Tobacco need not be banned, but it is a scientific fact that it is less addictive and less dangerous than marijuana. marijuana also does not make people aggressive or antisocial, as does alcohol. I oppose the legalization of heroin, however. Heroin is a dangerous drug. 'Pot' is not harmless, nor is heroin. I believe they should both be legalized. It is not the drug that ought to be attacked, but the behavior, i.e. drunkenness does not absolve one from responsibility when driving or dating. What causes the state concern is that, in an atmosphere where we are forced to support the excesses of the irresponsible, an unemployable crack user is a significant expense. My point is that the Left is contradictory on this subject, as in most others, dependant on political expediency.
: Nobody I know advocates this. (DC: Andrea Dworkin states that heterosexual sex is rape. Is she a conservative, perchance?) What we do believe is that the government should not be in the business of regulating family structure, because family composition varies from culture to culture. What's wrong with fathers paying child support, by the way? (DC: What's wrong with mothers paying child support, by the way? Is the so-called 'sexual revolution' and the meteoric rise in single motherhood entirely unconnected?) And the social workers I know would resent your implication of being "well paid" (DC: So would the teachers. It does not make it untrue). our society seems to ahve mroe than enough to devote to weapons of war, but when it comes to funding social spending, suddenly the coffers seem to dry up (DC: This country seems to have enough money to pay for what taxes are raised for, but when it comes to supporting left-wing schemes, it seems to dry up. Which is of course a patent falsehood).
: No nation ought to have nuclear weapodn- not india, not China, not America. And exactly when has teh US defended a Communist state from fascist aggression? (DC: World War II would seem to qualify - oops, my mistake. "State capitalism". Of course at the time the Communist party in the U.S. didn't seem to think so …) if my memory serves me, they INSTIGATED the fascist aggression in Nicaragua, Chile, Mozambique, Guatemala, etc (DC: What? The insurgents? - oops … 'patriotic fighters for the people', as it were. Someone should tell the people). As for genocides, exactly what are you refrring to? (DC: The 'Great Leap Forward' comes to mind. Etc.) Cambodia was not Communist (DC: Pol Pot was an industrialist), Nicaragua, never committed any genocide (DC: Commandante Zero was a mite confused, I suppose), and although teh Vietnamese certainly did go overboard with their reprisals after the war(!), these actions were mroe likely the outgrowth of the regrettable human instinct for revenge than of any Communist program (DC: And the invasion of Laos and Cambodia? Twenty years of brutal 'revenge'? And, since they seem to be on unusually agreeable terms with the old Khmer Rouge nowadays, who was this 'revenge' directed against? Couldn't have been the 'bourgeois' - old P.P. had pretty much finished that lot come '79).
: are you perhaps talking about wolves? I'm no expert, but aren't teh stories about wolevs attacking humans simply myths? And if an area is supposed to be "natural", how can we jsutify human intervention to prevent forest fires?
I refer also to tigers. As in Bengal. As in Bangladesh and India. As to 'natural' areas, a few firebreaks would have made sense in Yellowstone. I assume you agree (?)
Can I have some evidence? i never once had a "Leftist" teacher in public school. the only political "instruction" i ever received in public school was when a substitute teacher began railing about teh evils of Communism and the glories of President Nixon. After sixth grade I went to a private school where I had a wide variety of teachers inclduing a libertarian, a bron-again Christian, a socialist, some liberals, a conservative.....
: My experience was a bit different. I vividly remember being forced not to cite the Pledge of Allegiance in fourth grade. I remember having my toy soldiers taken from me - they were - 'war toys', as I remember. I remember a rather intensive 'education' in South American history during my fifth grade, which was decidedly biased. We should have traded places, I suppose.
: Meanwhile, I am told to abstain from fast foods from McDonald's. I wonder - if an 'approved' fast food institution, run by representatives from Hanoi, were to set up shop in my town, would there be the same level of 'insightful and concerned inquiry' conducted against them?
But Hanoi doesn't run larhge-scale, predatroy commercial enterprises. that is like saying "If a frog had wings....." you know the rest of it.
: No. They only run large-scale, predatory military enterprises. Which is like saying "If a tiger only eats people, and does not exploit their labor, what's the harm?" Wolves are nice too - that bit about them having 'canine teeth' and being carnivorous is but a myth.
Dance with the wolves if you like, but I'd rather keep them overseas if you don't mind. And no matter how 'corpulent' I might be, they may not bite off a piece of me with my happy consent.
"Doc" Cruel
