Page 116 of 228 FirstFirst ... 1666106114115116117118126166216 ... LastLast
Results 1,151 to 1,160 of 2276

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #1151
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    I couldn't care less about Trump the person. What he tweets is often reckless and explicitly xenophobic. Conflating his language with the compulsion of the moderate electorate that support his policy is lazy. Agnostic policy is agnostic policy regardless of which political idiot, on either side, put it forward. As an individual, there are some policies put forward by each party with which I agree. Using identity politics and the idiotic "it all comes back to racism" statement negates the individual impact of choice. It cannot "all" come back to racism and if you actually believe that, you've over-simplified the issues, the policies, the electorate and the individuals. Trump is an individual. He is a vile, pig of a person, however, that doesn't mean agreeable/ acceptable policy can't come from him. I know very little of Obama as a person, but he also put forward some policy with which I agree. Partisanship does suck. There's no way to move past it except to denounce a group identity. A vote for Trump is not an endorsement of his personal behavior, rather a leaning towards the policy he presents which also considers the checks and balances of a democracy with specific regard to the partisan gamesmanship. It's wanting to stop speaking in generality not being pedantic.

    If there is a specific policy that is racist (for which I've defined the terms) then we should work together as decent people to remove it. The 2 emergent liberals in unfated & d0c should be quick to renounce the regressive leftists such as Gordon and Steve. They don't speak for you anymore than Josh or Trump speak for me. Or... maybe you agree with him.
    Last edited by ironyusa; 10-31-2018 at 05:06 PM.

  2. #1152
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    I couldn't care less about Trump the person. What he tweets is often reckless and explicitly xenophobic. Conflating his language with the compulsion of the moderate electorate that support his policy is lazy. Agnostic policy is agnostic policy regardless of which political idiot, on either side, put it forward. As an individual, there are some policies put forward by each party with which I agree. Using identity politics and the idiotic "it all comes back to racism" statement negates the individual impact of choice. It cannot "all" come back to racism and if you actually believe that, you've over-simplified the issues, the policies, the electorate and the individuals. Trump is an individual. He is a vile, pig of a person, however, that doesn't mean agreeable/ acceptable policy can't come from him. I know very little of Obama as a person, but he also put forward some policy with which I agree. Partisanship does suck. There's no way to move past it except to denounce a group identity. A vote for Trump is not an endorsement of his personal behavior, rather a leaning towards the policy he presents which also considers the checks and balances of a democracy with specific regard to the partisan gamesmanship. It's wanting to stop speaking in generality not being pedantic.

    If there is a specific policy that is racist (for which I've defined the terms) then we should work together as decent people to remove it. The 2 emergent liberals in unfated & d0c should be quick to renounce the regressive leftists such as Gordon and Steve. They don't speak for you anymore than Josh or Trump speak for me. Or... maybe you agree with him.
    "it all comes back to racism" doesn't negate choice or individuality.

    individuality doesn't matter in a group of folks who are self-selecting to identify there agreement with a set of beliefs. they are choosing to agree with a policy or set of policies. words and labels mean things. if republican platform doesn't mean republican platform, then its not useful as a word.

    i love to speak generally, that seems to be yours an josh's opposition to my statements.


    there are many policies that are racist, and or are supported because of racism. i have listed many already. the problem irony, is that there are lot of not decent humans in this country. such as ones who will not state that putting newborn children into camps without there parents, to represent themselves in immigration court, is fucking evil. that should be a basic litmus test for decency.
    Last edited by cockerpunk; 10-31-2018 at 05:23 PM.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  3. #1153
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Quote Originally Posted by cockerpunk View Post
    "it all comes back to racism" doesn't negate choice or individuality.

    individuality doesn't matter in a group of folks who are self-selecting to identify there agreement with a set of beliefs. words and labels mean things. if republican platform doesn't mean republican platform, then its not useful as a word.

    i love to speak generally, that seems to be yours an josh's opposition to my statements.


    there are many policies that are racist, and or are supported because of racism. i have listed many already. the problem irony, is that there are lot of not decent humans in this country. such as ones who will not state that putting newborn children into camps without there parents, to represent themselves in immigration court, is fucking evil. that should be a basic litus test for decency.
    There are a relatively low number of people that identify specifically with a party. I tend to be more conservative and have no better choice in most cases than to vote republican. Given a viable alternative, that would change quickly.

