Jump to content

Dealing with prohibitionists


JimmyPage

Recommended Posts

"Never argue with an idiot - they will only drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"

This is how I deal with prohibitionists :yep:lol

Edited by Embryo
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prohibition has NEVER been a rational position. It has ALWAYS been a moral/ethical/prejudicial one.

Some prohibitionists will attempt to legitimise their position with science but when you see their reaction to being shown that the science is firmly against them you know they are not coming from science, but in fact are coming from a prohibitionist position and trying to bolster it with facts.

I would encourage people to engage with people on a scientific basis though. I once thought there was sense in prohibition of drugs (obviously alcohol was different somehow) until the facts were laid out leaving me nowhere to hide. The only intellectually honest route open to me was to oppose prohibition.

Of course, it's not just about science. Even IF the science said drugs were demonstrably bad, with no benefits, huge harms and that prohibition could eliminate their use completely it would be a bad position on ethical grounds. That's the other side to my conversion.

I recognised (coming from a libertarian position that recognised the rights of others to engage in personal/consensual behaviour that harmed nobody who wasn't consenting to that harm) that there was an ethical problem with prohibition and again had nowhere to hide and took the only intellectually honest route.

Several people provided me with the arguments and most never saw the results, they sowed seeds that germinated, sprouted and grew later. I'm now an advocate for ending prohibition, an almost-daily consumer of the sacred herb and - make no mistake - a better person for it.

Of course, there are those like the woman in the Dilbert strip up top... but we don't need to convince them... we'll have enough on our side if we convince those who actually change their opinions when presented with evidence that they are fundamentally flawed.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems prohibition/mental retardation go hand in hand lol

This is also the woman who complained that they were going to make women pay the same rate of car insurance, and her answer was because we don't crash and are not boy racers, plus women always get a hard time and we should be equal.

My answer was - well that's bollocks I've known many girl racers in my time and your daughter has crashed more in her 1st 3 years than I have in my 8 years driving, and it is equal if we pay the same.....

Her- I don't care, we should have cheaper insurance.

Me - You want us to take away the vote as well yeah?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is also the woman who complained that they were going to make women pay the same rate of car insurance, and her answer was because we don't crash and are not boy racers, plus women always get a hard time and we should be equal.

Funnily enough, the removal of differentials based on gender was intended to *make* women equal to men. After all, you wouldn't want special treatment just because you are a woman ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funnily enough, the removal of differentials based on gender was intended to *make* women equal to men. After all, you wouldn't want special treatment just because you are a woman ?

Yeah she didn't want to go along with those lines of thinking, which is why I brought up the vote... oh well it is the recent ex mrs's mum so no need to worry about talking to a brick wall and defending my own cannabis habit to both of them.

Too many people are hung up on the legality side of it, I just quote "an unjust law is no law at all" and show me who is the victim, otherwise as far as I am concerned no crime is being committed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prohibition has NEVER been a rational position. It has ALWAYS been an immoral/unethical/prejudicial one.

Fixed that for you bud

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funnily enough, the removal of differentials based on gender was intended to *make* women equal to men. After all, you wouldn't want special treatment just because you are a woman ?

mmm not sure I'm willing to pay double the premium so that 18 year old boy racers can pay less, am I youthist?

Edited by Ishmael
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Privacy Policy Terms of Use