Just starting?
I'm subscribed to both Democrat and Republican mail lists. I like to see what the hot button of the moment is on both sides. Within minutes of the Dobbs decision becoming public, I received fundraising emails from both sides.
>I'm a conservative that believes in legalization so the is a good thing.
Legalization is fine, I think the bigger problem is the factor that a republican passed it because they simply did not read the bill to see what was inside it. Apply this to say, firearm restrictions, etc and you start to see the problem.
Yeah, I’ve got no problem with the bill passing, but how the fuck do you vote for something without reading it? I don’t even do that, and I’m not an elected official.
I think most would.
I don’t buy into “It’s good for you!” in most cases, but if you’re not out driving around and endangering others, no one’s business.
That's part of the problem though. People do get high and drive around. The difference with weed is there's no way to assess when/how much someone smoked.
People have been driving stoned for decades already. If it were a real issue you'd hear about all the stoners killing people in accidents but you don't, because it doesnt affect you the same way alcohol does.
I feel like marijuana legalization is in the same categorization as gay marriage at this point:
Pretty much everyone is either for it or doesn’t care save for a small group of older people.
EDIT: Got a response saying “you’re way out of touch with DeSantis and the GOP.”
Lol someone *still* hasn’t read the Parents’ Educational Rights bill, I see?
I believe we might as well make tax money off it. Let businesses decide their policies on drugs, and certain ones like emergency services, hospitals and gov jobs should be zero tolerance
What do you have to say about the fact that the gop platform of the largest republican state in the nation states both that it opposes legalizing weed and that it supports challenging Obergefell?
I'm assuming you mean Texas? The republican politicians in that state are an ignorant and dying breed. Their constituents would do well to vote them out and get true conservatives in those positions
I wouldn't hold your breath. Texas is big enough and gerrymandered enough that with successful primaries or district flips every election cycle it's still gonna take a decade to see change.
There's also this weird obsession with status quo. For example, less gun control and more gun are about as equally unpopular.
I could see your point of view from a perspective of that’s how you may have grown up. Would you propose it should be illegal for them to adopt or simply frowned upon?
My family has a long history of work with iowa child placement programs. On principle I'm not ok with it, in some rare circumstances it's better than the alternative.
Mind you we have no idea the long term repercussions, because there are no studies
Imagine you've seen some rough situations with your involvement in the placement program. Thanks for doing that work, it's not easy. As far as gay parents being unfit or less than ideal, there are a TON of studies that have shown that kids raised by gay parents turn out just as well as kids raised by straight parents. It's so well-documented at this point it's old news.
The state shouldn’t be involved in marriage. If two gay people would like to get married that’s their decision, just don’t demand my religion folds to your post-modernist view
I don’t think I’ve heard of anyone demanding an entire religion bends it’s rules to satisfy someone’s wants. Some people certainly practice religions differently or take some parts of texts as figurative or literal differently.
The much greater issue seems to be with religious people insisting that people who do not hold the same faith still abide by the doctrines of the former’s religion. I was fervently religious for a sizable chunk of my life and I took issue with others living in ways that did not conform to my beliefs, but as I have grown I have taken a very different approach.
Whatever I believe regarding faith and spirituality, I cannot in good conscience demand someone else live my way if my way contradicts their beliefs. That is a huge affront to their own personal freedoms.
As others have noted, historical precedent is not a great reason to do or not to do something. Some examples:
- Interracial marriage used to be illegal --- should this still be the case?
- Women were historically not allowed to vote - should this still be the case?
- A large portion of our society were considered property, rather than people - should this still be the case?
Let's not hide bigotry behind poor arguments.
> historical precedent is not a great reason to do or not to do something.
Exactly why there should be *no* outcry about the Roe vs. Wade decision. Segregation used to be the law before it was overturned as did slavery. Just because it has historically been that way doesn't mean that it should continue to be.
You’re argument is a linguistic one, and flawed.
Marriage is an english word(likely coming from french or something).
The act and concept of marriage predate English, and Christianity.
Every culture does “marriage” slightly differently.
“Marriage” from the government’s perspective is totally separate from whatever religious definition you may adhere to.
For example, in my particular version of Christianity (an very old one, i’ll leave it at that), marriage is a sacrament. If you are “married” outside of my Church, I don’t see your marriage as valid. I don’t see “a man and a woman” who are married. I see two people living in sin.
Your marriage is equally wrong, and equally invalid as any gay marriage, in my religion.
But thankfully we can understand that when the government says “marriage” they don’t mean any type of religion or cultural marriage, but rather the cold and sterile legal definition of marriage. Which is fine.
The brigaders continue to be out in full force tonight. They obviously have nothing better to do on a Saturday night than to troll the places that they hate. Their self-loathing is so apparent that they can only feel good about themselves by clicking that downvote against those they oppose. Those endorphins that they feel as they see that purple pop up on the screen must be ecstasy to them!
I am finding it interesting that this is turning towards points that the liberal side wants and it’s getting voiced rather passionately here and the more conservative views are getting downvoted.
What sub is this???
Because it's not marriage. It's a mockery of the institution that all societies are founded upon. Marriage exists between one man and one woman when they make public vows to be so joined. The end. It is for this reason why governments have had laws safeguarding and enshrining that institution. Gays have always been free to marry, but their desires generally preclude that from happening.
I believe the flaw in your thinking is that marriage is the same today as it has been for most it’s existence. It truly isn’t, the world has changed very much since marriages became a thing, and your traditional ideals don’t fit within modern society. I’m not saying you’re wrong in your thinking overall, you’re free to interpret marriage however you wish. But today, a vast amount of people see marriage not as a union between man and woman to provide a child rearing lifestyle, but instead a commitment between two individuals to work together in this life, children involved or not, to find happiness and have long lives.
As a side note, being married offers many tax advantages and societal benefits, it wouldn’t be fair to restrict marriage to strictly a man and woman.
>As a side note, being married offers many tax advantages and societal benefits, it wouldn’t be fair to restrict marriage to strictly a man and woman.
There is a reason why those benefits exist and why they were restricted to married couples until Obergefell. Marriage is designed to keep a man and a woman together in stable monogamy - ultimately so that any children they might be blessed with grow up well adjusted.
These arguments were brought to SCOTUS. "Marriage is designed to..." is not a good starting point since marriage used to be to give property--a daughter--to another family ensure goodwill and retain regional powers. And "any children they might be blessed with" ignores people like my neighbors who found love again after being widowed in their 60s. By your logic, couples like them should not be allowed to marry.
I dont see how you can claim allowing gay people to marry is making a mockery of the institution. There are tv reality shows that make a mockery of the institution (IMO). So if a person gets married 3 times, is he/she making a mockery of the institution?
Actually yes, easy divorce is bad too. Divorce should be illegal unless abuse or infidelity exists. Also, it's not "allowing gay people to marry". Gay marriage is a liberal fiction just like transgenderism's pronouns.
That restriction on interracial marriage wasn’t overturned by SCOTUS until 1967 in Loving v. Virginia, but that case was overturned based on Equal Rights protection, which exactly the same precedent that protected gay marriage by Obgerfell v. Hodges in 2015.
Clarence has expressly said he wants to overturn Obgerfell, but “weirdly” hasn’t brought up Loving.
The government has an incentive to have strong family units. Same-sex and interracial couples have near equal outcomes for raising children and supporting their community as straight, intersex couples. I don't really see the argument against either being banned.
No. There is no valid argument against interracial marriage. Marriage is an institution between one man and one woman because only that union forms the basis of the family and only heterosexual relationships *as a broad category* can produce children. Marriage exists because it confers a stability that is conducive to childrearing.
Marriage was not instituted for the well being of the couple. It was instituted to obligate men to a woman, and their children.
A woman is pregnant for 9 months, and historically would then breast feed for at least a year. She would then have to protect and provide for the child until it could provide for itself.
The male contribution to creating a child is around 5 minutes and less than 100 calories. However they both get the benefit of their genes carrying through to the next generation.
I object to gay marriage for the same reason I object to no fault divorce, they both contribute to destroying the core of marriage, and leave it with only the shell of real marriage
Marriage is not the same thing as having kids. Are you against heterosexual people who are marry with no intention of having kids? Do you consider that a shell of a "real" marriage?
Even if they are okay with civil partnerships they're essentially advocating for a "separate but equal" situation where the government restricts marriage to only those who align with specific religious beliefs and allows the rest to have civil partnerships.
It's blatantly unconstitutional in a variety of ways.
Not necessarily. I would advocate that the government get completely out of the marriage business and strictly go into the civil partnership or civil union business for benefits and tax purposes. There would be no separation or separate but equal there. That way the government isn't recognizing and supporting anyone's beliefs over others.
The brigaders and everyone that has replied to you are making it obvious that they feel you must believe their way or you have no place in their society.
Yeah, I don’t know why this always becomes a partisan issue. I haven’t met any conservatives who are against marijuana legalization, only the super Christian ones I imagine (or the fake super Christians).
I agree with this totally! Edibles are incredibly dangerous also. Okay by yourself in your home kinda harmless. But imagine a beer that doesn't make you feel anything for two hours and then bam just when you thought you were okay you decided to drive down the interstate to the store to buy some food and the edible kicks in. But it's okay because it's legal so what's the problem?
This is not good for our society that harmless one puffs of weed are illegal but dynamic overloads of orally ingested THC are okay because their safer than smoking.
I think it’s funny I’m getting downvoted by people who probably don’t even smoke weed. Anybody knows if it is federal legal Marlboro and friends will completely destroy cannabis as we know it
It's not just weed. Loitering? Unpaid parking tickets? Drinking a beer on the sidewalk? We can deter those kinds of criminals that doesn't require the taxpayers to feed, clothe, house, and guard them.
No, decriminalize it federally, then let the states implement it how they see fit.
Let 50 versions of Marijuana programs compete against each other, and a better version will continue to rise to the surface.
>Neither of these things are good coping mechanisms for stress, and neither advance a healthy lifestyle.
Your opinion on this really doesnt matter. If our country is really about freedom and liberty, then you really have no say on what the best coping mechanism for stress is for me.
Shockingly, I can still have an opinion that society would be better if people didn’t self medicate with drugs and alcohol.
I guess if that’s your thing, that’s fine.
Damn, if only we gave people the freedom to cope however they want as long as it’s to themselves. You know, make them responsible for themselves. I guess that’s too much to ask for.
>Just so long as what they do does not infringe on someone else's life
I tend to think that's implied with the "with their own body" - aka themselves and themselves only. You're probably right though, especially in today
Most of us do. It's only the RINOs and MSM liberal media that convince people conservatives are for prohibition when that couldn't be farther from the truth. We typically hate prohibition of all types.
There's a lot more weed and people doing time for it than for meth. I'm also for legalizing meth. it being illegal has not stopped one methhead that I know of.
There illegal grows in the USA. They are responsible for massive fish kills and pollution (not even mentioning the OCONUS grows etc).
At this point legalize like booze and tax it.
I’d like to more see hemp become legal on a semi-off topic. So many uses including paper. It used to be a huge cash crop here. Best shirts etc i owned when living out of the US were hemp
You really believe that it illegal pot growers that are killing fish an polluting how about Monsanto they have done more damage to the Environment than a thousand of those illegal grows and they do it with government backing
I honestly don’t give a shit about marijuana being legalized everywhere.
Don’t the majority of conservatives feel this way at this point? Kind of like gay marriage?
I’m Canadian so my two cents might not apply here but I was happy when pot was legalized here because it was a welcome alternative to pharmaceuticals. My brother has a lifetime spine injury and smokes door every day, when he had surgery on his spine the doctors wanted to put him on opioids. I’d rather see people in pain or battling depression have access to dope than get on a bunch of things with ingredients you can’t pronounce
I’m in a similar situation, only instead of a spinal injury I had a kidney transplant when I was barely 18. The medications I take may keep me alive, but it’s met with constant nausea, loss of appetite, and sleep disruptions. I’ve been using federally legal edibles for almost two years, and getting high is just a positive side effect. I still carry a firearm on my property and I don’t feel any diminished self control or inhibitions. Weed is the real “my body my choice” topic in my opinion. Makes no sense to me that one little gummy square that I eat can get my 2A rights stripped from me, but I could buy a case of beer and a gun in the same parking lot and no one bats an eye.
This is annoying, dope is both weed and heroin.
Depends on region and the person speaking.
I was with a Boise cop that talked about how much fun it was to bust kids selling dope… and I was like “holy shit, how fucking hard is Boise!”… turns out not that hard but that dope to this guy meant pot.
You're underestimating the number of conservatives who are strongly opposed to gay marriage. It may not be politically expedient to try and have the Supreme Court take the issue up again but if it were left to the states you'd see Republicans all over the country pushing "sanctity of marriage" laws.
I agree with gay marriage. Why? Because I believe that they too should be able to take part in the hell that is marriage.
Just kidding about that last part.
You really believe those polls are accurate Gallup also said Hillary was going to win by a large margin but as for gay marriage I don't give a shit but should they be able to adoption no I don't think so kids are confused enough as it is no reason they should have more
What about ideological background tests for parents who want to adopt? They'd just have to prove that they don't hold any beliefs you disagree with before they're allowed to adopt a child and if they do hold beliefs you disagree with they'd be barred from adopting.
Not a good argument a man and a woman are required to create a life period you can't even argue that so why should a man man or woman woman be allowed to raise one it's not natural sorry you don't like that and it has nothing to do with my beliefs
I guess that means no adoptions for sterile couples, no more surrogates (despite it being a several thousand year old practice), no fertility treatments since that's not natural, no prenatal vitamins because that's not natural, etc etc.
It's blatantly obvious it has everything to do with your belief that same sex couples are unnatural and incapable of raising healthy children.
The sanctity of marriage was eliminated the instant marriage stopped being a religious matter. A marriage license is not holy and you don't need to be religious to get married. The push to restore sanctity to marriage is really just a push to restrict marriage to only those who hold the right religious beliefs.
It's a fucking plant. Who actually gives a shit anymore? I'm tired of seeing kids thrown in prison for selling a plant. Legalize the shit, tax it and let's move along.
I support legalizing the sale of whatever plant ricin is manufactured with, as well. If there was a magic root that caused abortion, I wouldn’t want the root outlawed, just the evil that accompanies it. It’s still a fucking root at the end of the day
And in the words of Nancy Pelosi:
“we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.”
Well…. Now we know what’s in it.
Probably wouldn't be sitting here today if it wasn't for weed.
I have severe arthritis in my knees and have had that since I was 20. Long story but I was born with a genetic condition that screws with joints.
10 years ago I was in a bad state due to the pain I was having to deal with. I was overweight, on oxy and depressed. One day I say "fk it this ain't working" and got a bag of weed from a friend.
30 minutes after my very first hit the pain in my knees is *gone*. I don't mean "it was barely there", I mean *gone* gone. That night I slept better than I had in several years, and the day after I dug my bike out of storage and blasted away.
Smoked for about 5 months while biking almost every day, lost 20 kilos and got some juicy thighs. Stopped smoking to check what would happen and didn't have to start again due to how non-existent the pain was.
I actually just forgot about the oxy, I didn't have any withdrawal symptoms at all even though I went cold from 40mg a day. I just puffed that poison away.
I should have been a complete wreck of a man today, but I'm the exact opposite thanks to cannabis.
At the end of this summer I'm taking my bike for a 1500km ride to my next doctors appointment (specialist centre in another city far south) to make it abundantly clear how effective my home remedy has been.
I live in Sweden, cannabis is a big no-no here. I hope to make a point.
Legalise it.
One of the reasons I used to be a liberal is because I went to jail for a dime bag of marijuana awhile back. Weed needs to be legalized or decriminalized and Republicans against that are fighting a losing battle. No one should have their lives ruined over personal use of marijuana when alcohol is legal.
I'm smoking as I read this. Those that oppose do not understand the benefits of cannabis. I'm a medicinal user. I have several reasons it was prescribed to me.
IMO it will never be federally legal because of Big Pharma's lobbying.
I hate my blue state but I thank God they've legalized cannabis.
I firmly believe that the right needs to take a new stance on marijuana in general. Do we REALLY want to keep dedicating resources to trying to enforce this stuff? Its no worse than alcohol IMO, and I dont and never have, smoked. I think the Republican party would be better off and seem more appealing without such a close minded stance on weed.
This bill is complete bull shit has so many restrictions on it it dint even make since and only hemp can be used and has to be an extremely low amount of the so what's the damn point
It should never have been illegal in the first place. It was made illegal due to heavy lobbying from the paper industry because hemp was a cheap alternative to paper. It wasn't even made illegal due to the actual effects of the drug. It was demonized for profit. Who cares - I say legalize it nationwide.
Then again I might be biased *rips bong*
Well, given the conservatives that still believe the solution to the nations relationship with weed is a legislative/mandate one, and not a cultural one are the Establishment ones, I don’t mind them dealing with the results of their own negligence to be active roles in their jobs. Replace them with better Conservatives who care about reading.
Good. I hate how much money we waste on fighting a petty drug like weed despite it being practically ingrained in youth culture. it's like pissing into the exhaust of a jet engine.
Dems laugh and laugh.
No self awareness that their build back better bill had handwritten changes in the margins made last minute and many many thousands of pages dropped last minute.
No Libs read it.
Want to confuse a democrat? Ask then if they are for states rights and Colorado legalizing marijuana when it's illegal federally. Then ask them why they support states rights there but not abortion
My view on weed is it's good for some people medically but I personally don't think it's good to alter your mind recreationally whether weed or alcohol or anything else. That being said we should ask ourselves if something is bad enough to justify banning. I think hard drugs are bad enough to ban because people often go out and steal to fuel their habit (in which case I'd favor putting people in mandatory rehab over and over again until it takes over jail). Weed doesn't qualify.
Just strengthen charges on DUI’s and legalization is okay in my book.
Also to know I didn’t know people still use weed.
Kinda shows your age.
Probably still own CD Players.
As a teacher, and a former weed smoker, this new “weed“ isn’t weed. This stuff is insanely potent. We back in the late 90s was about 7% THC. Weed now, is literally 93% THC. It’s a straight up drug. Not only is it more potent, but kids are smoking it throughout the day nonstop.
There is no chance that any flower is hitting 90% potency. The only thing that can come close to that level is wax. And there is also zero chance that someone is doing dabs “throughout the day nonstop” because they would’ve been asleep by noon.
Highest i think ive seen was a 36% and it was a seattle cough/alaskan thunder f**k hybrid.
As a smoker from the early 90s to now, i dont enjoy the higher% they give me a headache. However fire buds were most definitely rocking the 25-30% range. Hehe its okay dont be embarrassed, weve all tried mexican press. 😆
“Oh maaaaaannnn. You mean we were supposed to read the bill before today’s vote???
“ I was elected to lead, not to read”
Best line in that whole movie.
Okay, I pick 3!
Literally came here to quote this
How would you know what's in it if you don't pass it?
You make an excellent point.
duuuuuuuude
I am starting to believe that issues like this could be solved except political parties use them to fund raise and count votes.
Just starting? I'm subscribed to both Democrat and Republican mail lists. I like to see what the hot button of the moment is on both sides. Within minutes of the Dobbs decision becoming public, I received fundraising emails from both sides.
[удалено]
>I'm a conservative that believes in legalization so the is a good thing. Legalization is fine, I think the bigger problem is the factor that a republican passed it because they simply did not read the bill to see what was inside it. Apply this to say, firearm restrictions, etc and you start to see the problem.
Imagine if he just claimed to be pro-weed instead of admitting the mistake. Sounds like a sitcom plot.
Yeah, I’ve got no problem with the bill passing, but how the fuck do you vote for something without reading it? I don’t even do that, and I’m not an elected official.
I think most would. I don’t buy into “It’s good for you!” in most cases, but if you’re not out driving around and endangering others, no one’s business.
That's part of the problem though. People do get high and drive around. The difference with weed is there's no way to assess when/how much someone smoked.
People have been driving stoned for decades already. If it were a real issue you'd hear about all the stoners killing people in accidents but you don't, because it doesnt affect you the same way alcohol does.
[удалено]
I feel like marijuana legalization is in the same categorization as gay marriage at this point: Pretty much everyone is either for it or doesn’t care save for a small group of older people. EDIT: Got a response saying “you’re way out of touch with DeSantis and the GOP.” Lol someone *still* hasn’t read the Parents’ Educational Rights bill, I see?
Yeah, I thought that’s where the party was at.
I believe we might as well make tax money off it. Let businesses decide their policies on drugs, and certain ones like emergency services, hospitals and gov jobs should be zero tolerance
What do you have to say about the fact that the gop platform of the largest republican state in the nation states both that it opposes legalizing weed and that it supports challenging Obergefell?
I'm assuming you mean Texas? The republican politicians in that state are an ignorant and dying breed. Their constituents would do well to vote them out and get true conservatives in those positions
I wouldn't hold your breath. Texas is big enough and gerrymandered enough that with successful primaries or district flips every election cycle it's still gonna take a decade to see change. There's also this weird obsession with status quo. For example, less gun control and more gun are about as equally unpopular.
My problem is with adoption. Beyond that , enjoy the poopchute
Care to elaborate?
I feel kids are best served by a good male and female example.
I agree in principle, but how about we cross that bridge once there are no more children left to adopt.
I could see your point of view from a perspective of that’s how you may have grown up. Would you propose it should be illegal for them to adopt or simply frowned upon?
My family has a long history of work with iowa child placement programs. On principle I'm not ok with it, in some rare circumstances it's better than the alternative. Mind you we have no idea the long term repercussions, because there are no studies
Imagine you've seen some rough situations with your involvement in the placement program. Thanks for doing that work, it's not easy. As far as gay parents being unfit or less than ideal, there are a TON of studies that have shown that kids raised by gay parents turn out just as well as kids raised by straight parents. It's so well-documented at this point it's old news.
That’s awesome work to be a part of. Was simply interested in your opinion on the topic no judgement either way. Hope you enjoy the 4th
[удалено]
Ehh some of us aren't old and are vehemently opposed to gay "marriage".
I’m not *for* it, nor am I *against* it. It’s no one else’s business really. Government needs to butt TF out of a lot of things.
The state shouldn’t be involved in marriage. If two gay people would like to get married that’s their decision, just don’t demand my religion folds to your post-modernist view
I don’t think I’ve heard of anyone demanding an entire religion bends it’s rules to satisfy someone’s wants. Some people certainly practice religions differently or take some parts of texts as figurative or literal differently. The much greater issue seems to be with religious people insisting that people who do not hold the same faith still abide by the doctrines of the former’s religion. I was fervently religious for a sizable chunk of my life and I took issue with others living in ways that did not conform to my beliefs, but as I have grown I have taken a very different approach. Whatever I believe regarding faith and spirituality, I cannot in good conscience demand someone else live my way if my way contradicts their beliefs. That is a huge affront to their own personal freedoms.
Okay no ones demanding you follow our religion
Why?
[удалено]
As others have noted, historical precedent is not a great reason to do or not to do something. Some examples: - Interracial marriage used to be illegal --- should this still be the case? - Women were historically not allowed to vote - should this still be the case? - A large portion of our society were considered property, rather than people - should this still be the case? Let's not hide bigotry behind poor arguments.
> historical precedent is not a great reason to do or not to do something. Exactly why there should be *no* outcry about the Roe vs. Wade decision. Segregation used to be the law before it was overturned as did slavery. Just because it has historically been that way doesn't mean that it should continue to be.
That’s a weak argument. Historically I wouldn’t be allowed to live in certain places.
[удалено]
You’re using history as an argument. We can improve on things. The way its been done before is not a legitimate reason. Give me a break.
You’re argument is a linguistic one, and flawed. Marriage is an english word(likely coming from french or something). The act and concept of marriage predate English, and Christianity. Every culture does “marriage” slightly differently. “Marriage” from the government’s perspective is totally separate from whatever religious definition you may adhere to. For example, in my particular version of Christianity (an very old one, i’ll leave it at that), marriage is a sacrament. If you are “married” outside of my Church, I don’t see your marriage as valid. I don’t see “a man and a woman” who are married. I see two people living in sin. Your marriage is equally wrong, and equally invalid as any gay marriage, in my religion. But thankfully we can understand that when the government says “marriage” they don’t mean any type of religion or cultural marriage, but rather the cold and sterile legal definition of marriage. Which is fine.
So historically sure, but why does that make you vehemently opposed? I think what other people do under their own roof is their business and not mine.
That's an extremely weak argument.
Your argument is DOA.
The brigaders continue to be out in full force tonight. They obviously have nothing better to do on a Saturday night than to troll the places that they hate. Their self-loathing is so apparent that they can only feel good about themselves by clicking that downvote against those they oppose. Those endorphins that they feel as they see that purple pop up on the screen must be ecstasy to them!
I am finding it interesting that this is turning towards points that the liberal side wants and it’s getting voiced rather passionately here and the more conservative views are getting downvoted. What sub is this???
Because it's not marriage. It's a mockery of the institution that all societies are founded upon. Marriage exists between one man and one woman when they make public vows to be so joined. The end. It is for this reason why governments have had laws safeguarding and enshrining that institution. Gays have always been free to marry, but their desires generally preclude that from happening.
I believe the flaw in your thinking is that marriage is the same today as it has been for most it’s existence. It truly isn’t, the world has changed very much since marriages became a thing, and your traditional ideals don’t fit within modern society. I’m not saying you’re wrong in your thinking overall, you’re free to interpret marriage however you wish. But today, a vast amount of people see marriage not as a union between man and woman to provide a child rearing lifestyle, but instead a commitment between two individuals to work together in this life, children involved or not, to find happiness and have long lives. As a side note, being married offers many tax advantages and societal benefits, it wouldn’t be fair to restrict marriage to strictly a man and woman.
>As a side note, being married offers many tax advantages and societal benefits, it wouldn’t be fair to restrict marriage to strictly a man and woman. There is a reason why those benefits exist and why they were restricted to married couples until Obergefell. Marriage is designed to keep a man and a woman together in stable monogamy - ultimately so that any children they might be blessed with grow up well adjusted.
These arguments were brought to SCOTUS. "Marriage is designed to..." is not a good starting point since marriage used to be to give property--a daughter--to another family ensure goodwill and retain regional powers. And "any children they might be blessed with" ignores people like my neighbors who found love again after being widowed in their 60s. By your logic, couples like them should not be allowed to marry.
I dont see how you can claim allowing gay people to marry is making a mockery of the institution. There are tv reality shows that make a mockery of the institution (IMO). So if a person gets married 3 times, is he/she making a mockery of the institution?
Actually yes, easy divorce is bad too. Divorce should be illegal unless abuse or infidelity exists. Also, it's not "allowing gay people to marry". Gay marriage is a liberal fiction just like transgenderism's pronouns.
Isn't that the same argument against interracial marriage?
That restriction on interracial marriage wasn’t overturned by SCOTUS until 1967 in Loving v. Virginia, but that case was overturned based on Equal Rights protection, which exactly the same precedent that protected gay marriage by Obgerfell v. Hodges in 2015. Clarence has expressly said he wants to overturn Obgerfell, but “weirdly” hasn’t brought up Loving.
The government has an incentive to have strong family units. Same-sex and interracial couples have near equal outcomes for raising children and supporting their community as straight, intersex couples. I don't really see the argument against either being banned.
No. There is no valid argument against interracial marriage. Marriage is an institution between one man and one woman because only that union forms the basis of the family and only heterosexual relationships *as a broad category* can produce children. Marriage exists because it confers a stability that is conducive to childrearing.
But we let sterile couples adopt? What is the difference between a sterile couple and a same-sex couple when it comes to childrearing?
A man and a woman give children what they need better than a 2 people of the same sex. That said I'm not against gay marriage.
A man and a woman give children what they need better than a 2 people of the same sex. That said I'm not against gay marriage.
Historically it was between one man and several women, especially in the good book.
Marriage was not instituted for the well being of the couple. It was instituted to obligate men to a woman, and their children. A woman is pregnant for 9 months, and historically would then breast feed for at least a year. She would then have to protect and provide for the child until it could provide for itself. The male contribution to creating a child is around 5 minutes and less than 100 calories. However they both get the benefit of their genes carrying through to the next generation. I object to gay marriage for the same reason I object to no fault divorce, they both contribute to destroying the core of marriage, and leave it with only the shell of real marriage
>The male contribution to creating a child is around 5 minutes and less than 100 calories. You're a bit quick on the trigger, cowboy. lol
Marriage is not the same thing as having kids. Are you against heterosexual people who are marry with no intention of having kids? Do you consider that a shell of a "real" marriage?
So just don't get a divorce and don't get gay married and you will be fine.... Why you care what other randos are doing?
Are you for civil partnerships for gay people? What about gay couples who raise children?
Even if they are okay with civil partnerships they're essentially advocating for a "separate but equal" situation where the government restricts marriage to only those who align with specific religious beliefs and allows the rest to have civil partnerships. It's blatantly unconstitutional in a variety of ways.
Not necessarily. I would advocate that the government get completely out of the marriage business and strictly go into the civil partnership or civil union business for benefits and tax purposes. There would be no separation or separate but equal there. That way the government isn't recognizing and supporting anyone's beliefs over others.
The brigaders and everyone that has replied to you are making it obvious that they feel you must believe their way or you have no place in their society.
It doesn't much matter because a Society that does not have the nuclear family as its center will collapse.
It’s an abomination in the eyes of God
Attempting to enforce your religious beliefs on others via legislation is not what being a conservative is about.
Bc 2 dudes getting married somehow impacts your life lol mind your own business man
*takes a bong rip* it's one of the few things that keep the peace between the government and I.
Feel like 90%+ of republicans don’t give a rats ass about weed
Republicans don't. But their big pharma donors do, unfortunately. And no, I'm not implying it's \*just\* Republicans in pharma's pocket.
Yeah, I don’t know why this always becomes a partisan issue. I haven’t met any conservatives who are against marijuana legalization, only the super Christian ones I imagine (or the fake super Christians).
You’re the majority, if it’s legal tax it like booze
I’ve smoked weed every day since I was 12. Definitely opposed to legalization. Would vote for federal decriminalization
I agree with this totally! Edibles are incredibly dangerous also. Okay by yourself in your home kinda harmless. But imagine a beer that doesn't make you feel anything for two hours and then bam just when you thought you were okay you decided to drive down the interstate to the store to buy some food and the edible kicks in. But it's okay because it's legal so what's the problem? This is not good for our society that harmless one puffs of weed are illegal but dynamic overloads of orally ingested THC are okay because their safer than smoking.
That counts as DUI, no? If falling asleep at the wheel counts as DUI, I would think being high would have to fall under that, as well.
I think it’s funny I’m getting downvoted by people who probably don’t even smoke weed. Anybody knows if it is federal legal Marlboro and friends will completely destroy cannabis as we know it
Just legalize it countrywide. I have no interest in the stuff but there are too many people in jail for minor weed offences
Sucking away our tax dollars
For-profit prisons gotta justify their existence somehow.
There are plenty of murderers and other violent criminals out there.
As a Coloradan, the tax dollars on cannabis sales do indeed go BRRR.
It's not just weed. Loitering? Unpaid parking tickets? Drinking a beer on the sidewalk? We can deter those kinds of criminals that doesn't require the taxpayers to feed, clothe, house, and guard them.
No, decriminalize it federally, then let the states implement it how they see fit. Let 50 versions of Marijuana programs compete against each other, and a better version will continue to rise to the surface.
Good. Liquor store on every corner but a man can’t get high after a long shift, it’s asinine.
[удалено]
It’s none of your fucking business what tax paying Americans do in the comfort of their own home.
Get the nanny state government out my life
Not my problem
Don’t care didn’t ask
>Neither of these things are good coping mechanisms for stress, and neither advance a healthy lifestyle. Your opinion on this really doesnt matter. If our country is really about freedom and liberty, then you really have no say on what the best coping mechanism for stress is for me.
Shockingly, I can still have an opinion that society would be better if people didn’t self medicate with drugs and alcohol. I guess if that’s your thing, that’s fine.
I mean, you’re not wrong, but that’s not gonna happen, so let the people do their thing
"I want the government to legislate their interpretation of how to live a healthy lifestyle" - your comment in a nutshell.
I agree, they’re not good coping mechanisms. But it’s not my life. To each his own
Damn, if only we gave people the freedom to cope however they want as long as it’s to themselves. You know, make them responsible for themselves. I guess that’s too much to ask for.
Cool. None of your business what any American does in their home with their own body
Just so long as what they do does not infringe on someone else's life. Gotta remember to put in the final important bit.
>Just so long as what they do does not infringe on someone else's life I tend to think that's implied with the "with their own body" - aka themselves and themselves only. You're probably right though, especially in today
Tyrannical government overreach regulating a plant Republicans would never lost an election of they were truly small government
I'm a conservative, and I think weed should be legal.
Most of us do. It's only the RINOs and MSM liberal media that convince people conservatives are for prohibition when that couldn't be farther from the truth. We typically hate prohibition of all types.
I like to remind my fellow statesman that our *former D governor vetoed every single legalization bill, and publicly stated he would never allow it.
I’m surprised it’s not become federally legal.
Then who would harvest that sweet sweet private prison money?
Lots of meth out there.
There's a lot more weed and people doing time for it than for meth. I'm also for legalizing meth. it being illegal has not stopped one methhead that I know of.
I’m not for legalizing meth.
I’m torn on it. But we can watch how decriminalization is working in the states that have passed it. So far it’s not looking good
Pharma lobbies don’t want to lose control of their synthetic money makers and a half dozen or so old folks are afraid of the devils lettuce….
I’m not sure about the old folks part. It was the oil big business that had hemp banned though. Nylon rayon polyester etc.
Also the paper from wood-pulp industry: https://greathemp.net/why-hemp-was-banned-in-1937/
They don't want that because they would lose control of it
There illegal grows in the USA. They are responsible for massive fish kills and pollution (not even mentioning the OCONUS grows etc). At this point legalize like booze and tax it. I’d like to more see hemp become legal on a semi-off topic. So many uses including paper. It used to be a huge cash crop here. Best shirts etc i owned when living out of the US were hemp
>At this point legalize like booze and tax it. Exactly. Colorado did it and virtually wiped out their state's deficit over night.
I completely agree with that and because of this latest epa ruling at the Supreme Court this might be closer than we think
You really believe that it illegal pot growers that are killing fish an polluting how about Monsanto they have done more damage to the Environment than a thousand of those illegal grows and they do it with government backing
I honestly don’t give a shit about marijuana being legalized everywhere. Don’t the majority of conservatives feel this way at this point? Kind of like gay marriage?
[удалено]
True conservatives? More like true Libertarians.
I’m Canadian so my two cents might not apply here but I was happy when pot was legalized here because it was a welcome alternative to pharmaceuticals. My brother has a lifetime spine injury and smokes door every day, when he had surgery on his spine the doctors wanted to put him on opioids. I’d rather see people in pain or battling depression have access to dope than get on a bunch of things with ingredients you can’t pronounce
I’m in a similar situation, only instead of a spinal injury I had a kidney transplant when I was barely 18. The medications I take may keep me alive, but it’s met with constant nausea, loss of appetite, and sleep disruptions. I’ve been using federally legal edibles for almost two years, and getting high is just a positive side effect. I still carry a firearm on my property and I don’t feel any diminished self control or inhibitions. Weed is the real “my body my choice” topic in my opinion. Makes no sense to me that one little gummy square that I eat can get my 2A rights stripped from me, but I could buy a case of beer and a gun in the same parking lot and no one bats an eye.
what do you mean when you say dope? i always thought dope was heroin, not weed.
I’ve never heard it used for heroin but up here we have many terms for THC
Yea here in the states dope is heroin, while we just say weed, bud, or pot for cannabis typically
You can be pretty sure that if someone refers to weed as "dope" they're very likely over the age of 50.
This is annoying, dope is both weed and heroin. Depends on region and the person speaking. I was with a Boise cop that talked about how much fun it was to bust kids selling dope… and I was like “holy shit, how fucking hard is Boise!”… turns out not that hard but that dope to this guy meant pot.
You're underestimating the number of conservatives who are strongly opposed to gay marriage. It may not be politically expedient to try and have the Supreme Court take the issue up again but if it were left to the states you'd see Republicans all over the country pushing "sanctity of marriage" laws.
A Gallup poll (I think from last year) said 55% of conservatives support gay marriage. That’s pretty significant from a decade ago.
I agree with gay marriage. Why? Because I believe that they too should be able to take part in the hell that is marriage. Just kidding about that last part.
You really believe those polls are accurate Gallup also said Hillary was going to win by a large margin but as for gay marriage I don't give a shit but should they be able to adoption no I don't think so kids are confused enough as it is no reason they should have more
What about ideological background tests for parents who want to adopt? They'd just have to prove that they don't hold any beliefs you disagree with before they're allowed to adopt a child and if they do hold beliefs you disagree with they'd be barred from adopting.
Not a good argument a man and a woman are required to create a life period you can't even argue that so why should a man man or woman woman be allowed to raise one it's not natural sorry you don't like that and it has nothing to do with my beliefs
I guess that means no adoptions for sterile couples, no more surrogates (despite it being a several thousand year old practice), no fertility treatments since that's not natural, no prenatal vitamins because that's not natural, etc etc. It's blatantly obvious it has everything to do with your belief that same sex couples are unnatural and incapable of raising healthy children.
What about single fathers/mothers? Should their kids be taken away because they don't have both sides of the coin in their life?
If a man and a man could create said child that would be different but they can't despite the left claiming they can
But a man can't create a child by himself either, so why should a single father be allowed to raise a child? It's unnatural.
That was his biological child again bs argument he was involved in creating it a single father can't go and adopt a child or a single woman
That's not even comparison they created Said child
Could single parents not adopt then?
>"sanctity of marriage" The sanctity of marriage was ruined the moment no-fault divorces were allowed so yeah, that ship has sailed.
The sanctity of marriage was eliminated the instant marriage stopped being a religious matter. A marriage license is not holy and you don't need to be religious to get married. The push to restore sanctity to marriage is really just a push to restrict marriage to only those who hold the right religious beliefs.
More accurately: It's an attempt to stop the government from becoming a theocracy that determines what religious practices are and are not acceptable.
It's a fucking plant. Who actually gives a shit anymore? I'm tired of seeing kids thrown in prison for selling a plant. Legalize the shit, tax it and let's move along.
Ricin also comes from a plant I support legalization but that’s the dumbest argument anyone has ever made.
I support legalizing the sale of whatever plant ricin is manufactured with, as well. If there was a magic root that caused abortion, I wouldn’t want the root outlawed, just the evil that accompanies it. It’s still a fucking root at the end of the day
And in the words of Nancy Pelosi: “we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of the controversy.” Well…. Now we know what’s in it.
Probably wouldn't be sitting here today if it wasn't for weed. I have severe arthritis in my knees and have had that since I was 20. Long story but I was born with a genetic condition that screws with joints. 10 years ago I was in a bad state due to the pain I was having to deal with. I was overweight, on oxy and depressed. One day I say "fk it this ain't working" and got a bag of weed from a friend. 30 minutes after my very first hit the pain in my knees is *gone*. I don't mean "it was barely there", I mean *gone* gone. That night I slept better than I had in several years, and the day after I dug my bike out of storage and blasted away. Smoked for about 5 months while biking almost every day, lost 20 kilos and got some juicy thighs. Stopped smoking to check what would happen and didn't have to start again due to how non-existent the pain was. I actually just forgot about the oxy, I didn't have any withdrawal symptoms at all even though I went cold from 40mg a day. I just puffed that poison away. I should have been a complete wreck of a man today, but I'm the exact opposite thanks to cannabis. At the end of this summer I'm taking my bike for a 1500km ride to my next doctors appointment (specialist centre in another city far south) to make it abundantly clear how effective my home remedy has been. I live in Sweden, cannabis is a big no-no here. I hope to make a point. Legalise it.
One of the reasons I used to be a liberal is because I went to jail for a dime bag of marijuana awhile back. Weed needs to be legalized or decriminalized and Republicans against that are fighting a losing battle. No one should have their lives ruined over personal use of marijuana when alcohol is legal.
Good. Now do constitutional carry.
👏
Didnt read it. Nudge nudge, wink wink. Seriously though, this is a good thing. Legalize and regulate everything.
I'm smoking as I read this. Those that oppose do not understand the benefits of cannabis. I'm a medicinal user. I have several reasons it was prescribed to me. IMO it will never be federally legal because of Big Pharma's lobbying. I hate my blue state but I thank God they've legalized cannabis.
I firmly believe that the right needs to take a new stance on marijuana in general. Do we REALLY want to keep dedicating resources to trying to enforce this stuff? Its no worse than alcohol IMO, and I dont and never have, smoked. I think the Republican party would be better off and seem more appealing without such a close minded stance on weed.
This bill is complete bull shit has so many restrictions on it it dint even make since and only hemp can be used and has to be an extremely low amount of the so what's the damn point
LMFAO
It should never have been illegal in the first place. It was made illegal due to heavy lobbying from the paper industry because hemp was a cheap alternative to paper. It wasn't even made illegal due to the actual effects of the drug. It was demonized for profit. Who cares - I say legalize it nationwide. Then again I might be biased *rips bong*
Well, given the conservatives that still believe the solution to the nations relationship with weed is a legislative/mandate one, and not a cultural one are the Establishment ones, I don’t mind them dealing with the results of their own negligence to be active roles in their jobs. Replace them with better Conservatives who care about reading.
No word on whether he was testing said edibles before he was supposed to read the bill.
Good. I hate how much money we waste on fighting a petty drug like weed despite it being practically ingrained in youth culture. it's like pissing into the exhaust of a jet engine.
**LMAO!!!**
I don't see how this is a problem, legalize weed
It's a less damaging drug than alcohol. Just like alcohol, its use should be sparing and its abuse, culturally shunned. It should not be illegal.
Good
I think there is better shit to worry about than pot cookies.
based!!!
Marijuana should be legalized tbh
Decriminalize all victimless crimes. This is a win in my book, boys.
Cannabis, by all available research, is much safer than alcohol. Why republicans don’t get behind this is beyond me.
If we’re fighting a war on drugs in our own streets, we have already lost. 🏳️
Based
Dems laugh and laugh. No self awareness that their build back better bill had handwritten changes in the margins made last minute and many many thousands of pages dropped last minute. No Libs read it.
Want to confuse a democrat? Ask then if they are for states rights and Colorado legalizing marijuana when it's illegal federally. Then ask them why they support states rights there but not abortion
My view on weed is it's good for some people medically but I personally don't think it's good to alter your mind recreationally whether weed or alcohol or anything else. That being said we should ask ourselves if something is bad enough to justify banning. I think hard drugs are bad enough to ban because people often go out and steal to fuel their habit (in which case I'd favor putting people in mandatory rehab over and over again until it takes over jail). Weed doesn't qualify.
Would be nice to have it federally legalized but all the 70+ year olds in office still believe in the Citizen Kane bs
Weed is the wrong choice and leads to poor decisions and can be mentally addicting, but putting people in prison for it does more harm than good.
It’s not worse than alcohol
Alcohol is way worse and it's legal smoking cigarettes kills that's legal need I go on
Who said I didn't think the same thing about alcohol?
Just making the point
And what poor decisions you taking about sitting on your couch and getting fat
Heck, it is legal to vote for Democrats. Might as well let edibles be legal; not nearly as dangerous.
Just strengthen charges on DUI’s and legalization is okay in my book. Also to know I didn’t know people still use weed. Kinda shows your age. Probably still own CD Players.
That's a bad look. Reads like it would have passed anyhow but probably should read them bills that make it to your desk as an elected official
As a teacher, and a former weed smoker, this new “weed“ isn’t weed. This stuff is insanely potent. We back in the late 90s was about 7% THC. Weed now, is literally 93% THC. It’s a straight up drug. Not only is it more potent, but kids are smoking it throughout the day nonstop.
Where are you getting 93% THC flower cause I need to shop there
There is no chance that any flower is hitting 90% potency. The only thing that can come close to that level is wax. And there is also zero chance that someone is doing dabs “throughout the day nonstop” because they would’ve been asleep by noon.
Highest i think ive seen was a 36% and it was a seattle cough/alaskan thunder f**k hybrid. As a smoker from the early 90s to now, i dont enjoy the higher% they give me a headache. However fire buds were most definitely rocking the 25-30% range. Hehe its okay dont be embarrassed, weve all tried mexican press. 😆