Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Deicide on November 10, 2010, 01:01:39 PM
-
???
Does this make any sense to anyone here?
I am sure more behavioural and physical harm has come from abusing androgens than mary jane.
-
staunch right wing folks do not use logic and reason, deicide.
-
staunch right wing folks do not use logic and reason, deicide.
Yeah, I know...like his hero (Rush), abused conventional drugs for years but is supposedly an exemplar of good conservative behaviour.
-
Do it like Swede and use both, then you're on the safe side.
-
Do it like Swede and use both, then you're on the safe side.
LOL. Word to big bird!
-
Chalk it to deicide to start another fail thread.
-
'dolphins are just gay sharks' - ahhahahahahahahahhaha!!
-
Chalk it to deicide to start another fail thread.
No, this weird hypocrisy is fail sirrah!
-
staunch right wing folks do not use logic and reason, deicide.
Bullshit. I'm a total wing nut ex-democrat. I would love for roids and weed to be legal. 8)
Coach is a fake nanny state christian, no different than some IDIOT democrat that wants to ban "happy meals" ::)
-
Bullshit. I'm a total wing nut ex-democrat. I would love for roids and weed to be legal. 8)
Coach is a fake nanny state christian, no different than some IDIOT democrat that wants to ban "happy meals" ::)
So you are not religious?
-
the only ones who should not want pot to be legal would be drug dealers, they make waaay to much money from this shit.
-
LOL...oh brother. I'm almost 18-19 years clean, I've just grown up and seen the light. I've been a Christian for 12 years. You mean I'm a hipocryte if I change my views from almost 2 decades ago? Hahahaha..K!
-
???
Does this make any sense to anyone here?
I am sure more behavioural and physical harm has come from abusing androgens than mary jane.
Wrong.
-
Wrong.
Every single aas user Will have a sideeffects. And they are Millions out there using aas, coke, speed that ends up doing crazy ass shit.
So just the "nope" is wrong.
-
Yeah, I know...like his hero (Rush), abused conventional drugs for years but is supposedly an exemplar of good conservative behaviour.
Rush took pain killers to deal with the pain of having his skull cut open. It had no effect on his job performance or on anybody else. No one would have ever know he was takin oxycontin if someone hadn't snitched on him. That hardly constitutes abuse.
BTW, I'm for the legalization of all drugs. My feeling is that what you do to yourself, as long as it doesn't effect anybody else, is nobody's business.
-
So you are not religious?
I'm not sure :-[
-
LOL...oh brother. I'm almost 18-19 years clean
Are you saying you were clean when you competed 3 - 4 years ago, Coach? I remember seeing you post lots of pics from the contest and standing outside the venue. You didn't look clean to me at all.
-
I'm talking of street drugs Kiwi.
-
Every single aas user Will have a sideeffects. And they are Millions out there using aas, coke, speed that ends up doing crazy ass shit.
So just the "nope" is wrong.
All of life is a matter of degrees. I have been on HRT (150mg test/wk) for over 10 years and have never had any negative side effects and only a positive effect. If you drink once a week nothing will happen to you. If you blaze once a week nothing will happen to you. But it doesn't matter to me whether it effects your health or not. It's nobody's right to force you to be healthy. Over eating effects your health. If your "crazy ass shit" effects other then you crossed the line.
-
I'm talking of street drugs Kiwi.
Roger that. I thought you were talking about hormones.
-
All of life is a matter of degrees. I have been on HRT (150mg test/wk) for over 10 years and have never had any negative side effects and only a positive effect. If you drink once a week nothing will happen to you. If you blaze once a week nothing will happen to you. But it doesn't matter to me whether it effects your health or not. It's nobody's right to force you to be healthy. Over eating effects your health. If your "crazy ass shit" effects other then you crossed the line.
Ofc. But most aas beginners, at least from a bunch of stories/qestions ive seen at forums havent gotten a fucking Clue about what they are doing though.
-
Silly to me that tobacco is legal and marijuana isn't.......
-
No, this weird hypocrisy is fail sirrah!
Though I disagree with Coach if he doesn't want to decriminalize weed it is not hypocrisy (BTW, can someone for once please spell that overused word right).
To equate steroids, all derivatives of a natural hormone produce in your body, with hallucinogenic drugs whose primary purpose is simply to get high, is not a fair comparison. Even comparing meth to weed is ludicrous.
-
Ofc. But most aas beginners, at least from a bunch of stories/qestions ive seen at forums havent gotten a fucking Clue about what they are doing though.
They haven't read the gh15 bible.
-
Legalize - there'll be a little turmoil at the beginning which will even out after time.
Time to grow up for many people.
-
He's a born again and a Republican. They love being told what to do, and they feel you should be just as submissive and retarded.
(http://www.davidbadgerow.com/images/deal_with_it_crab.gif)
-
Not to bright are ya dustin?
-
Not to bright are ya dustin?
Nope.
(http://taylorhicksgirlfriend.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/funny-pets-halloween-costumes-dogs.jpg)
-
Rush took pain killers to deal with the pain of having his skull cut open. It had no effect on his job performance or on anybody else. No one would have ever know he was takin oxycontin if someone hadn't snitched on him. That hardly constitutes abuse.
BTW, I'm for the legalization of all drugs. My feeling is that what you do to yourself, as long as it doesn't effect anybody else, is nobody's business.
Epic rationalization of Rushs' actions.. Can I use this in class to demonstrate the lengths people will go to defend illegal behavior? For the record, dems do it to..
-
LOL...oh brother. I'm almost 18-19 years clean, I've just grown up and seen the light. I've been a Christian for 12 years. You mean I'm a hipocryte if I change my views from almost 2 decades ago? Hahahaha..K!
ur a christian?
which type of christian are you?
-
Non-denominational but I'm not a "Bible thumper".
-
Rush took pain killers to deal with the pain of having his skull cut open. It had no effect on his job performance or on anybody else. No one would have ever know he was takin oxycontin if someone hadn't snitched on him. That hardly constitutes abuse.
BTW, I'm for the legalization of all drugs. My feeling is that what you do to yourself, as long as it doesn't effect anybody else, is nobody's business.
Hehe. It was for his back pain. Which easily explains the doctor shopping, and the buying of pills from his (front) maid. Oh, and the viagra-fuelled trip to visit the nice children of the DR. Guy's a hypocritical shitbag. You wanna defend someone with all your GOP might, that's cool, but find someone who actually deserves your efforts.
-
Silly to me that tobacco is legal and marijuana isn't.......
Exactly, and the one that is legal does more damage...
-
Hehe. It was for his back pain. Which easily explains the doctor shopping, and the buying of pills from his (front) maid. Oh, and the viagra-fuelled trip to visit the nice children of the DR. Guy's a hypocritical shitbag. You wanna defend someone with all your GOP might, that's cool, but find someone who actually deserves your efforts.
The truth is spoken.
-
Not to bright are ya dustin?
Ironic coming from you as you are the pinnacle of stupid.
-
Not to bright are ya dustin?
You're setting yourself up, there ;D
-
"He's a born again and a republican, they love being told what to do". No, knowing right from wrong is what told me to quit, commonsense.
-
LOL...oh brother. I'm almost 18-19 years clean, I've just grown up and seen the light. I've been a Christian for 12 years. You mean I'm a hipocryte if I change my views from almost 2 decades ago? Hahahaha..K!
BULLSHIT!
-
What's bullshit?
-
What's bullshit?
That you've been clean for 18 years.
Do you mean from just recreational drugs?
Because I know you're not talking about steroids.
-
Rush took pain killers to deal with the pain of having his skull cut open. It had no effect on his job performance or on anybody else. No one would have ever know he was takin oxycontin if someone hadn't snitched on him. That hardly constitutes abuse.
Right. That and the fact that he abused it so much he went deaf and was slurring his words on his show. Other than that everything was fine.
-
That you've been clean for 18 years.
Do you mean from just recreational drugs?
Because I know you're not talking about steroids.
Yes, thats exactly what I meant, as I clarified with Kiwi.
-
i just bought a new bong, had me high as fuck on that medical marijuana i got on venice beach
-
i just bought a new bong, had me high as fuck on that medical marijuana i got on venice beach
:'( :'(
-
I just booked an apartment for four nights in Amsterdam, figure it'll be a waaaaaaaaaaaay more relaxed environment to smoke weed and shroom like total junkies, before the BIG party! 8)
Ah, youth...
-
I just booked an apartment for four nights in Amsterdam, figure it'll be a waaaaaaaaaaaay more relaxed environment to smoke weed and shroom like total junkies, before the BIG party! 8)
Dont forget to stop at the heineken brewery and get loaded of beer there, and heineken is $1 cheaper then any other beer you buy there too
-
staunch right wing folks do not use logic and reason, deicide.
Some staunch right wingers are pretty smart, especially when then lean towards Libertarianism and old school conservative ideals. But nowadys most of them are just sheep in that left vs. right social engineering game that the government loves to play on us.
This new breed a Fox News watching, Glenn Beck listening, neo-con politician supporting right wingers is a bunch of complete fucking morons.
-
I just booked an apartment for four nights in Amsterdam, figure it'll be a waaaaaaaaaaaay more relaxed environment to smoke weed and shroom like total junkies, before the BIG party! 8)
This one threw me for a loop when i went to amsterdam ... open public pissers
(http://www.thisamsterdam.com/talesfromthecity/portable%20urinals.jpg)
(http://images.metrophotochallenge.com/photos/big/60720.jpg)
-
This one threw me for a loop when i went to amsterdam ... open public pissers
(http://www.thisamsterdam.com/talesfromthecity/portable%20urinals.jpg)
(http://images.metrophotochallenge.com/photos/big/60720.jpg)
Doesn't look so sanitary as you have to get so close .
-
Why do you have to get so close in?
I dont know man, i mean its tuff to take a piss in a bath tub at a baseball stadium with 300 dicks standing next to you, but pissing in public felt more weird
-
This one threw me for a loop when i went to amsterdam ... open public pissers
(http://www.thisamsterdam.com/talesfromthecity/portable%20urinals.jpg)
(http://images.metrophotochallenge.com/photos/big/60720.jpg)
Would be cool to see some "fe"male bodybuilders use those when they go over to guest pose or compete 8)
-
In my town they have some restrooms that men and women share. And there are lots of restrooms where there is no door and everyone can just see you pissing.
I don't see what the big deal is about it. People are too uptight about that kind of thing.
-
Doesn't look so sanitary as you have to get so close .
They're good.
And actually more sanitary than regular public bathrooms as you stand outdoors and on a steel net as opposed to some urine filled floor.
You just gotta get used to them. 8)
-
'dolphins are just gay sharks' - ahhahahahahahahahhaha!!
Oh you saw that Sly Stallone epic too !?!
-
They're good.
And actually more sanitary than regular public bathrooms as you stand outdoors and on a steel net as opposed to some urine filled floor.
You just gotta get used to them. 8)
Whats the point of them? Seems like they are trying to be so post modern and cool. ::)
-
Yes, thats exactly what I meant, as I clarified with Kiwi.
k my bad coach.
i thought u were talking steroids as well, i didnt see your earlier post.
-
Weed has ruined my life. Let me rephrase that the laws have ruined my life. Not totally but making it very difficult. I will be going to jail Friday for 2 weeks because I failed a drug test. I smoked that K2 shit and wouldn't you know that they just started testing for it the first time I even tried it. Just my luck.
Oh well. Be back in 2 weeks (hopefully) ;)
I am currently in a drug court program.
-
Weed has ruined my life. Let me rephrase that the laws have ruined my life. Not totally but making it very difficult. I will be going to jail Friday for 2 weeks because I failed a drug test. I smoked that K2 shit and wouldn't you know that they just started testing for it the first time I even tried it. Just my luck.
Oh well. Be back in 2 weeks (hopefully) ;)
I am currently in a drug court program.
That sucks, mate. See you in the boards when you get back.
-
Coach is a totally unconscious entity who can't think outside of the letter I or word me. Seems like a decent guy though, just what most people would call new money/soul
-
weed really is one of the worst drugs... at least with uppers like meth, coke, mdma, etc. you're still productive (many times over productive) weed just makes you a retarded stoner, a lot of guys I went to high school with ended up having their lives fucked up because of weed, just like the poster stated above a lot of these guys were on the honor roll before grade 10 or were team captains in sports, after a few years of being introduced to weed most of them had dropped out , some became homeless, a few I saw recently are working at starbucks and walmart for $10 an hour...still living with their parents, and they're in their 30's..
-
weed really is one of the worst drugs... at least with uppers like meth, coke, mdma, etc. you're still productive (many times over productive) weed just makes you a retarded stoner, a lot of guys I went to high school with ended up having their lives fucked up because of weed, just like the poster stated above a lot of these guys were on the honor roll before grade 10 or were team captains in sports, after a few years of being introduced to weed most of them had dropped out , some became homeless, a few I saw recently are working at starbucks and walmart for $10 an hour...still living with their parents, and they're in their 30's..
There are different strains of weed. Most of the stuff circulating is the type that make people sit around and do nothing. Exactly what "they" want. They don't want us to understand what different strains can do for us. ;)
-
And to think people start threads and talk shit about me all because I voted no on the weed issue. Its not my place to tell people what they can or cannot do and my opinionated facts are all based on personal experiance. Its not a "me" or "I" issue.
-
Epic rationalization of Rushs' actions.. Can I use this in class to demonstrate the lengths people will go to defend illegal behavior? For the record, dems do it to..
Of course, that's what intelligent people do. We use our minds to make rational decisions base on reason rather than emotion. When you examine the cost/benefit ratio on this "war on drugs" it's not a good investment. Not even close. Mexico is now one of the most dangerous places on earth solely because drugs are illegal. In any dispute between a legitimate business they have the option to take legal action through the courts. But just like during prohibition, drugs lords don't have that option and have to take matter into their own hands. Take the case of Rush. When you take into account the cost in prosecuting him and Rush having to defend himself versus the damage and/or harm done to society, which by all accounts was zero, a rational person rationalizing would conclude that it's not worth it and such resources can be far better used elsewhere.
Feel free to use this "in class."
-
(http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFiles/picture/548705/699282.jpg)
-
Hehe. It was for his back pain. Which easily explains the doctor shopping, and the buying of pills from his (front) maid. Oh, and the viagra-fuelled trip to visit the nice children of the DR. Guy's a hypocritical shitbag. You wanna defend someone with all your GOP might, that's cool, but find someone who actually deserves your efforts.
Hehe, has nothing to do with politics and political parties. Interesting you should see it through that prism. But when that whole Rush thing came up I found that it had more to do with a person's hatred of Rush than in the case itself. For my part, it's standing by the principle that you, and you alone, own your body. What you do to your body, as long as doesn't impinge on the freedom and rights of others, is nobody's business. Your political party, or anything about you or your beliefs, is completely irrelevant.
Now there are some who would argue that, say a person who eats himself into obesity and a heart attack, or those who take unnecessary risks to their health are a burden to the health care system. But that is a problem of socialism. No one should be forced to pay for another who risks or ruins their health due to irresponsible, unnecessary and/or reckless behavior. When I didn't have health insurance I gave up Jiu-Jitsu training because I knew my propensity for injuries. It gave me that much more of an incentive to get health insurance.
-
Weed did not ruin your life ::). The retarded laws did.
QFT!!!!!!
-
(http://i9.tinypic.com/6btkrc3.jpg)
-
There seems to be a pattern with conservative christian steroid users who have seen the light and now know the evils of rec drugs. They are projecting their own personal fears and weaknesses with regards to rec drugs on to others, cause they can't understand that there are people out there that don't need a "savior" or that can enjoy some weed and be happy and successful.
-
There seems to be a pattern with conservative christian steroid users who have seen the light and now know the evils of rec drugs. They are projecting their own personal fears and weaknesses with regards to rec drugs on to others, cause they can't understand that there are people out there that don't need a "savior" or that can enjoy some weed and be happy and successful.
the christian come back to jesus crowd are the absolut worst hormone users,,they use alot more than hormones in many cases,,but the reborn christians are usualy convicts,,people who didnt have so good life,,the jeff willet type fellas,,they make sins against their so called god on a daily basis by LIEING about their hormone use,,they have no shame
so many in this cult are convicts who take on bodybuilding remain convicts and become reborn christian while still being sinners ,,its so hypocritical in america,,i dont know how one can wake up in the morning and look in mirror and tell him self im a good loving god christian ,,i got back to god and 30 min later make an order of 5 kit gh and 10 vial testosterone lol its not that those are drugs because hormones are not drugs but its the rule of law christian so belive in and in american hormones are controlled...so they are breaking law those good christians ,,now true they wont get in trouble because personal users do not in 99% cases unles they wave it infront of law ,,but! its the idea behind following your god and being good christan,,it just dont sit together well,,
this is just embaresing :D,,but they dont care mmthey are addict ,,they cant function with out test anymore ,,and gh comes with age...
gh15 approved
-
When you examine the cost/benefit ratio on this "war on drugs" it's not a good investment. Not even close a rational person would conclude that it's not worth it and such resources can be far better used elsewhere.
this x 2
-
weed really is one of the worst drugs... at least with uppers like meth, coke, mdma, etc. you're still productive (many times over productive) weed just makes you a retarded stoner, a lot of guys I went to high school with ended up having their lives fucked up because of weed, just like the poster stated above a lot of these guys were on the honor roll before grade 10 or were team captains in sports, after a few years of being introduced to weed most of them had dropped out , some became homeless, a few I saw recently are working at starbucks and walmart for $10 an hour...still living with their parents, and they're in their 30's..
Correlation is not causation. I'd argue that these guys, if they didn't find weed, would find something else to fark up their life. Most people who use weed are just regular people who use it to relax. I like the high, but I'm not a smoker, so it's a bit of work - so these days I indulge, maybe, every couple of years.
-
And to think people start threads and talk shit about me all because I voted no on the weed issue. Its not my place to tell people what they can or cannot do and my opinionated facts are all based on personal experiance. Its not a "me" or "I" issue.
well, most of California agrees with you, so it's not an issue at all anymore. funny how democrats always try to get the biggest pieces of shit in society to vote for them, illegal mexicans, potheads, etc. you never see a democratic rally for business development.
-
Funny how most of you morons avoid a real debate, ignore my and other peoples REAL arguments and base your opinions on blatant lies, misinformation and completely irrelevant personal experience. When any of you are up for a real debate let me know, until then I shall regard you all as ignorant douchebags.
You're a drug addict, you have no say
but hey I'm sure you can quit any day, right ?
-
Alcohol More Harmful Than Crack or Heroin
Written by Tim Locke
Nov. 1, 2010 -- Alcohol abuse is more harmful than crack or heroin abuse, according to a new study by a former British government drug advisor and other experts.
alcohoNeuropharmacologis t David Nutt, MD, of Imperial College London, and colleagues rated 20 different drugs on a scale that takes into account the various harms caused by a drug. Drugs are rated on nine harms a drug causes an individual and seven harms a drug causes society.
The scale, developed by a panel of experts called the Independent Scientific Committee on Drugs (ICSD), ranges from 0 (no harm) to 100 (greatest possible harm). It is weighted so that a drug that scores 50 is half as harmful as a drug that scores 100.
"The highest and lowest overall harm scores ... are 72 for alcohol and 5 for mushrooms," Nutt and colleagues calculate. "The ICSD scores lend support to the widely accepted view that alcohol is an extremely harmful drug both to users and to society."
Alcohol was found to be the most harmful drug to society and the fourth most harmful drug to users.
The findings should come as no surprise: Alcohol has been linked to more than 60 diseases.
"Alcohol does all kinds of things in the body, and we're not fully aware of all its effects," alcohol researcher James C. Garbutt, MD, of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, recently told WebMD. "It's a pretty complicated little molecule."
Alcohol vs. Heroin, Other Drugs
Using the ICSD ratings, Nutt and colleagues rated 20 substances in terms of the overall harm they do. Their results:
Alcohol 72
Heroin 55
Crack 54
Crystal meth 33
Cocaine 27
Tobacco 26
Amphetamine/speed 23
Cannabis (marijuana) 20
GHB 18
Benzodiazepines (e.g. valium) 15
Ketamine 15
Methadone 14
Mephedrone (aka drone, MCAT) 13
Butane 10
Khat 9
Ecstacy 9
Anabolic steroids 9
LSD 7
Buprenorphine 6
Mushrooms 5
Heroin, crack, and crystal meth were the most harmful drugs to the individual, while alcohol, heroin and crack were the most harmful to others.
According to this "multicriteria decision analysis approach," alcohol is almost three times as harmful as cocaine or tobacco.
Nutt and colleagues conclude that aggressively targeting alcohol harm is "a valid and necessary public health strategy."
In an editorial accompanying the Nutt team's report, Jan van Amsterdam of the Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment and Wim van den Brink of the Amsterdam Institute for Addiction research note that the legal penalties prescribed by various nations' drug policies are out of synch with the actual harms caused by different drugs.
"It is intriguing to note that the two legal drugs assessed -- alcohol and tobacco -- score in the upper segment of the ranking scale, indicating that legal drugs cause at least as much harm as do illegal substances," van Amsterdam and van den Brink write.
The editorial and the Nutt study appear in the Nov. 1 Online First edition of The Lancet.
-
Like it or not, taking drugs is a matter of course in the United States. For any generation younger than the baby boomers, blazing a joint at a party is pretty much on par with having a drink. Exactly which drug leads to the use of other drugs is really irrelevant. The fact is, if you are inclined to use drugs, then you will use drugs-- either for recreation or performance enhancement-- there's really no moral difference. Anyone who thinks there is, and smokes cigarettes or drinks alcohol to boot, is a total hypocrite. There is no denying that anabolic steroids, and their accompanying drugs, have a tremendous positive effect on building muscle and burning fat, but the fact is that these same substances are illegal where most bodybuilders live.
However, when you consider the evidence and compare them to the drugs that are legal, there's no sane reason for these drugs to be illegal. Somehow, the war on drugs has scooped bodybuilding up into the fold, and something has to be done to pull it back out and give the bodybuilders back their freedom to make choices regarding their own bodies. If you look at the facts, there's undeniably a strong case to legalize all drugs and put the freedom of choice into the hands of the people where it belongs. America is supposed to be the land of the free, but it really isn't.
When President Nixon declared war on drugs, it was criticized by Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Friedman for the freedom it disallows. According to Friedman, "On ethical grounds, do we have the right to use the machinery of government," [and the tax payer's money], "to prevent an individual from becoming an alcoholic or a drug addict? For children, everyone would answer at least a qualified yes. But for responsible adults, I, for one, would answer no. Reason with the potential addict, yes. Tell him the consequences, yes. Pray for him and with him, yes. But I believe that we have no right to use force, directly or indirectly, to prevent a fellow man from committing suicide, let alone from drinking alcohol or taking drugs." ....No wonder he won a Nobel Prize.
Friedman's sentiments came over a hundred years after those of radical 19th century utilitarian English philosopher, John Stuart Mill, who's famous essay "On Liberty" argued that "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physically or moral, is not a sufficient warrant........ Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign."
Clearly these two great minds understood the basic tenets of personal freedom, and it's interesting that Americans were ultimately allowed these freedoms when the U.S. government decided the legalities of alcohol and tobacco. But what were they thinking when they classified the other drugs, specifically marijuana, cocaine, and subsequently steroids? Personal freedom in these regards were clearly usurped.
Let's take tobacco and marijuana for a moment. Close your eyes and imagine that you're a law maker and you need to decide what to do with these two plants. Bear in mind that they are both plants, having inhabited the earth long before modern man knew what to do with them. How it was even possible that a government could exercise its power on the recreational use of these two plants is no different than deciding the legalities of green tea. The notion is absolutely ludicrous. Nevertheless, one plant is physically addictive, carcinogenic, habit-forming and is responsible for tens of thousands of cases of heart disease, emphysema and cancer related deaths a year. The other is virtually harmless by comparison, non-addictive physically, and in over 100 studies, has shown beneficial analgesic, anti-asthma, and anti-glaucoma properties, not to mention the fact that there are no reported deaths from its use-- probably because even the most ardent pot head doesn't smoke 40 joints a day, but a two-pack-a-day smoker does. Which one do you legalize and promote the world over? The fact that tobacco is legal and pot isn't is absolutely insane. The gateway to harder drugs theory is poppycock too. Anyone who smoked a joint in high school did so after smoking cigarettes in the bathroom or drinking beer out of a keg.
Has Nixon's war on drugs thwarted drug use in this country? Those who answered "yes," line up over there-- the Brooklyn Bridge will be going on sale soon. An easy surf down the internet will substantiate the following statistics; the United States of America sustains 6% of the world's population and we consume 68% of the world's drug production. Nixon, roll over in your grave; we're talking about a $60 billion market in the U.S. today. Imagine the potential tax revenues that the government could be earning. But instead, the U.S. government spends $40 billion a year of tax payer's money keeping Tricky Dick's legacy afloat. That's what happens when law makers drink instead of smoke dope.
Furthermore, the drug war has had 35 years to corrupt law enforcement, encourage gang violence and spread crime, erode civil liberties, and endanger public health by making it impossible to regulate the quality of a widely consumed product. And, the problem is global. In the U.S. and in the countries that supply it, the attempt to wage war on drugs has had effects more devastating than the drugs themselves, including the following social anomalies:
Police departments rely on criminals to do their job. Why? Because drug dealing is a victim-less crime-- the guy buying the drugs is just as happy as the guy selling them. Who is going to report a crime-- the little rat who got popped last week? According to Friedman, the use of these "informants" generates an additional enormous expenditure for the tax payers to bear. These immense sums of money will inevitably lead to corruption-- as they did during prohibition. The use of informants also leads to violations of civil rights of innocent people, to the shameful degree that forcible entry and the forfeiture of property without due process are common today.
And, like with most wars, there are POWs. According to the Department of Justice, In 1970, 200,000 people were in state and federal prisons. At year-end 2007, the total incarcerated population reached 2,413,112 inmates in state and federal prisons. The United States has the highest prison population rate in the world, some 738 per 100,000 of the national population. American prisons are crammed with drug offenders who now account for roughly one in four of all those in state custody and more than half of all federal prisoners. Attempting to win the war on drugs is the reason the far majority of these people, including some bodybuilders, are incarcerated. Do you have any idea what that costs taxpayers on top of the $40 billion it took to put them in there? According to the American Corrections Association, the average daily cost per state prison inmate per day in the US is $67.55. State prisons held 253,300 inmates for drug offenses in 2005. That means states spent approximately $17,110,415 per day to imprison drug offenders, or $6,245,301,475 per year. And don't think they will be better people when they come out.
To make matters worse, the US locks up more African-Americans, disproportionate to its population than any other country on the planet. According to Connecticut's Director of Addiction Services, for every 100,000 American men arrested, 3,109 of them are African-American. Our closest Competitor in the race to lock up black men is South Africa. Even during its pre-Mandela period of overt public policy of apartheid, South Africa incarcerated 729 black men for every 100,000 men. Did you get that? We lock up over four times as many black men as the only country in the world that had an overt political policy of apartheid with an inversely proportional ratio of blacks to whites as compared to America!
The drug war bombs the inner city too. Crowded inner cities concentrate the population making it considerably more advantageous to sell drugs on city streets than country roads. Although, not all drug buyers live in the city, drug dealers do - along with the violence and crime associated with disputes between rival drug dealers. Dealers who only have a burgeoning market because drugs are illegal. Al Capone was to Prohibition what the Latin Kings are to the drug war.
If drugs are bad for you, the war made them worse. This period of drug prohibition has made drugs extremely expensive - relative to their production costs, even though street prices have come down - and of questionable quality. Drug users must consort with criminals and many times become criminals themselves in order to finance their habit. This whole AIDS spreading dirty needle sharing thing is a direct result of pins being hard to get, thanks to the drug war.
The DEA has put so much pressure on physicians who prescribe narcotics for pain, patients in pain are chronically under treated. According to the Federal Department of Health and Human Services, two-thirds of all terminal cancer patients do not receive adequate pain medication. Wouldn't want a cancer patient dying a drug addict, would we? The numbers for non-terminally ill patients are surely higher.
Globally, the war fought here has a harmful effect on the drug producing countries. Columbia, Mexico, Peru and others have suffered the loss of thousands of lives, lost enormous wealth, and have had the stability of their governments undermined - because we have a drug war. If we didn't, we wouldn't have a market for imported drugs - there would be no drug cartels, and all treachery that goes along with them.
To employ Nixon ideology, however noble, to rid bodybuilding of drugs has surely done for bodybuilding what the drug war did for America. I'm sure you caught many of the similarities above. Already, not withstanding the criminal aspects, the illegal drugs used in bodybuilding have created their own set of evils, many of which do parallel street drugs. However, unlike street drug users, the greatest risk to a bodybuilder is still getting caught. But how did this happen?
-
In April 1989, an elite U.S. track-and-field athlete named Diane Williams presented herself before a United States Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington, DC. The Olympic version of Joe Valaci, Williams spilled the roids out of the Olympic gym bag and told what would become a ubiquitous tale of steroid abuse among female track athletes at both the amateur and Olympic levels.
Hot on the heels of Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson's media fiasco which saw him stripped of his 100-meter gold medal at the Summer Olympics in Seoul, Korea, for failing a steroid test, her testimony, and the testimony that followed from other athletes and coaches, insinuated that steroid use was rampant among athletes of all levels, male and female. So inspired by these events, after the hearings Sen. Joseph Biden Jr., D-Del., (now Vice President Biden) drafted a bill which classified anabolic steroids as Schedule III substances, placing them in the same legal category as amphetamines, pain killers, various barbiturates and Benzodiazepines (Valium). The senior president George Bush signed the bill into law in 1990 creating the Anabolic Substance control Act, and history was made. Since that time the US sentencing commission has convened on two separate occasions, and both times raised the penalties for Steroid convictions. Pretty much gone are the days of straight probation for selling even just a couple of bottles of test. The new battle lines were drawn and now the fight to rid the earth of steroids has become another battle in the woefully pathetic, perennial, and continually lost war on drugs. The only thing that subsequently changed was that elite athletes became criminals - no one stopped using steroids, in fact the numbers rose.
Regardless of the new classification, which can draw prison terms of up to ten years, the fastest-growing group of steroid users in the United States is not professional athletes, but everyday body-conscious people looking for the social accolades that come when you're bricked. According to a study conducted 15 years ago by Dr. Charles Yesalis, a professor at Penn State University and a world renowned expert on anabolic steroids, of the estimated 3 million people who have used anabolic steroids in America, 33 percent of those users took the drugs solely for cosmetic effects. Today those numbers are exponentially much higher.
Those millions of users also include those who have admitted to using steroids at some point in their career; entertainers such as pro wrestlers, including Hulk Hogan and Jesse "The Senator" Ventura, and actors such as Sylvester Stallone and former Mr. Olympia turned Governator, Arnold Schwarzenegger, who, quite ironically, chaired President George Bush's Council on Physical Fitness shortly after Bush signed Sen. Biden's crackdown bill on steroids.
For the aforementioned, and a lot of other actors, athletes, sports entertainers, etc., performance enhancing drugs are more or less just part of the job, yet they get the same rap as drugs which are clearly recreational, making extreme physical prowess and the ability to recover as much a sign of illicit behavior as clenched teeth and dilated pupils. Think about that the next time you are at a pro sports event or an Olympic competition or a bodybuilding contest - the majority of those whom you have paid to see perform have committed felonies for your viewing pleasure.
In bodybuilding today those chasing Olympia recognition have no choice but to use drugs. The system has decided for them. Their individual conscience has been eaten by the group's dynamic. The consensus is that bodybuilding actually promotes drug taking despite its clearly stated rules against it. Contract renewals depend on bodybuilders winning contests, or at least placing in the top five or ten. The competition is so great that bodybuilders routinely take extreme risks - not only with their health, but also with their freedom.
Certainly, the moral dilemma any drug taking athlete is faced with stems from the fact that performance enhancing drugs are banned by their sports federation and are also illegal to buy and sell. The wide spread proliferation of drug use in sports should indicate to some one at the top that perhaps drug use should be permitted in sports, thus availing athletes who wish to use them to competent medical assistance and real pharmaceutical drugs at a reasonable price. The fact that they're not is a serious failing of the system because any athlete who wishes to exercise freedom over his own body and use performance enhancing drugs - for whatever reason - must do so under the blind eye of the medical community at large. The AMA, still to this day, proffers the notion that steroids are useless in bettering strength, performance and muscle growth! That's obviously bullshit and it leaves athletes out in the cold with regard to their health by the very community sworn to protect it. I don't know where doctors got the notion that they are only supposed to help sick people, except, of course, plastic surgeons. If you wish to exercise your freedom over your own body and have something augmented, reshaped or removed, and have a big wad of the folding green, they're all over it. But, if you want to reshape your body and do it from the inside out, you're out of luck.
In essence, the first step to allow drug use in sports is to legalize them. At the very least this would diminish the social stigma against drugs - which the law today helps to reinforce. Perhaps then this level playing field crap would diminish as well. With the exception of a very small handful of exceptionally talented and gifted athletes, there is only a level playing field if an athlete uses drugs.
Now, just a soon as the conservative, hypocritical, puritanical lunatics who make the laws in the US put down their Scotch and water and take a big long pull off their Marlboro, they will undoubtedly defend the decision to criminalize steroids because it is in the public interest to do so because these drugs, first and foremost, are dangerous.
As compared to what? Other legal drugs? Ha!
Each year, about 2 billion legal drugs are dispensed to people who rely on them for everything from allergies to diabetes and depression. But, in a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researches found that adverse reactions to prescription drugs may rank somewhere between the fourth and fifth leading cause of death in the United States. (No one has ever died as a direct result of steroid use.) Dr. Bruce Pomeranz, a professor at the University of Toronto, and his team analyzed 39 studies conducted in American hospitals over four decades. The results were startling; of the 33 million patients admitted to hospitals in 1994, more than 100,000 died from toxic reactions to medications that were administered properly, either before or after they were hospitalized. Another 2 million suffered serious side effects. In other words, in 1994 more than 2 1/2 times as many people died from properly using their medication than died from AIDS! Did I mention that no one has ever died as a direct result of steroid use?
Dr. Lucian Leape of the Harvard Medical School paints a bleak picture. While 100,000 deaths is 100,000 too many, those represent just .32 percent of hospitalized patients. "When you realize how many drugs we use," said Dr. Lucian, "maybe those numbers aren't so bad after all." Oh-migod.
Forget about alcohol and cigarettes for a minute, we all know how bad those are for you and I'm not going to keep harping on it regardless of what a travesty it represents, but what about junk food? If steroids and recreational drugs are illegal because they are bad for you, then we need to make junk food illegal too and take the war on drugs to Mickey Dee's. The FDA recently stated that "obesity contributed to the deaths of an estimated 300,000 Americans each year." In 1993, then Surgeon General C. Everett Koop stood on the White House lawn and launched a program called Shape up America! Koop called obesity "a major public health threat" and said it had become the nation's number 2 cause of death behind smoking, "resulting in about 300,000 deaths each year." The American Obesity Association echoed those same statistics. Obesity is also associated with increased risk of cardio vascular disease, certain cancers and diabetes. Yet, Americans keep getting fatter. By last count, 64% were overweight or obese. Yet, kids can still buy high calorie crap, but an adult can't legally buy steroids to be muscular and lean. That makes sense.
Without a doubt, steroids, if taken under a medically supervised plan, in sane dosages, based on prudent research, would be far less harmful than just about any legal drug on the market. But because they are in fact illegal, a very unique set of circumstances exists that clearly undermines the athletes health. Because steroids are illegal to use for performance enhancement, and yet most performance enhancement is drug assisted, some of the best steroids have been taken off the market. Somehow the drug companies were pressured to do so because it became evident that only healthy athletes were using them. Dianabol, Finajet, Anavar, to name a few, are now only manufactured by foreign drug companies and sold on the black market, or by rouge steroid bootleggers. These bootleggers, many of whom are just graduate level chemists with a shop set up in Mexico or in some barn in the middle of Idaho, and access to the internet, are also marketing designers steroids. These are concoctions of hormones specifically geared toward bodybuilding, many times configured with veterinary ingredients. Some are good - really good - so good in fact that many top pros are their exclusive clients and the average Joe bodybuilder can't touch his products. Unfortunately, this is the exception, not the rule. Just like during prohibition, there was bathtub gin, these days there are bathtub steroids of questionable quality, made with questionable ingredients - if any, some are just oil with no drug in it what so ever - and some are down right dirty causing illness, fever, infection and abscesses that sometimes need surgical attention.
The blind eye the medical community turns toward bodybuilding has given rise to self proclaimed experts, gurus, and informed gym rats, most of whom have a better handle on steroids than most MDs. Unfortunately, their knowledge is empirical and some guys come up with ruthless opinions that would have their charges taking inhuman doses of drugs far exceeding the bounds of safety and efficacy. If drugs were legal and if sport began to realize that they need to change their rules and allow drug use, all the athletes who use them - 80% by some estimates, would at least be doing so under proper medical supervision. Any cries of danger made by the medical community with regard to performance enhancing drugs is made possible only because they won't help us. Steroids would be far safer to use if they were legal, but they are not because the US government insists on fighting a war it can't possibly win.
Perhaps it could be argued, finally, that it is human nature to do whatever it takes to do that which one ultimately endeavors to achieve i.e., win a gold medal, set a world record, become a champion, even if doing whatever it takes includes cheating or endangering their health. Hell-O! The athletes of the world have proven one thing for sure - outlaw drugs and they will still use them. It's time to change the damn rules, but we can't do that until athletes get their freedom back and they can't do that until the US government surrenders. How about accepting the fact that athletes will, and do, depart from the rule book- the carrot being dangled before them is just too enticing - and spend the time, energy and money used to combat drugs on providing the athletes who choose to use drugs accurate information, competent medical assistance and access to real, safe, pharmaceutical items. Why should drugs which safely boost performance only be indicated for the sick and the dying?
Like it or not, young athletes today are faced with the fact that drugs are part of sports, and if you've got game, sooner or later you are going to be deciding weather or not the benefits steroids offer are worth the risk of taking them. That is a personal choice, and for a lot of them the answer is going to be yes. That is never going to change, and in America, that choice should be free. We don't need the government to protect us from ourselves, we need them to protect us from middle east terrorists. Legalize drugs and go fight a real war - one America can win. America needs to fight for freedom on all fronts, not just with those who oppose democracy.
The simple fact of the matter is this: Alcohol and tobacco are by far the most lethal consumable items on Earth, having directly claimed many times more lives than all the soft and hard drugs combined, yet these drugs are perfectly legal in the U.S. for anyone over the age of 21 to purchase. These two drugs also account for huge price tags on the health care system, abuse counseling, the justice system, and lost wages and corporate losses -- no different, although probably to a greater degree, than anything drugs would cause. To say that other less dangerous drugs are illegal is violating the rights of anyone with a free mind in America. It has also turned many non criminals into criminals, most notably athletes. If there is to be equality under the law and the government has appointed itself our savior, then they should also criminalize tobacco and alcohol and take them off the market immediately. It only makes sense based on all their arguments against the drugs they now deem harmful and thus illegal. If the government won't do that, then it is incumbent upon them to uphold the very tenets of freedom-- those proffered by Milton Friedman and John Stuart Mill-- and legalize the rest of the drugs and let people make up their own minds and hold themselves accountable. Then, America would truly be "home of the free."
-
spot on by Romono^^^like him or not what he says in the above article is based on common sense and supported by actual facts...unlike these fear mongers that would have you believe the sky is falling if marijuana was to become legal,...
-
LOL...oh brother. I'm almost 18-19 years clean, I've just grown up and seen the light. I've been a Christian for 12 years. You mean I'm a hipocryte if I change my views from almost 2 decades ago? Hahahaha..K!
You've seen the light by becoming a christian? It's more like you've been told what to believe. Believing is: not knowing. So, you don't know, but you believe.
-
And to think people start threads and talk shit about me all because I voted no on the weed issue. Its not my place to tell people what they can or cannot do and my opinionated facts are all based on personal experiance. Its not a "me" or "I" issue.
I'm confused.. You voted no to allowing people to smoke pot, then say it's not your place to tell people what they can or cannot do? Did I read that wrong?
-
Coach is a totally unconscious entity who can't think outside of the letter I or word me. Seems like a decent guy though, just what most people would call new money/soul
Some people would call a guy like him... a dipshit.
-
I'm confused.. You voted no to allowing people to smoke pot, then say it's not your place to tell people what they can or cannot do? Did I read that wrong?
The coach is a christian, and christians are confused.
-
You've seen the light by becoming a christian? It's more like you've been told what to believe. Believing is: not knowing. So, you don't know, but you believe.
The coach is a christian, and christians are confused.
When you suspend logic and independent thought process, you can't help but to fall into the mental bottom feeders category. By far and large, Christians are just insecure wimps who can't handle the reality of the modern world. Which is exactly why their numbers are decreasing over the years.
-
-
When you suspend logic and independent thought process, you can't help but to fall into the mental bottom feeders category. By far and large, Christians are just insecure wimps who can't handle the reality of the modern world. Which is exactly why their numbers are decreasing over the years.
So you know how this world and the universe came into being? You either believe that the universe always existed or that it was created. Neither can be proven and both views are matters of faith.
So you really think that William F. Buckley, every President of the United States, Isaac Newton, Chuck Norris, C.S. Lewis, Martin Luther King, Arnold.... are insecure wimps who can't handle, um, "reality"?
-
If there is a being so powerful enough to create the entire universe, then he wouldn't really need a rest of 1,000 years afterwards then would he?
He/She/It is so powerful but yet can't prove themselves or save starving kids in a third world country? Or maybe He/She/It is just testing them?
As far as the rest of your post goes, there is a difference between being religious and being spiritual. The majority of dumbass Christians are religious. Which is their own mental shortcoming.
-
Roger that. I thought you were talking about hormones.
i LOVE MAKING A WHORE MOAN :D
-
If there is a being so powerful enough to create the entire universe, then he wouldn't really need a rest of 1,000 years afterwards then would he?
He/She/It is so powerful but yet can't prove themselves or save starving kids in a third world country? Or maybe He/She/It is just testing them?
As far as the rest of your post goes, there is a difference between being religious and being spiritual. The majority of dumbass Christians are religious. Which is their own mental shortcoming.
I love that! I hear that all the time. 100% of the time! "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual." Tell me friend, what do you mean by spiritual? Be specific and clear. Spell it out real simple because I have some mental short comings.
BTW, epic non sequitur to my response. I pointed out that one must believe that either matter just simply always existed or that it was created and both views are a matter of faith. So both views suspend logic by your definition. Of course, there may be another alternative which I posed to you and your reply strayed wildly as to why there is evil in the world or God needing to rest. Address the issue, please, if you are able to get past your anger and spite.
I always find it curious how religious people view atheist as being wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger, or animosity towards that person. Not so with the atheist. There seems to be genuine anger, spite and frustration as evidence by your unprovoked insults and name calling.
But one question at a time. Tell me about your spirituality?
-
I love that! I hear that all the time. 100% of the time! "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual." Tell me friend, what do you mean by spiritual? Be specific and clear. Spell it out real simple because I have some mental short comings.
BTW, epic non sequitur to my response. I pointed out that one must believe that either matter just simply always existed or that it was created and both views are a matter of faith. So both views suspend logic by your definition. Of course, there may be another alternative which I posed to you and your reply strayed wildly as to why there is evil in the world or God needing to rest. Address the issue, please, if you are able to get past your anger and spite.
I always find it curious how religious people view atheist as being wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger, or animosity towards that person. Not so with the atheist. There seems to be genuine anger, spite and frustration as evidence by your unprovoked insults and name calling.
But one question at a time. Tell me about your spirituality?
It is interesting what one experiences that is so different from another. For example, you found religious people view atheists as wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger or animosity towards that person and not so with the atheist.. I found it to be the exact opposite. I can certainly think of examples in history where religious people held quite a bit of animosity towards atheists as well as people of a different personal belief i.e. Protestants vs Catholics, Muslims Vs Christians. I personally find most atheists/Agnostics to be indifferent to others personal beliefs while the Christians feel it is their mandate to convert the non believers..
And as far as your experience with hearing "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual" and asking them to be specific and clear...... try that with a Christian telling you what happens after you die, or what is heaven exactly like.... or why does god allow a 4 yr old to be repeatedly raped by his uncle but helps Bill get that job promotion he's been praying about...
-
It is interesting what one experiences that is so different from another. For example, you found religious people view atheists as wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger or animosity towards that person and not so with the atheist.. I found it to be the exact opposite. I can certainly think of examples in history where religious people held quite a bit of animosity towards atheists as well as people of a different personal belief i.e. Protestants vs Catholics, Muslims Vs Christians. I personally find most atheists/Agnostics to be indifferent to others personal beliefs while the Christians feel it is their mandate to convert the non believers..
And as far as your experience with hearing "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual" and asking them to be specific and clear...... try that with a Christian telling you what happens after you die, or what is heaven exactly like.... or why does god allow a 4 yr old to be repeatedly raped by his uncle but helps Bill get that job promotion he's been praying about...
In the past, religious intolerance, i.e., religious people toward the non religious, was rampant and often brutal and cruel. I'm talking about today, my friend. And I'm not talking about Islam. Religion is widely mocked in the secular world. Just take this board as an example. There are a lot more religious people here than you would think but most are too scared or embarrassed to admit it. Just off the top of my head only Coach, Ursus and myself freely admit our faith and speak openly about it and defend it. But we do not insult and condemn non believers unless we are attacked first. Coach may attack others on their political beliefs and/or moral behavior but I've never seen him name call or insult someone based solely on their beliefs unless attacked first.
In answer to your questions: What happens after you die? Heaven or hell. I, nor anyone else, knows exactly what Heaven will be like. To address the problem of evil in the world and why bad things happen to good people is far beyond the scope of this board. But, in brief, man was given free will. Free to choose between good and evil. God could have very easily programmed us to do nothing but good. He did not. To me, a more interesting and fair question is not so much whether a God exists, but is he good?
OK? I can't be anymore specific and clear without further torturing CalvinH with my long winded posts. Now it's your turn. Explain your spirituality.
-
I love that! I hear that all the time. 100% of the time! "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual." Tell me friend, what do you mean by spiritual? Be specific and clear. Spell it out real simple because I have some mental short comings.
You can determine for yourself the difference between being religious and being spiritual. Was Ghandi religious or spiritual? Is the Phelps clan religious or spiritual? Taliban? Dali Lama? If you can't tell the difference, I can't help you.
BTW, epic non sequitur to my response. I pointed out that one must believe that either matter just simply always existed or that it was created and both views are a matter of faith. So both views suspend logic by your definition. Of course, there may be another alternative which I posed to you and your reply strayed wildly as to why there is evil in the world or God needing to rest. Address the issue, please, if you are able to get past your anger and spite.
I never said anything in regards to why there is evil in the world. Who said starving children are evil? It's Gods Will. Are you to argue with that? Add comprehensive reading skills to your short coming list. And why should I have spite and anger? That is foolish. Simply because it conflicts with your fairy tale beliefs? Try again.
I always find it curious how religious people view atheist as being wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger, or animosity towards that person. Not so with the atheist. There seems to be genuine anger, spite and frustration as evidence by your unprovoked insults and name calling.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA! Hypocrisy is a bear trap for Christians in this regard. Last time I checked, the atheist doesn't want to impose an imaginary being beliefs upon the entire country whether it believes the same as they do or not. Last time I checked, the atheist doesn't quote things from a contradictory book and use it to judge others. Last time I checked, the atheist doesn't pick and choose which of the principles of the good book that suit that current views and needs while rejecting the rest in order to feel secure about themselves.
-
It is interesting what one experiences that is so different from another. For example, you found religious people view atheists as wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger or animosity towards that person and not so with the atheist.. I found it to be the exact opposite. I can certainly think of examples in history where religious people held quite a bit of animosity towards atheists as well as people of a different personal belief i.e. Protestants vs Catholics, Muslims Vs Christians. I personally find most atheists/Agnostics to be indifferent to others personal beliefs while the Christians feel it is their mandate to convert the non believers..
And as far as your experience with hearing "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual" and asking them to be specific and clear...... try that with a Christian telling you what happens after you die, or what is heaven exactly like.... or why does god allow a 4 yr old to be repeatedly raped by his uncle but helps Bill get that job promotion he's been praying about...
Exactly. As I stated above regarding hypocrisy being a bear trap....
-
Coach may attack others on their political beliefs and/or moral behavior but I've never seen him name call or insult someone based solely on their beliefs unless attacked first.
Oh so saying liberals won't go to heaven isn't a baseless attack on your fellow Christians?
-
In answer to your questions: What happens after you die? Heaven or hell. I, nor anyone else, knows exactly what Heaven will be like.
you don't know if there even is a heaven let alone what it's like...you may believe there is one but you don't know there is one...theirs a difference...
-
you don't know if there even is a heaven let alone what it's like...you may believe there is one but you don't know there is one...theirs a difference...
Never have I said I "know". Neither do believers. It should have been obvious from my posts. It's a matter of faith whether God does or doesn not exist.
-
I love that! I hear that all the time. 100% of the time! "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual." Tell me friend, what do you mean by spiritual? Be specific and clear. Spell it out real simple because I have some mental short comings.
You can determine for yourself the difference between being religious and being spiritual. Was Ghandi religious or spiritual? Is the Phelps clan religious or spiritual? Taliban? Dali Lama? If you can't tell the difference, I can't help you.
BTW, epic non sequitur to my response. I pointed out that one must believe that either matter just simply always existed or that it was created and both views are a matter of faith. So both views suspend logic by your definition. Of course, there may be another alternative which I posed to you and your reply strayed wildly as to why there is evil in the world or God needing to rest. Address the issue, please, if you are able to get past your anger and spite.
I never said anything in regards to why there is evil in the world. Who said starving children are evil? It's Gods Will. Are you to argue with that? Add comprehensive reading skills to your short coming list. And why should I have spite and anger? That is foolish. Simply because it conflicts with your fairy tale beliefs? Try again.
I always find it curious how religious people view atheist as being wrong and misguided but bear no hatred, anger, or animosity towards that person. Not so with the atheist. There seems to be genuine anger, spite and frustration as evidence by your unprovoked insults and name calling.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAA! Hypocrisy is a bear trap for Christians in this regard. Last time I checked, the atheist doesn't want to impose an imaginary being beliefs upon the entire country whether it believes the same as they do or not. Last time I checked, the atheist doesn't quote things from a contradictory book and use it to judge others. Last time I checked, the atheist doesn't pick and choose which of the principles of the good book that suit that current views and needs while rejecting the rest in order to feel secure about themselves.
Really can't answer a simple question. I can simply evade any and all questions and challenges by saying, "If you don't know I can't help you." It's a simple cop out.
I don't know how you would categorize starving children. How about bad? This is assuming you think evil is bad.
Check again. Who wants to forbid children from voluntarily praying in schools. Who wants to remove "In God We Trust." Who wants to remove all references to the Bible in our society.
We are now coming upon the Christmas season which is the celebration of Christ. Pay attention to the objections to the manger scene of Christ's birth. Not allowing "Merry Christmas" but saying "Happy Holidays" instead.
Last time I checked, atheists pick and choose conduct of behavior based on the principles of their feelings that suit their current needs and views.
It's obvious you are not here to debate or clarify issues or beliefs. Simply to attack and vent. Fair enough.
May God have mercy on your soul.
-
Oh so saying liberals won't go to heaven isn't a baseless attack on your fellow Christians?
Show me where Coach has ever said that being a liberal is a mortal sin condemning someone to hell?
Coach, if you read this please clarify.
-
Never have I said I "know". Neither do believers. It should have been obvious from my posts. It's a matter of faith whether God does or doesn not exist.
meh..there in "lie's" the problem...you have people voting for laws & politicians (that effect us all) based on there "faith" along with churches raking in untaxed cash yet telling people who they should vote for the list goes on & on...religion is the biggest scam this world has ever known...
A man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows. - Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain)
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca the Younger
I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence. - Doug McLeod
Since the Bible and the church are obviously mistaken in telling us where we came from, how can we trust them to tell us where we are going? - Anonymous
Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer. - Anonymous
Blind faith is an ironic gift to return to the Creator of human intelligence. - Anonymous
What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. - Christopher Hitchens
On the first day, man created God. - Anonymous
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts
oh and "in god we trust" wasnt added to our money untill the 1950's so dont get it twisted our founding fathers would not want that on our tender and they didnt...
-
staunch right wing folks do not use logic and reason, deicide.
or like obama who says he wants the economy to recover but passes legislation after legislation that hinders its growth?
sounds pretty logical doesnt it :D ;) ;D
-
meh..there in "lie's" the problem...you have people voting for laws & politicians (that effect us all) based on there "faith" along with churches raking in untaxed cash yet telling people who they should vote for the list goes on & on...religion is the biggest scam this world has ever known...
A man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows. - Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain)
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca the Younger
I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence. - Doug McLeod
Since the Bible and the church are obviously mistaken in telling us where we came from, how can we trust them to tell us where we are going? - Anonymous
Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer. - Anonymous
Blind faith is an ironic gift to return to the Creator of human intelligence. - Anonymous
What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. - Christopher Hitchens
On the first day, man created God. - Anonymous
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts
oh and "in god we trust" wasnt added to our money untill the 1950's so dont get it twisted our founding fathers would not want that on our tender and they didnt...
"I hate quotations. Tell me what you know." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
-
meh..there in "lie's" the problem...you have people voting for laws & politicians (that effect us all) based on there "faith" along with churches raking in untaxed cash yet telling people who they should vote for the list goes on & on...religion is the biggest scam this world has ever known...
A man is accepted into a church for what he believes and he is turned out for what he knows. - Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain)
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca the Younger
I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence. - Doug McLeod
Since the Bible and the church are obviously mistaken in telling us where we came from, how can we trust them to tell us where we are going? - Anonymous
Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer. - Anonymous
Blind faith is an ironic gift to return to the Creator of human intelligence. - Anonymous
What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof. - Christopher Hitchens
On the first day, man created God. - Anonymous
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. - Stephen Roberts
oh and "in god we trust" wasnt added to our money untill the 1950's so dont get it twisted our founding fathers would not want that on our tender and they didnt...
Some great damn quotes