Originally Posted by RCT

You know, don't know about you, but 90 percent of Americans break laws all the time in their own bedrooms. Do you know the local laws about sex in so many places state some normal sexual acts are illegal? And for what, the religious right, which, in case you don't know, are sometimes the biggest breakers of these laws? I agree with you, that, if we don't agree with a law, we have two choices, but, when the laws are so archaic, sometimes, just have to say forget it. And if you have never broken a law, then by all means, cast the first stone.

And who is to say when a law is "archaic?" Are the laws regarding euthanasia archaic? What about the laws on indecent exposure? How about the laws on animal cruelty? And the list goes on.....

You and I can break any law we want, as long as we are ready to endure the result. If you and I aren't ready, and the feeling is "it's okay to break THIS law" without penalty because we in our enlightened status think it's archaic despite the current validity," that's no different than the kid who eats all the cookies in the cookie jar because s/he wants to, despite being told to leave them alone.

Either change the law according to our system of government (if the majority goes along with the desire) or accept the consequences.

It's not a matter of "casting the first stone,' but rather being realistic. Democracy or anarchy - take your pick. The choice really is that simple.

I was there and I do remember it. The traffic was a disaster and it was a circus of people out of control. I lived nearby.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

And who is to say when a law is "archaic?" Are the laws regarding euthanasia archaic? What about the laws on indecent exposure? How about the laws on animal cruelty? And the list goes on.....

You and I can break any law we want, as long as we are ready to endure the result. If you and I aren't ready, and the feeling is "it's okay to break THIS law" without penalty because we in our enlightened status think it's archaic despite the current validity," that's no different than the kid who eats all the cookies in the cookie jar because s/he wants to, despite being told to leave them alone.

Either change the law according to our system of government (if the majority goes along with the desire) or accept the consequences.

It's not a matter of "casting the first stone,' but rather being realistic. Democracy or anarchy - take your pick. The choice really is that simple.

You keep rehashing the point about accepting the consequences. Nobody is talking about that point, our topic was about the legalization, what thoughts were on that. I realize we have to pay consequences if we choose to break laws. But, if you are going to keep talking about laws, come up with a better analogy than a kid sticking his hand in a cookie jar. That isn't a law, that's a rule of the household, by parents or guardians. Huge difference.

Originally Posted by REH7380

I would like to thank everyone who responded and partiicpated in this string of notes. Whether I am right or wrong is not important as it has been in my opinion , a good exchange of ideas and feelings. I found I started to repeat myself so will go on to other things. I do feel the last note was insensitive to the poor suffering children with handicaps which they did not sign up for when they were born.

Which note was that?

Originally Posted by RCT

You keep rehashing the point about accepting the consequences. Nobody is talking about that point, our topic was about the legalization, what thoughts were on that. I realize we have to pay consequences if we choose to break laws. But, if you are going to keep talking about laws, come up with a better analogy than a kid sticking his hand in a cookie jar. That isn't a law, that's a rule of the household, by parents or guardians. Huge difference.

Analogies - they still demonstrate the point.

Okay - Legalizing pot as a recreational substance is a bad idea - just adds another mind-bending substance of unknown long-term effect into the market for no reason other than to have another mind-bending substance in the market - tough to control and there will still be criminals peddling it to kids who don't know any better - health care costs associated with expanded access to pot may or may not be worse than tobacco or booze, and common sense says they need quantification up front. We complain when the department store sells toys which may harm kids, but public sale of pot would be okay?

Okay - Legalizing pot for medicinal purposes may be a reasonable idea, but the conventional medical establishment needs to present the pros-and-cons of that in the same way any other treatment or medicine is - substantive research backed by quantifiable results to include defined regimens establishing the when and how to dispense. Anything less is folly.

How's that?

Originally Posted by SteveZ

And who is to say when a law is "archaic?" Are the laws regarding euthanasia archaic? What about the laws on indecent exposure? How about the laws on animal cruelty? And the list goes on.....

You and I can break any law we want, as long as we are ready to endure the result. If you and I aren't ready, and the feeling is "it's okay to break THIS law" without penalty because we in our enlightened status think it's archaic despite the current validity," that's no different than the kid who eats all the cookies in the cookie jar because s/he wants to, despite being told to leave them alone.

Either change the law according to our system of government (if the majority goes along with the desire) or accept the consequences.

It's not a matter of "casting the first stone,' but rather being realistic. Democracy or anarchy - take your pick. The choice really is that simple.

this will probably work for Mr.Midnight

Steve Z I could not agree with you more..Great definition of the problem..