I thought Thorpe was on a ban?

vjmehra said:
Elite athletes are banned from taking a ton of legal stuff, even some basic painkillers could result in a multi-year ban, so its hardly like they singled her out to make a point!

As for the IOC being not fit for purpose...well yeah that's fair for multiple reasons!
Click to expand...
I also really liked watching Sha'carri run in the qualifiers. She has a lot of spunk, and power. Then her relative dies, and so she smokes a little weed, and so she's kicked out of the Olympics - that sucks, and that's stupid.
 
vjmehra said:
Most of the world?

I know this is a US site, but (rightly or wrongly) the majority of the world does not (currently) agree with the US on this...for starters didn't you guys only agree to legalise it on a federal level yesterday (if I'm understanding things correctly)?

That may of course change, but even across (most of) the more liberal European countries its illegal (with of course varying degrees of enforcement).
Click to expand...

there are a lot of countries that have come out of the stone age and smartened up about incriminating these innocent people.

regardless, i was making a joke, obviously there are a lot of places still stuck in the past. that’s part of what i was addressing, how ridiculous it all is.

Robin Williams said it best:

“Marijuana enhances many things, colors, flavors, sensations.... but you are certainly not f*ing empowered.”

there should be a guy running around enforcing who is drinking what energy drinks and banning them for that.
 
soyale said:
Robin Williams said it best:

“Marijuana enhances many things, colors, flavors, sensations.... but you are certainly not f*ing empowered.”
Click to expand...
I quit weed in the 70s. I'm not against weed, almost everyone I know has gone holic on it and these days it's only the killer stuff. The problem is weed will also enhance the most common experience in humans: Their fat fkn heads. Politicians, "leaders" with imaginations over stimulated trying to steer the world into conglomeration. Hippies, type 11 with a "legit" gig. This is dangerous.
 
straightline said:
I quit weed in the 70s. I'm not against weed, almost everyone I know has gone holic on it and these days it's only the killer stuff. The problem is weed will also enhance the most common experience in humans: Their fat fkn heads. Politicians, "leaders" with imaginations over stimulated trying to steer the world into conglomeration. Hippies, type 11 with a "legit" gig. This is dangerous.
Click to expand...
Whoa. Thats scary
 
straightline said:
I quit weed in the 70s. I'm not against weed, almost everyone I know has gone holic on it and these days it's only the killer stuff. The problem is weed will also enhance the most common experience in humans: Their fat fkn heads. Politicians, "leaders" with imaginations over stimulated trying to steer the world into conglomeration. Hippies, type 11 with a "legit" gig. This is dangerous.
Click to expand...
Give me a break.

truman used to get wasted drunk and fly over foreign countries threatening to drop nukes.

kennedy was on so much medication i doubt he could ever think straight.

you’re telling me the reason the globe is going to hell is because our world leaders are ON WEED?!

im sorry, im not gonna give that one to you man. Thats absurd.
 
Minnesota Phat said:
I agree with you on both of those points.

I just don't think that any governing body should legislate lifestyle beyond what is necessary. In sports, I think that performance-enhancing substances that present health risks should be banned, while anything healthy or anything that does not enhance performance should not be banned. Even drug-testing for steroids and whatnot is intrusive enough - that shouldn't give a governing authority carte blanche to get into the athlete's personal life and legislate how that athlete lives his or her life.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree, the reach does seem over-zealous, especially when a chunk of the substances banned don't actually seem to be performance enhancing anyway!

That said, in this one example, it wasn't an accidental breach, she knew the rules and ignored them, its not like the situation that arises from time to time, when an athlete is given something by the team doctor, only to find that it contained a micro dose of some obscure banned substance and they get a ridiculous ban as a result! Those are the ones I really feel for!
 
soyale said:
Give me a break.

truman used to get wasted drunk and fly over foreign countries threatening to drop nukes.

kennedy was on so much medication i doubt he could ever think straight.

you’re telling me the reason the globe is going to hell is because our world leaders are ON WEED?!

im sorry, im not gonna give that one to you man. Thats absurd.
Click to expand...
"leaders" just front for the supporting mass. Actually, front _to_ the supporting mass and for the supporting cash. Speaking of support, society is on life support. Easy to come up with and revise. People continue to decline.
 
straightline said:
"leaders" just front for the supporting mass. Actually, front _to_ the supporting mass and for the supporting cash. Speaking of support, society is on life support. Easy to come up with and revise. People continue to decline.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, but consider this: I dislike beets. However, I have no desire to give an organizing body the power to ban people from competition for eating beets.

I could say the same about alcohol, or sugar, or caffeine. There's a line to be drawn when the question is whether we should be free to do what we choose, or be dominated by bureaucrats and governments. Heck, I recently had a conversation with a person who thinks that running creates heart risks - should we ban running? Someone everywhere will think that x,y,z is bad for you, but the question is whether you should be banned from making a living because someone disapproves of your lifestyle choices, and my answer is a resounding "NO."
 
Minnesota Phat said:
Fair enough, but consider this: I dislike beets. However, I have no desire to give an organizing body the power to ban people from competition for eating beets.

I could say the same about alcohol, or sugar, or caffeine. There's a line to be drawn when the question is whether we should be free to do what we choose, or be dominated by bureaucrats and governments. Heck, I recently had a conversation with a person who thinks that running creates heart risks - should we ban running? Someone everywhere will think that x,y,z is bad for you, but the question is whether you should be banned from making a living because someone disapproves of your lifestyle choices, and my answer is a resounding "NO."
Click to expand...
There's an intellectual component to casual drug use. Much like chronic abuse, the mindset will drift. When entire cultures are affected by this modulation, you have a problem. I have no stake in this. No plans to own the world. It happens regardless of what I think but, it happens - and at the expense of "my" world.
 
I think entire cultures of substance users were able to build structures thousands of years ago that we still can’t figure out.

The world is digital, there’s not empty space in between your eyes and the spoon. It is code, and if you can figure it out you can effect things seemingly by magic.

Psychedelics definitely tune your brain waves to a different frequency, and it always feels like waking up into the real world. I think it is a wider connection into the pool of consciousness we draw from when we’re born. Crazy stuff.

Marijuana opens the mind a little less than other things but it definitely leads people to be introspective and compassionate. It’s hard to be a bigot, a Karen, or an ace-hoe when you’re all smoked up. That’s part of the reason it’s still illegal in so many places. Those who rule absolutely hate anything that brings people together - unless ‘they’ already own or influence the thing itself. Herb is too natural and too good to be allowed to roam free. It’s breaking through anyway but still under assault.

They can’t use it like TV/movies, professional sports, gladiator games, elections, award shows 😂... Alcohol they love. Everyone open your face!!

Love yo neighbor, question everything. Very crazy times in 2022.
 
straightline said:
I quit weed in the 70s. I'm not against weed, almost everyone I know has gone holic on it and these days it's only the killer stuff. The problem is weed will also enhance the most common experience in humans: Their fat fkn heads. Politicians, "leaders" with imaginations over stimulated trying to steer the world into conglomeration. Hippies, type 11 with a "legit" gig. This is dangerous.
Click to expand...

That must have been some really good weed to last this long!


Jeff Livingston
 
straightline said:
There's an intellectual component to casual drug use. Much like chronic abuse, the mindset will drift. When entire cultures are affected by this modulation, you have a problem. I have no stake in this. No plans to own the world. It happens regardless of what I think but, it happens - and at the expense of "my" world.
Click to expand...
I think it's good to refrain from using drugs or alcohol, and it's good to refrain from eating sugary snacks, etc.

It's when the state starts throwing people into cages that I have a problem with it. Prison doesn't usually cure drug addiction, but it often exacerbates the problems of drug addiction.
 
Minnesota Phat said:
I think it's good to refrain from using drugs or alcohol, and it's good to refrain from eating sugary snacks, etc.

It's when the state starts throwing people into cages that I have a problem with it. Prison doesn't usually cure drug addiction, but it often exacerbates the problems of drug addiction.
Click to expand...
These days you'd have to lock everyone up. Problem is permissiveness. Evolution will become dysfunctional and default to synthetic. Meaning, whatever the life support allows. It's old fiction becoming current events.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top