    That has been my clear opposition to your statement the whole time. If a person literally says, "I voted for Trump because he hates Mexicans" then they are a racist idiot. In a democracy, Trump's personal feeling towards Mexicans has to be manifest in policy form with language that's explicitly biased. I believe Trump's "us" versus "them" plays to the common plebeian's lack of understanding of the political process. The supreme court and congress can still keep him mostly in check. Using that type of narrative has allowed the GoP to hide much of their elitist policy under the guise of "nationalism." Biting on it is a distraction and it was never Trump or the GoP's agenda. That's why I contend that the primary cause is corporate cronyism and the effect correlates naturally to the socio-economic status where blacks tend to have lower income. I think you have it backwards and your attempt to demonize anyone that has ever supported anything Trump has ever done is counter-productive, hence me using the epitaph of regressive leftist for you.

    Stop with the hyperbole. If you really think the majority of republicans' objective is to break-up families then, yet again you're a distraction and don't seem to care about helping solve the problem. WHY are the kids there in that situation? Well, the cause is that policy seems to have existed with a hole that, when enforced, would lead to this but a change in enforcement has this effect. Both parties believe immigration reform is necessary and a policy discussion needs to take place, but won't as long as we're chasing distractions. The impracticality of "do not enforce" or lack of viable alternatives is perpetuating the current border status, hence my statements that you and people like you are part of the problem. Given, the type of vitriol that comes out of the president's mouth (or twitter) is equally as repugnant.


    Funny that you have also taken any of my statements about your relationships as me having something against you. The good news is that in America, you don't have to care what I think about you. In my opinion, government has no place in marriage at all. On an online forum, you toss it out there so it's free for debate but personally, I don't care what you do. If you aren't having kids, your relationship doesn't have a biological significance. If you aren't having kids, then your relationship doesn't have a sociological meaning. Maybe it has deep personal value in how it makes you "feel" but that isn't quantifiable by any objective measure. Go for it if it makes you happy, but don't expect anyone else to care. That's not personal or "judgement."
    Last edited by ironyusa; 10-31-2018 at 05:52 PM.

  4. #1154
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    Ok, has anyone else watched Hamilton's Pharmacopoeia? It's a docuseries on hallucinogens. The scheduling of drugs is a matter of control and I've become increasingly convinced that many of the old shaman traditions had real benefits. I'm not sure if it was a repression of culture or an inability to capitalize on unsynthasized molecules. Regardless, I hope that a renaissance against prohibition is started with cannabis, but extends to other natural compounds.

  5. #1155
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Well, even Bohner is saying federal penalties could be phased out fir cannibus in the next 5 years. I figure it is an eventuality.

    Other drugs... we will see. It most likely will take half a generation. I am curious to see what happens when the baby boomer generation passes on. We are ripe for some change.

  6. #1156
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    As of now, I am of the personal opinion that no plant should be illegal.

  7. #1157
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    I do like what Portugal has done.

  8. #1158
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,581
    I should probably extend that because I've recently learned of "toad venom" which is derived from a bufo alvarius and is a natural source of 5-meo-dmt. So, plants and animals shouldn't be illegal especially since harvesting the venom doesn't kill the toad.

    My opinion on synthesized drugs isn't as well-formed. What I do know is that LSD, in particular, unquestionably DOES have medicinal value and thusly shouldn't be schedule 1. From PTSD to alcoholism treatment, it's been proven effective. It's it's scheduling that is stifling research.

  9. #1159
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Manchester, England
    Posts
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by ironyusa View Post
    As of now, I am of the personal opinion that no plant should be illegal.
    So cocaine and heroin should be legal? Sorry, I missed a load of the conversation here, so feel free to ignore me if you already covered this.
    Dear boy, I work at Planet Eclipse, don't you know..

  10. #1160
    Insider
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Knoxville, TN
    Posts
    2,303
    Sorry, I missed a load of the conversation here, so feel free to ignore me if you already covered this.
    No worries, most of it was crap - the drug stuff is a welcome change of topic.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal (for reference from one of my highly partisan sites)

    Individuals found in possession of small quantities of drugs are issued summons. The drugs are confiscated, and the suspect is interviewed by a *Commission for the Dissuasion of Drug Addiction* (Comissões para a Dissuasão da Toxicodependência * CDT). These commissions are made up of three people: A social worker, a psychiatrist, and an attorney.[13][15] The dissuasion commission have powers comparable to an arbitration committee, but restricted to cases involving drug use or possession of small amounts of drugs. There is one CDT in each of Portugal*s 18 districts.

    The committees have a broad range of sanctions available to them when ruling on the drug use offence. These include:

    Fines, ranging from *25 to *150. These figures are based on the Portuguese minimum wage of about *485 (Banco de Portugal, 2001) and translate into hours of work lost.
    Suspension of the right to practice if the user has a licensed profession (e.g. medical doctor, taxi driver) and may endanger another person or someone's possessions.
    Ban on visiting certain places (e.g. specific clubbing venues).
    Ban on associating with specific other persons.
    Foreign travel ban.
    Requirement to report periodically to the committee.
    Withdrawal of the right to carry a gun.
    Confiscation of personal possessions.
    Cessation of subsidies or allowances that a person receives from a public agency.
    If the person is addicted to drugs, they may be admitted to a drug rehabilitation facility or be given community service, if the dissuasion committee finds that this better serves the purpose of keeping the offender out of trouble. The committee cannot mandate compulsory treatment, although its orientation is to induce addicts to enter and remain in treatment. The committee has the explicit power to suspend sanctions conditional upon voluntary entry into treatment. If the offender is not addicted to drugs, or unwilling to submit to treatment or community service, he or she may be given a fine.[1][16][17][18]
    Consumption and possession
    In Portugal, recreational use of cannabis is forbidden by law; also the medicinal use is not yet officially recognized (there is debate and legislators have proposed bills in the Portuguese Parliament). Portugal signed all the UN conventions on narcotics and psychotropic to date. With the 2001 decriminalization bill, the consumer is now regarded as a patient and not as a criminal (having the amount usually used for ten days of personal use is not a punishable crime) but repression persists. One can be sent to a dissuasion committee and have a talk or must pay a fee. According to the libertarian think tank Cato Institute, illegal drug use among Portuguese teenagers declined after 2001, and 45 percent of the country's heroin addicts sought medical treatment. But critics of the policy, such as the Association for a Drug-Free Portugal, say overall consumption of drugs in the country has actually risen by 4.2 percent since 2001 and claim the benefits of decriminalization are being "over-egged."[citation needed]

    Cultivation and distribution
    The cultivation of cannabis, even on a very small-scale home grown basis for personal use only, can legally be prosecuted. However, an unknown number of enthusiasts of small-scale home-cultivation grow the plants with a high degree of secrecy due to the legal punishment they could face if prosecuted, and due to potential social stigma as well. In neighboring Spain, small-scale cultivation of cannabis plants for personal use only, is tolerated by the authorities and there are many grow shops across the country selling their products physically and online. In 2003 another update to the "Portuguese drugs law" brought the criminalization of the possession of cannabis seeds, except certified industrial hemp seed. This law made the buying of cannabis seeds from legal and financially transparent online cannabis seed shops based in other European Union member states, such as neighboring Spain or the Netherlands, an unlawful transaction when performed by Portuguese residents. The provision of seeds and tools to produce and consume cannabis is also illegal in the country. Production and distribution of hemp products is legal but regulated. There are a small number of hemp shops in Portugal and hemp products are legal.
    So, the big issue has more to do with how they treat drug use - and instead of punishment as a high crime they treat it as a problem, and assign you treatment. They don't make it legal though.

    I think this is just a far more humane way, and in the basic sense, the smarter way to deal with the problem. If somebody is using and ruining their life the end result is some minor punishments and treatment vs. years in jail that might reinforce the need to use.
    Last edited by pbjosh; 11-01-2018 at 07:46 AM.
    Josh Coray
    J4 Paintball
    Lead Design
    www.j4paintball.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •