• 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!

Should LSD be legal?

Should LSD be legal?

  • Total voters
    45
APACHERAT said:
I knew a guy who never came down. Bad trip.
Sad.
Click to expand...

I've seen what LSD can do too. Keep in mind that it was developed to help schizophrenics.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Sometimes stating the absurd or being hyperbolic is necessary to getting the point across.
Click to expand...

I don't really think extrapolating making LSD legal to eliminating all laws helps you make your point. Hyperbole rarely does, but in this case especially.
 
Legalize everything.

War on drugs ended.

Stop using logic Michael. You're making sense and that's dangerous
 
Lachean said:
Do you think Free Speech was designed to protect Mickey Mouse or people like the KKK?
Click to expand...

People like the KKK. Why do you ask? Art wasn't a part of an oppressive government. It was the government locking you in jail for making antagonistic speeches about government officials.

It was designed to protect political speech not vulgar speech. (If that is what you are getting out.) Silencing Mickey Mouse would be totally acceptable under the intent of the constitution. Silencing the KKK is unacceptable under the intent of the constitution.

Again, why are you asking?
 
Kreton said:
Sounds like you believe the government should protect us from ourselves.
Click to expand...

Yes. The whole purpose of the government is to ensure that the citizens may enjoy a safe environment. Otherwise, who needs a government?
 
Absolutely the worse single experience from something I ever had. Walls breathing, ceiling dripping and completely out of my mind. For me it was like living hell.

Wouldn't give it to my favorite enemy.
 
vasuderatorrent said:
Yes. The whole purpose of the government is to ensure that the citizens may enjoy a safe environment. Otherwise, who needs a government?
Click to expand...

So should you be allowed to eat fatty foods? Should you be allowed to sit around your house? Own a gun? Run with scissors? Smoke a cigarette? Sleep less than 7 hours a night? Where exactly are you drawing this line of the governments job to protect you from yourself?
 
vasuderatorrent said:
People like the KKK. Why do you ask? Art wasn't a part of an oppressive government. It was the government locking you in jail for making antagonistic speeches about government officials.

It was designed to protect political speech not vulgar speech. (If that is what you are getting out.) Silencing Mickey Mouse would be totally acceptable under the intent of the constitution. Silencing the KKK is unacceptable under the intent of the constitution.

Again, why are you asking?
Click to expand...

My point was that popular speech and wholesome activities don't require the protection of our rights, our rights are about stopping the government from oppressing unpopular speech/activities.

The individual is the smallest minority and nobody is going to go after Mickey Mouse.

When you say, "Freedom wasn't designed to encourage self destruction." my response was to say that it was designed to protect it though. Just because something is legal doesn't mean the government encourages it.

EDIT: Freedom of speech DOES protect vulgarity.
 
Last edited:
APACHERAT said:
I thought the U.S. Army developed LSD ?
Click to expand...

It was first accidentally synthesized by someone investigating the properties of ergot I believe. It was used by psychologists while it was legal to treat schizophrenia and researched by the Army for the potential to be somewhat of a truth serum.
 
Absolutely.
 
APACHERAT said:
I thought the U.S. Army developed LSD ?
Click to expand...


Albert Hofmann of Sandoz Pharmaceuticals was famous for synthesizing LSD.

Timothy Leary was responsible for popularizing psychedelic drugs with his advocacy and research at Harvard during the 60's. There were also rumors and some film at the time showing that the military was experimenting with drugs to enhance a soldiers senses.
 
Kal'Stang said:
While we're at it lets legalize EVERYTHING! Get rid of all laws! That way no one will get in trouble!

/sarcasm
Click to expand...

Well sure, if we make everything legal there'll be no more crime.
 
grip said:
Wouldn't give it to my favorite enemy.
Click to expand...

What would it take to convince you I am purest evil?


oops. I must have misread You said wouldn't.

Never mind.
 
Gardener said:
What would it take to convince you I am purest evil?


oops. I must have misread You said wouldn't.

Never mind.
Click to expand...

You know, I did some Microdots and some weak Blotter that at best were like potent weed or mild shrooms and made me giggle a lot and brighten colors. But when some retard gave me a hit of "4-Way Window Pane", I didn't know to break it up and took the whole thing. Ended up in the ER, over dosed and almost permanently demented.
 
grip said:
You know, I did some Microdots and some weak Blotter that at best were like potent weed or mild shrooms and made me giggle a lot and brighten colors. But when some retard gave me a hit of "4-Way Window Pane", I didn't know to break it up and took the whole thing. Ended up in the ER, over dosed and almost permanently demented.
Click to expand...

I THOUGHT I recognized 4 way pane when I saw it!

The melting stuff gave it away. I had a nice little chat with a Pantheon of gods who pealed away the ceiling to my room and looked down on me in all their magnificence,myself.
 
Lachean said:
Freedom of speech DOES protect vulgarity.
Click to expand...

Yes. In our current legal environment it does. There is a term called, "intent of the law". Nobody was around December 15, 1791 when the constitution was ratified. It's anybody's guess.

