Should members of the Church of Peyote be allowed to consume mescaline?

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Drugs= Bad
Drugs being Legal = Good

So this would hold true for lots of other bad and dangerous things then wouldn't it?

Depends if it is a victimless crime

Consentual sex between adults and young minors?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Drugs= Bad
Drugs being Legal = Good

So this would hold true for lots of other bad and dangerous things then wouldn't it?

Depends if it is a victimless crime

Consentual sex between adults and young minors?

The young minor is a victim in that case, however, if the person is say about 16 or so no reason for a crime.  I am very much against rules that make sex between a 19 and 16 statuatory rape

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Drugs= Bad
Drugs being Legal = Good

So this would hold true for lots of other bad and dangerous things then wouldn't it?

Depends if it is a victimless crime

Consentual sex between adults and young minors?

The young minor is a victim in that case, however, if the person is say about 16 or so no reason for a crime.  I am very much against rules that make sex between a 19 and 16 statuatory rape

Public Nudity?

[DownWithTheLeft]

Drugs= Bad
Drugs being Legal = Good

So this would hold true for lots of other bad and dangerous things then wouldn't it?

Depends if it is a victimless crime

Consentual sex between adults and young minors?

The young minor is a victim in that case, however, if the person is say about 16 or so no reason for a crime.  I am very much against rules that make sex between a 19 and 16 statuatory rape

Public Nudity?

I don't think that crime is victimless, it is certainly tasteless and inappropriate to young children and offensive to most.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

Drugs= Bad
Drugs being Legal = Good

So this would hold true for lots of other bad and dangerous things then wouldn't it?

Depends if it is a victimless crime

Consentual sex between adults and young minors?

The young minor is a victim in that case, however, if the person is say about 16 or so no reason for a crime.  I am very much against rules that make sex between a 19 and 16 statuatory rape

Public Nudity?

I don't think that crime is victimless, it is certainly tasteless and inappropriate to young children and offensive to most.

What if they're attractive? And how about suicide?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

I just find it funny that you assumed that I was making an ignorant judgment.  And numbskull?  I haven't heard that since about 3rd grade.

You still haven't provided any rationale to prohibit religious-based consumption of mescaline.

Or consumption of it in general, for that matter.

It's an illegal drug - you can't do illegal stuff just for the sake of religion.

I'm sure that you would say the same of Christians in countries where Christianity is suppressed and/or banned. Of course they shouldn't be reading the Bible. It's illegal, after all!

Just because the religion under consideration here is not Christianity or some closely related cult does not mean that it should be excluded from sharing the same liberties that Christians and closely related cults do. And you have not even presented a sound argument as to why mescaline should be illegal. The fact that it is illegal at present is not a reason why it should be illegal, unless of course you are perfectly content to continue plodding along, dumbly accepting everything that the government force-feeds you as valid.

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

But it's ILLEGAL!

Amusing how you put Ron Paul in your signature and then turn around and say the state should be able to regulate a person's health and restrict their religious beliefs.

I have Chris Dodd and Howard Dean - I don't agree 100% w/ anybody in my signature.

[Gabu]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Drugs= Bad
Drugs being Legal = Good

So this would hold true for lots of other bad and dangerous things then wouldn't it?

Depends if it is a victimless crime

Consentual sex between adults and young minors?

The young minor is a victim in that case, however, if the person is say about 16 or so no reason for a crime.  I am very much against rules that make sex between a 19 and 16 statuatory rape

Public Nudity?

I don't think that crime is victimless, it is certainly tasteless and inappropriate to young children and offensive to most.

What if they're attractive? And how about suicide?

I don't think being attractive makes a difference, although it might raise the tolerance level among the general public to report the crime    Suicide should be legal

[Silent Hunter]

Narcotics aren't victimless.

[dead0man]

Narcotics aren't victimless.

Neither are cars, twinkies, tall buildings, beer, air travel or peanut butter.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Narcotics aren't victimless.

Neither are cars, twinkies, tall buildings, beer, air travel or peanut butter.

All their benefits outweight the cost.

[dead0man]

The Twinkie benifits mankind more than mescaline does?  Are you aware of any religons that use the Twinkie as a major aspect of their faith?

But even if there is no good reason to use a substance you can grow in your backyard, why should the govt have any say in whether an adult uses said substance or not?  Maybe Liberty means something different to me.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Mescaline isn't even a narcotic.

[Gabu]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

[Eraserhead]

Option 1 of course.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.  And you can have a glass of wine and not be drunk/still be fully funcitonal.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

The Twinkie benifits mankind more than mescaline does?  Are you aware of any religons that use the Twinkie as a major aspect of their faith?

I could do that!

[Ebowed]

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.

Alcohol is considered one of the most intoxicating substances known to man.

[Gabu]

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.  And you can have a glass of wine and not be drunk/still be fully funcitonal.

So?  Tons of people get drunk off their ass all the time.  And a not insignificant chunk of those go out driving when drunk and kill people every year.  The fact that it's possible to drink without getting drunk is irrelevant.  Meanwhile, ever heard of a guy driving while high off mescaline who killed someone?

Which is really more dangerous here?

[dead0man]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.  And you can have a glass of wine and not be drunk/still be fully funcitonal.

So your for the legalization of pot then?  You can smoke as much pot as you want and still drive better than somebody with a 6 pack in them.

[Verily]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.  And you can have a glass of wine and not be drunk/still be fully funcitonal.

So your for the legalization of pot then?  You can smoke as much pot as you want and still drive better than somebody with a 6 pack in them.

No, not "as much pot as you want". "Some", certainly.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.

You clearly have never gotten drunk. Of course we all already knew that.

[2952-0-0]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.

You clearly have never gotten drunk. Of course we all already knew that.

He probably is, given that he was supposed to use "affect".

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.  And you can have a glass of wine and not be drunk/still be fully funcitonal.

So your for the legalization of pot then?  You can smoke as much pot as you want and still drive better than somebody with a 6 pack in them.

You're missing my point.  People don't just smoke enough so that they aren't effected.  You shouldn't drive drunk or even get drunk for that matter - and if you DO drink and endanger somebody, you should be punished - but if you're home alone and do whatever, I really don't care.  But smoking pot is a lot different than having a bear or a glass of wine.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Reading isn't hazardous to the health of you and others.

Mescaline is not physically addictive.  Why do you support having it illegal while alcohol is not illegal?  Beyond the extent to which the effects go, there isn't a lot of difference.

No response yet, I see.

It still effects your judgement way more than alcohol does.

You clearly have never gotten drunk. Of course we all already knew that.

We're not talking about getting drunk - I'm talking about having a drink.