Range_This11

Nope, not in MN and WI at least. And I've smoked with all sorts of different of people. Even my parents call them joints and did when they were kids too.

I'm starting to finally see my parents start to age and it's an odd thing for me. Finally I will be able to kick my Dad's ass (although probably not for another 10 years).

A glass of red wine every day has time and time again shown to have numerous health benefits. A joint every day will destroy your lungs. It's also illegal to be intoxicated. A few beers won't make an average person intoxicated, the same cannot be said for one joint. A joint will damage lungs just about as much as a cigarette will, but cigarettes are perfectly legal. Also, a joint now and then has just as many health benefits as red wine. Most people, at least where I'm from, consider a joint to only contain marijuana. No tobacco. I know, it's technically not a "joint", then, but that's just what we call it.

Almost all colonists were loyalists, but when the taxation being imposed on you is to pay for something that is not directly affecting you (Britain's wars against France), then it becomes an unfair tax. Even up to the first battle, the colonists remained loyalists. They only wanted fair laws and representation.

Sometimes I don't understand the intolerance and outright douche-baggery by some people when in all likelihood they are okay with alcohol consumption. It's okay, though. California votes to legalize in November and once that passes it's going to domino and then.... :shades:

Good, so can all the crackies stop saying it has to matter and I'll stop being the assuming [wagon]. To us it really does matter, so just be careful if you insult it :)

The human brain is capable of many abstract thoughts that our sober, conscious brains do not think. It is a matter of choice whether or not you want to open the "doors of perception" in your mind, as Huxley puts it (although to be fair, he was referring to Peyote, which would open many more doors than marijuana). Whether you choose to respect these thoughts, views, concepts--whatever you want to call them-- as worthy is a personal choice. Some find meaning, others don't.

I don't have time to find a link, but I believe the tie between schizophrenia and marijuana use is people that are predisposed to schizophrenia and smoke at a young age can develop it much sooner in life. If I remember right...

I'm probably going to get flamed for this, but I thought the first article was very hard to read. The style drew me away from the subject of the article and the grammar was borderline poor at times.

I could go on a stoner-esque soapbox on why weed is my drug of choice, but I'll save it. I enjoy using it and I don't plan on stopping for a very long time. Everyone needs a break from reality once in awhile. I choose to use weed. You may choose racquetball. It's all the same to me.

Because I can definitely type up an argument with hours of research on the bus? I will find some research, I just don't have the time at this moment in time And I will be patiently awaiting your reply :)

Having class is not excuse for having an unsupported argument. I take a full load of credits at a university just the same as you do.

How could YOU possibly be the judge on something like that? That is a boldface assumption based on no facts. That is perfectly natural. You know what isn't natural? The concept of industrial farms that raise millions of animals for the sole purpose of slaughtering them. (Again, I will reiterate: I do not have a problem with local, family owned farms or any of the meat that comes from those farms. I grew up in a rural farming community in Wisconsin, so please do not make the mistake of assuming that I am some city slicker who has never seen a cow before) Okay so maybe it wasn't out of context, now it's just irrelevant. Vegetarians make a conscious choice to not eat meat and I would venture to say that all of us are well aware of the monetary consequences that come along with it. To me, it isn't about the price and I think it's safe to assume most other vegetarians feel the same way. (correct me if I am wrong) I'm not getting emotional about anything. Nothing you say has been backed up by any sort of stats, figures, facts, links (now I know these aren't everything in an argument, but they bring credibility to what you say) and frankly, I'm sick of arguing with a brick wall. It seems that even when presented with glaring evidence to the contrary, you will not falter.

I don't feel like breaking down your argument and addressing things individually, so forgive me, someone else will probably do it. But what I did find at least slightly amusing was the fact that you said this: And then to close out your bulletproof argument you said this: It seems like you're implying that farm animals are somehow less human than we are and, in fact, do not have the right to life over my sister or my dog. Yet in the first quote, you are clearly invoking the right to life argument, claiming that vegetarians are the ones that are immoral. Your supposed "facts" are very contradictory, no? Stop playing the Devil's Advocate or stop trolling. Either way, you aren't very good at it. EDIT: Firstly, I would like you to know that I will eat meat butchered on a local, family farm or from a local meat market. Your "quote" is extremely out of context. The prices that are being compared are NOT what it costs to produce the product, only what it costs to buy it from the store. Huge difference there, and some of us are very prepared to pay more for food that is organic. I like to shop at co-ops occasionally (only because they are VERY pricy), and that's two birds with one stone. Local and organic.

You make a clear distinction between the meat-eaters who've offended you and those who haven't, yet this sentence is aimed at every meat-eater. And you really wonder why people bring up the "holier than thou" thing? For the most part, that statement is true (even if a bit bitter). Although I might take out the "living longer" portion because that's very subjective and has many other factors aside from diet.

You can never understand the world of teaching unless you're thrown in it and do it yourself. I've been teaching a high school drumline for 3 years now and it is the most rewarding experience I've ever had. You learn a lot about what you're teaching and yourself in the process. Everyone on this thread is going to say something different when it comes to qualities they like to see in teachers, and all of those make a good teacher! Teachers should be able to adapt to whatever their students need, no matter the situation. And it should be someone who actually cares about their students, not just the paycheck and the power trip :shades:

Vegetarians that force their views on other people are morons that only need to reaffirm to themselves that what they are doing is holier-than-thou. I only tell people under certain circumstances, this topic being one of them. If someone asks me if I want something with meat on it, I simply say "No, thanks" instead of saying "No, I'm a vegetarian" or "No, I don't eat meat".

The flaw here being it IS being sustained and the only reason for hunger is food distribution and waste NOT lack of production. Ergo the argument of vegetarianism making more food production is flawed in that we do not need more food production; AND people also ignore the chemical pollution of pesticides etc in crop growing and the pollution from vehicles required to plow, sow, water and harvest crops as well as the fact they take more to transport around so more pollution there and grains etc require more processing to result in an edible form than meat whihc again is more pollution. Care to back any of that up with stats or links? The fact remains that meat is an extremely inefficient product to produce and a detriment to the earth. The concept is not that hard to grasp.

The point he's trying to make, I believe, is by showing you the maximum capacity of food an acre of land can produce (using the potato example) when not devoted to feeding livestock. In reality I don't think we would produce all of that food, it's only being used to prove a point and that is that we are wasting precious resources on the unnecessary production of livestock. You can twist the figures all you want, but the fact remains that it is an inefficient system that cannot possibly be sustained given our population. Perhaps 500-1,000 years ago, but not today. Not without severe repercussions. Also, let's not bring world hunger into this debate. It is about the consumption or non-consumption of meat. That type of thing only adds spin.

Full-time college student and I teach winter and summer drumline along with playing gigs around St Cloud for some cash.

The pseudo-manly posts on this thread are so sickening, almost as sickening as the processed garbage you people seem to think is meat. :rolleyes: I am not a vegetarian, I will eat meat that came from an animal someone killed that I know personally or from a local meat market, but I will never touch "meat", or grey-matter, as I like to call it, from any grocery store or restaurant. All I have to say is that if you're oblivious to what you're putting in your body, don't read up on it because you won't look at food the same again. And if you do want to read up on it, I highly recommend "The Omnivoire's Dilemma" :thumbup:

People who are high on public transportation are definitely NOT going to talk to you for 30 minutes non-stop. They are much more concerned whether or not you can tell if they are high.

It's the same concept as having adults only swim. We pretty much have this starting around 11 or 12 o'clock CST when all the younger players go to bed, so that's kind of cool, but it'd be nice to have the option available to us all the time.

It's not about maturity, it's about AGE. Us older players can be as immature as any 13 year old, but just like in real life, we don't like to hang out with 13 year old kids. I know that not every high-level player is going to be 20+ years old, but there is a lot better chance that he or she will be, and THAT is what we want. Or at least what I would like to see.

We need some new faces...er, avatars around here, some of the older members have their heads up their...yeah. So welcome :) I definitely agree with you. Even though a complete overhaul of the fishing skill would be necessary to implement a fish-x option, I don't want to see it happen.