I personally think the freedoms found in our constitution was to protect citizens from an oppressive government. I have a heard time believing the government envisioned degradation of culture and a nation where citizens destroy themselves as the ultimate goal for the United States.

:cuckoo: I just don't think it's likely but I don't know. I wasn't there. Your guess is as good as mine. :shrug:
 
vasuderatorrent said:
Yes. In our current legal environment it does. There is a term called, "intent of the law". Nobody was around December 15, 1791 when the constitution was ratified. It's anybody's guess.
Click to expand...

We do have the writings on the founders.

vasuderatorrent said:
I personally think the freedoms found in our constitution was to protect citizens from an oppressive government.
Click to expand...

I agree, to a degree. Many of them feared writing out what our rights for they feared that the government would be oppressive in respect to every right not enumerated. For those who do not accept the notion of Natural Rights, might take the foolish point of view that said enumerated rights were GRANTED by the constitution rather than preventing the government to infringe on said rights.

vasuderatorrent said:
I have a heard time believing the government envisioned degradation of culture and a nation where citizens destroy themselves as the ultimate goal for the United States.

:cuckoo: I just don't think it's likely but I don't know. I wasn't there. Your guess is as good as mine. :shrug:
Click to expand...

This hyperbole is beyond responding to, but I shall try.

Your judgement of what constitutes degradation or self destruction are exactly what they wanted us to be free to do. They believed in the philosophy of liberty, best articulated by Thomas Paine. Now I do not regard LSD use as self destructive, but I am certain the founders view on freedom certainly included people engaging in self destructive behavior such as being a drunkard. If you own your own body, which they believed, what you do with it so long as you don't violate the rights you are perfectly free to do, free to **** up, free to fail.

Heck many of the founders were drunkards themselves.
 
Anagram said:
It's been a point of discussion in my apartment recently, whether acid should be legal or not. One of my roommates is pretty strongly supportive of it and the other believes that it should never be legalized. I'm kind of on the fence, so I thought I'd throw it out here.

I asked both of them to give me some arguments for their side to put out here.
Pro arguments-

-LSD is one of the least addictive drugs out there with no chance of physical addiction.

-It is nearly impossible to OD on. People have taken 1000's of times that of a single dose and survived.

-One of the most dangerous things concerning acid is the fact that different research chemicals are often passed off as LSD and the fact that it is nearly impossible to tell what dose it is. Legalization would bring quality control and make sure that it is what it is advertised.

-LSD has almost no negative side effects either short term or long lasting.

-LSD's potential to cause crazy behavior has been generally overstated. It is unlikely to the extreme for people to put their children in ovens or jump out of windows thinking they can fly.

-For a drug like LSD where people under it pose less danger to themselves and others than alcohol or marijuana, there is no excuse for the government to be making it illegal.

Against arguments-

-LSD is a drug that dramatically alters the person's mind dramatically. It's dangerous not only for the person taking it, but those around them.

-LSD can cause psychosis in rare cases and can lead to Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder. HPPD causes visual changes like those under LSD chronically, sometimes appearing months after taking the drug.

-Having it legal would dramatically increase its use. If people used LSD like they use alcohol, that could cause serious problems.<br><br>
Click to expand...

Accidentally voted no. Obviously the answer is yes.
 
vasuderatorrent said:
That sounds like a wonderful place to live. :roll: Freedom wasn't designed to encourage self destruction. :roll:
Click to expand...

Freedom wasn't 'designed' to encourage anything, it wasn't designed period. Freedom isn't a means to an end. It is an end. The ability to do what one wills on condition that that doesn't infringe on another's freedom is something that people inherently value. The possibility of self destruction comes with the territory.
 
It surely does.

When my Libertarian friends talk about legalizing all drugs, however, they don't talk about the "collateral damage." What happens to the children? Who picks up the bodies in "needle park," and who pays for the funerals?
 
Just as with alcohol that intoxicates and alters mental status, there should be no restrictions for consenting adults that wish to use them as long as they are not taking away others rights. Its a simple concept. Let people f*** themselves up if they want to. Deal with accordingly those who endanger others. Have a freer and moore prosperous society all together.
 
Anagram said:
-LSD is a drug that dramatically alters the person's mind dramatically. It's dangerous not only for the person taking it, but those around them.
Click to expand...

Sure, that happened once, and I remember it well. Because it was the only time it happened.

-LSD can cause psychosis in rare cases and can lead to Hallucinogen Persisting Perception Disorder. HPPD causes visual changes like those under LSD chronically, sometimes appearing months after taking the drug.
Click to expand...

Informally known as "permafrying." I heard about a guy this happened to. Never met anyone who's ever permafried, and I'm not permafried myself (or at least everybody is too polite to tell me that I am). There have to be some already existent disorders for psychedelics to cause such harmful effects, and I can guarantee you that if a person has such disorders, he's already most likely well aware of them.

-Having it legal would dramatically increase its use. If people used LSD like they use alcohol, that could cause serious problems.
Click to expand...

Sure, it would increase a little. But not by as much as you think because the fact remains that tripping is an intense and exhausting experience that most people wouldn't find enjoyable more than a couple times a year.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom