(Untitled)

May 02, 2005 17:42

Leave a comment

Comments 9

revgonzo May 2 2005, 23:16:47 UTC
The tea contains DMT. Wow. Beats the hell out of the peppermint i am drinking. Oh wait, thats opium.

On a serious note, why can people use psychoactie stuff for religious purposes, butnot fr personal spiritual purposes? Suppose you don't follow whatever crock of shit group.

Reply

timothy_leary May 2 2005, 23:48:09 UTC
I think the reasoning behind it is that if you're a part of an organized religion it constitutes "religious freedom".

Reply

trasharama May 3 2005, 02:02:46 UTC
Exactly. What about personal freedom?

Reply

trasharama May 3 2005, 02:02:05 UTC
"why can people use psychoactive stuff for religious purposes, but not for personal spiritual purposes?"

Especially if the church/whatever organised religion truly see the drug as an obvious benefit and enhancement - why should it be contained/made sacred to a selected few?

Reply


jeremy_g2g May 2 2005, 23:34:23 UTC
Personaly, I don't think there should be drug laws.

But, there should not be specific exceptions made for particular reasons. I guess that would mean that I could make a "Church of Heroin" then, huh?

Reply

timothy_leary May 2 2005, 23:47:35 UTC
Isn't a small exception better than nothing?

Reply

revgonzo May 3 2005, 00:12:46 UTC
Possibly. But it exposes the inherent hypocracy of the system. Its fakeness.

Another example:

We give our fighter pilots military grade methamphetamines (SPEED), and on the same day can preach their harms to children at school watching their heroes do whatever in the sky above whatever underarmed brown nation...

Not THAT is funny. Is a small exception better than nothing? It can go either way depending on what ones mindset is I guess.

Reply

jeremy_g2g May 3 2005, 19:14:34 UTC
No, it isn't. You can't make exceptions for some people, just because they claim it for their religious purposes, and disallow it to others.

Reply


i_think_i_think May 3 2005, 14:10:36 UTC
it all boils down, or a steady simmer so as not to scald, to individual rights, personal libertys & that lot. I would like to set personal parameters that individuals c/would not be pers-nor pros-ecuted (be it god or drugs or both).

The PC movement is perhaps a foreshadow of our coming into a communism-looks-great-on-paper-realization (*crossing fingers*): the overwhelming 'us' focus of democracy really ought to be a 'me' era, much in the same way that communism focused on too many at once & it didn't work out to well for all.

Individual behaviour has been so removed that we are not much more than large collectives being branded/marketed/exploited. Individuals are the minority that democracy fails.

Religous freedom is such a 'group' effort that it allows the clever of the sheep to get behind the flock when attacked or heading towards a cliff... & to lead as they'd like... increasing their amount of personal freedom ( ... )

Reply


Leave a comment

Up