Medicinal Marijuana - Is Bush a moron for opposing it?

No. And it need not be smoked either. If legalised it could be put into tablet form!

http://www.marinol.com/

I received an e-mail that I was the topic of discussion in this thread. Before I make my grand exit here, I would like to respond.

First, how does one respond to the characterizations that Craven and others place on oneself or on a president for that matter? If you deny it, you are being defensive. If you ignore it and move on or just get tired of a pointless discussion that is going nowhere, you are being cowardly or admitting defeat. At least you are if you are me.

I've been around the block enough times this kind of stuff doesn't hurt my feelings anymore. I don't even get really angry. I am frustrated when only one point of view is even considered, much less deemed acceptable. And I do get frustrated when what I say is taken out of context, mischaracterized and misrepresented as Craven did in his initial post with no mention of related mitigating discussions.

I am pretty adament that civil people conduct civil debate. I'm sure that has been an irritant to many. And I'm pretty big on including my own views of how bias, prejudice, and obsession and/or fanaticism can color perception and understanding. That has been unacceptable to some. Direct insults directed to a person or his/her opinion seem to be okay here. Subtle insults re no one in particular seem to be intolerable here. That is strange to me, but I will accept it. It isn't my forum.

In my opinion, Craven's definition of 'intellectual honesty' is way off the mark, but I have not bothered to correct it as he seems to be considered the intellectual leader here. As to the way he has characterized me, I accept that as his opinion.

I have considerable respect for many in this forum and will miss fencing with them. Thanks for speaking up for me McG. And sorry to get off topic Centroles.

Isn't marinol, the active ingredient in marijuana, also an excellent pain controller?

In England, patients with terminal cancer have access to heroin to control the pain of their disease.

Doctors in the UK say it worls far better than morphine and allows the cancer victim the peace they deserve at the end of life.

Speaking for myself, I would regret it if Foxfyre decided to leave. In her short time here, she has presented a far more balanced view from the right than we have seen from others of that persuasion. I encourage her to reconsider.

I agree!

Foxfyre: I've been on A2K for about 11 months now, and irritations like yours have happened to me 3-4 times -- including one involving Craven. In all cases, my reaction was to leave the thread, stating in no uncertain terms why I was leaving, but not to leave A2K.

I can recommend this approach, as it gives me the psychiological advantage of smashing a door behind me without suffering any adverse consequences in the long run. I am on reasonably friendly terms with all the people I got irritated at, and neither they nor any of the bystanders have ever called me a coward for leaving the threads in question.

Just my two cents. The decision is up to you, of course. Good luck!

I wish to add an off topic note on pollarization (the political kind):

personally i consider myself to be a 'big boy' now having given up diapers some time ago, and having noted occasionally that the world is not always perfect, and does not always conform to my personally preferred ideals.

if i am to gain intelectually from this forum, i will not do so by reading only opinions that mesh with mine, by a series of like minded individuals.

we all gain from diversity; and we also become more able to 'see through' a bogus argument from having encountered such, and either pointed out the shortcoming myself, or read through another's well thought out debunking.

i don't have anything to 'fear' from opinions that differ from mine - hell, i might lust learn something - or even from missinformation, couched in catchy rhetoric (if you only want the 'truth', the internet is not the place for you). If i cannot discern the difference, that would be 'my' problem.

What am i saying?
well, while i appreciate those energetic souls here who give generously of their time, to moderate these threads, keeping the blatantly rude and abusive comments (mine excluded, of course) to a minimum, i do not feel the need to censure individuals for following a personal philosophy, be it rational, or not.
There are people here who's posts go unread by me, since i am 'tired' of the same old "(fill in the blank)" comments, and there are those who's every post, i know, is worth the effort of following, no matter how long.

personnally, i prefer to decide for myself, and only the most obnoxious of posters seem to need occasional raps on their errant knuckles.

if we could keep the discussions to the topic at hand; pummelling freely at arguments that need to be 'trashed'; but, laying not a hand/word on the integrity of the messenger, we would all benefit.

I wouldn't want to see Foxfyre leave. I rarely get involved in the political threads because I honestly admit, I rarely have anything of value to offer, although I can't miss the odd jokey post once in while. However, I would agree with joefromchicago, you have been one of the more reasoned voices of Conservatism here. Craven's comments aside, your views, and the way you express them, to me, would fill a needed gap here.

besides Foxfyre, we all make a point of paying little or no attention to Craven, when he's, how shall i say it? - his 'time of the mo(u/n)th'!

[just kidding (he, he, he) Crave; we allll love's ya!]

I took nothing you said or did "out of context". That being said I agree with Thomas. There's nothing wrong with irnoring a thread you are no longer interested in.

My criticism was using the exist as a stage to get in parting shots and parting shots that are intellectually dishonest. It was not a criticism of dropping a thread but the way in which it is done.

Bo, unfortunately the feeling is not mutual << my one-liner for you today.

cravin ya......!

Fox, I agree with all the others that are encouraging you to stay on A2K - even though we disagree on most political issues. Use Thomas' suggested approach to ignore some forums that are unpleasant for you. I ignore some posters on A2K which makes my life on A2K more fun - and works just fine. We need your points-of-view, because you articulate them intelligently. Most of us - including you - will not be swayed to change our political philosophy, but we can learn from each other about the why's and therefore's. A2K is meant to be educational and fun. You should stay, and even attend one of the many A2K Gatherings across the US and Europe. Some of us participated in the San Francisco Gathering from April 8 through April 12, and I can assure you that most participating on A2K are great, intelligent, fun people. Stick around, and enjoy.

Though I don't agree with you on some issues Foxfyre, you are one of the more moderate conservatives here today. I agree with you on many issues as well and I certainly wouldn't want you to leave.

If you feel the need to defend Bush on his stance on this issue though, please explain your reasons for supporting a ban on medicinal marijuana.

A. Using marijuana is against the law.
B. The president upholds the law of the United States.
C. The president does not make law.

Supporting the president does not mean supporting the ban.

What about all the laws the president is breaking. I say throw him in jail!

while i completely agree with your comment on the surface, this is, in my view as a Canadian, where things get very muddled; your president to my understanding has far too much to say on many laws, and deciscions, whereas as the head of the 'executive branch' of government, he should just be 'enforcing' them, not being involved in making them.

having said that, any law changes to do with marijuana, are as likely to be effective as is a long time user!

the only say a president has about laws is his ability to use his veto power. That's it. That's all they wrote.

Forgive me for being lazy, but didn't he pass or push the ban on same sex marriage.