(Dec. 17, 2008  8:15 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:13 PM)Artie Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:11 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:09 PM)Artie Wrote: Alcohol has many of the same effects on your response times and health and can cause egregious side affects such as death. Of course anything in moderation is fine; marijuana is healthy in moderation. Why is marijuana different from alcohol when both, when abused, can cause death? Either both should be legal or illegal; it's a double standard.

My uncle died six months ago from being an alcoholic, so yes I understand where you are coming from. But the effects of alcohol are much milder than some of the drugs we've been discussing. As for marijuana...lol that's all I got to say.

Marijuana, 'shrooms' and salvia are not exactly harsh drugs. Hell, salvia is still a legal substance.

...lol...well...think about the long term effect if you take it consistently. That's the real damage of the drugs. However, you'll probably die faster eating McDonalds everyday.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:20 PM)Artie Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:15 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:13 PM)Artie Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:11 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:09 PM)Artie Wrote: Alcohol has many of the same effects on your response times and health and can cause egregious side affects such as death. Of course anything in moderation is fine; marijuana is healthy in moderation. Why is marijuana different from alcohol when both, when abused, can cause death? Either both should be legal or illegal; it's a double standard.

My uncle died six months ago from being an alcoholic, so yes I understand where you are coming from. But the effects of alcohol are much milder than some of the drugs we've been discussing. As for marijuana...lol that's all I got to say.

Marijuana, 'shrooms' and salvia are not exactly harsh drugs. Hell, salvia is still a legal substance.

...lol...well...think about the long term effect if you take it consistently. That's the real damage of the drugs. However, you'll probably die faster eating McDonalds everyday.

There are many things we do in life that negatively affect us (such as fast foods); drugs seem to be the only ones that are "bad". My point is I should have the right to do whatever I want with my body for the reason that it only affects my own well-being.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:27 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:20 PM)Artie Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:15 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:13 PM)Artie Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:11 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:09 PM)Artie Wrote: Alcohol has many of the same effects on your response times and health and can cause egregious side affects such as death. Of course anything in moderation is fine; marijuana is healthy in moderation. Why is marijuana different from alcohol when both, when abused, can cause death? Either both should be legal or illegal; it's a double standard.

My uncle died six months ago from being an alcoholic, so yes I understand where you are coming from. But the effects of alcohol are much milder than some of the drugs we've been discussing. As for marijuana...lol that's all I got to say.

Marijuana, 'shrooms' and salvia are not exactly harsh drugs. Hell, salvia is still a legal substance.

...lol...well...think about the long term effect if you take it consistently. That's the real damage of the drugs. However, you'll probably die faster eating McDonalds everyday.

There are many things we do in life that negatively affect us (such as fast foods); drugs seem to be the only ones that are "bad". My point is I should have the right to do whatever I want with my body for the reason that it only affects my own well-being.

You are technically allowed to do what you please, but that doesn't mean it's right. If the government wants to moderate something that has a negative impact upon people and society, they should do that. There are Alcohol laws everywhere in the USA. I am not allowed to drink alcohol. People of a younger age are usually much more willing to try different things that will hurt them. Even if you want to try drugs, (I'm not saying you do), it makes no sense to tell that person, "Go ahead, have fun." If you wanted to help that person, you would say, "No, it will hurt you." When it comes to beer, a person may have one beer and be okay. But when they start asking for their fifth beer, you may want to tell them, "No." Why? Because it's about caring for that person's well being. I refuse to stand by and watch someone do something that will hurt themselves, without trying to reason with them, and help them not too. That is how I see things.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:30 PM)Artie Wrote: My point is I should have the right to do whatever I want with my body for the reason that it only affects my own well-being.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:40 PM)Artie Wrote: And one just needs to look at the latter half of that very sentence to see what I am talking about.


Are you really arguing semantics with me?

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:48 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:40 PM)Artie Wrote: And one just needs to look at the latter half of that very sentence to see what I am talking about.


Are you really arguing semantics with me?

You can try arguing semantics if you like, but you will find I know more than I appear to. I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:52 PM)Roan Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:48 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:40 PM)Artie Wrote: And one just needs to look at the latter half of that very sentence to see what I am talking about.


Are you really arguing semantics with me?

You can try arguing semantics if you like, but you will find I know more than I appear to. I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

Ok I'm just going to say this right now and out in the open: You are one arrogant carp aren't you? Get your head out of your carp, carp.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:48 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:40 PM)Artie Wrote: And one just needs to look at the latter half of that very sentence to see what I am talking about.


Are you really arguing semantics with me?

The latter half explains your own well-being. I explained why I would tell you not to do a certain thing for you're own well being, which means I answered your question and progressed through the argument using pathos as a way to feel emotionally bad for you. It's either that or very well misunderstood what you were bringing across.

You can try arguing semantics if you like, but you will find I know more than I appear to. I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:54 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:52 PM)Roan Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:48 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:40 PM)Artie Wrote: And one just needs to look at the latter half of that very sentence to see what I am talking about.


Are you really arguing semantics with me?

You can try arguing semantics if you like, but you will find I know more than I appear to. I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

Ok I'm just going to say this right now and out in the open: You are one arrogant carp aren't you? Get your head out of your carp, carp.

Thank you.

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:54 PM)Artie Wrote: For someone who claims to be so intelligent, I think it's hilarious you're a giant bible-thumper. How about you go through that argument using pathos?

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:55 PM)Roan Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:54 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:52 PM)Roan Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:48 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  8:40 PM)Artie Wrote: And one just needs to look at the latter half of that very sentence to see what I am talking about.


Are you really arguing semantics with me?

You can try arguing semantics if you like, but you will find I know more than I appear to. I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

Ok I'm just going to say this right now and out in the open: You are one arrogant carp aren't you? Get your head out of your carp, carp.

Thank you.

Point proven, once again.

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:04 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote: When arguing, remember that a person does not win through pathos alone. Yes, logos must be applied too, which is what is mostly included in every argument. I'm not here to prove I know more than you about any subject, but I am here to tell you what I do know about certain subjects. If you don't agree with me, then that is your decision.

---

TheUnkownGod Wrote:You can try arguing semantics if you like, but you will find I know more than I appear to. I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

TheUnkownGod Wrote:Roan, I'm not sure why you make such a comment, yet not tell me why. I'm trying to be nice about what I say, yet I'm completely mocked and called arrogant because I have a point to make about something.

The UnkownGod Wrote:Thank you for insulting my religion, when I made no move to strike at your personal beliefs what so ever.

I will try to be nice and explain this to you.

You explained that you know it would only effect your own well being. I understand this. However, if I wanted to be a friend, then I would care for your well being. This is why I stated I was using pathos (emotion) to turn your thoughts. Perhaps you do are not affected by emotion, but the majority of people are. I'm not trying to sound intelligent, and neither am I try to use personal insults (bible-thumper) for instance, to win this argument. If you were an intelligent and respectful person, I would expect you to do the same.

When arguing, remember that a person does not win through pathos alone. Yes, logos must be applied too, which is what is mostly included in every argument. I'm not here to prove I know more than you about any subject, but I am here to tell you what I do know about certain subjects. If you don't agree with me, then that is your decision.

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:14 PM)Artie Wrote:

The UnkownGod Wrote:Thank you for insulting my religion, when I made no move to strike at your personal beliefs what so ever.

I will try to be nice and explain this to you.

You explained that you know it would only effect your own well being. I understand this. However, if I wanted to be a friend, then I would care for your well being. This is why I stated I was using pathos (emotion) to turn your thoughts. Perhaps you do are not affected by emotion, but the majority of people are. I'm not trying to sound intelligent, and neither am I try to use personal insults (bible-thumper) for instance, to win this argument. If you were an intelligent and respectful person, I would expect you to do the same.

When arguing, remember that a person does not win through pathos alone. Yes, logos must be applied too, which is what is mostly included in every argument. I'm not here to prove I know more than you about any subject, but I am here to tell you what I do know about certain subjects. If you don't agree with me, then that is your decision.

You are the one who resorted to an air of superiority when you made the remark "I know more about arguing than you". That was unnecessary and just proved to me you're an insecure person flashing his intelligence on a board intended for children. Then again, you have a typographical error in your user name ...

As for your argument, you're using superfluous and pontificatic vocabulary to get your point across. Most of the time I can ascertain what someone is trying to get across ... but I don't know what the carp you are talking about. How about instead of pontificating and flexing your vocabulary, you actually come out with your point? You have an immense vocabulary; I'm sure it gets you all the honies.

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:14 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote: "I know more about arguing than you".

Obviously I never said that. I said I know about the subject at hand, not that I know more then you. I never said that to you.

TheUnkownGod Wrote:I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:16 PM)Artie Wrote: I think my comment clearly connoted my disbelief of the stupidity of what you were doing.

But hey, we see what we want to see.

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:17 PM)Roan Wrote:

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:14 PM)TheUnkownGod Wrote: "I know more about arguing than you".

Obviously I never said that. I said I know about the subject at hand, not that I know more then you. I never said that to you.

Dude shut up, you just said it:

TheUnkownGod Wrote:I know more about arguing than you know my friend.

lalala you're pissing me off. Stop backpedaling.

Here, I'll even give you the direct link to the post in which you said it:

http://worldbeyblade.org/thread-2512-post-82460.html#pid82460

(Dec. 17, 2008  9:24 PM)Artie Wrote: this argument sucks. there was clearly misinterpretation

let's talk about drugs again. or whatever this topic is about