evidence for my claim. Do you deny that if society (including government, schools, corporations, etc.) were filled with people who were perpetually on heroin, cocaine, meth and everything else, society would be harmed?
Click to expand...

First of all. That is a blanket statement predicting the future actions of every member of society. Second, as a libertarian who believes in a free market, my idea of legalization doesn't include forcing employers to hire people they deem undesirable. Employers should still have the right to test for drug users and deny those who are.

Individual drug use by many people harms society. The end. It seems like your attempting to keep individual drug use in a vacuum where it's interaction with the world does not exist. Unfortunately for you, I base my opinions on reality and individual drug use does not exist in a vacuum. On the contrary, it exists within a society and consequently, it has effects on society, effects that are harmful. And as I said, a society filled with addicts would be harmful to society.
Click to expand...

Again, you're making blanket, unsubstantiated statements. You need to prove how or why individual drug use harms thy neighbor.
 
Mensch said:
Do you trouble comprehending my statement? I never attributed any argument to you. I asked you a very simple question. Would you do heroin if it was legal tomorrow? Legalizing drugs doesn't turn every member of society into a drug addict. We're not all alcoholics, are we?
Click to expand...
The problem is that my comments have nothing to do with legalizing drugs. They are specifically about your question as to why individual drug use can be harmful. A nation filled with addicts is harmful whether or not drugs are legal or illegal.

First of all. That is a blanket statement predicting the future actions of every member of society.
Click to expand...
I didn't predict the future actions of every member of society. My comment doesn't even talk about every member of society. You are now distorting my arguments.

Second, as a libertarian who believes in a free market, my idea of legalization doesn't include forcing employers to hire people they deem undesirable. Employers should still have the right to test for drug users and deny those who are.
Click to expand...
I agree.

Again, you're making blanket, unsubstantiated statements. You need to prove how or why individual drug use harms thy neighbor.
Click to expand...
I don't actually need to prove anything. If you can't understand why large scale individual drug use would harm society, then that's your own easily rectified problem. Anybody who knows what the consequences of addiction are would agree with me.

The easiest thing for you to have responded to my comment would have been, "Yes, you're right. A nation filled with a bunch of addicts would be bad."
 
JasonI said:
Well then, I think your rules for discussing topics are fairly immature so we'll just stop now...and you don't know whether I have the experience or not, you're just assuming...

Good to know that since I've never been to church or read the bible, I shouldn't discuss religion...
Click to expand...

I understand you're need to stop.

That would make your discussion of the religious subject rather inept?
 
JasonI said:
:rofl - My only argument has to be that you can't prove that any of it true...not inept, pretty conclusive actually...
Click to expand...

What, that churches and bibles exist or that you want to talk about them, having no knowledge of them?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom