Why hate Athiest?

[Mystic]

Can you show studies that display this? We can't just go on your words.

[CleanShavenJesus]

I asked you for evidence and you respond by refusing to provide it. It is almost like you have this song in your head saying something like "DARE lied to us, the church lied to use, the x y and z, it is all propanganda, they are liars, atheists are not drug users, there is nothing wrong with rave music, not all rock musicians use drugs, it is all propaganda propaganda propaganda" and you are saying it over and over and over again and over and over and over again.

I'm done, it's over.

The word "ironic" could never be used better than now.

I didn't respond to the rest of your post because I have no idea why it was even typed.

[Angrboda]

Please post where I have viciously attacked someone else. I don't viciously attack people. I want to see a cut and paste of where I have viciously attacked someone.

"... I think you are a selfish piece of shit."

"I understand people are atheists, that is really not that good, but telling people drugs are not as bad for you as they are is evil." (implying that becca is evil)

"I don't say this that often, as a Christian, but, actually, if this is you, FUCK YOU. ... You are ruining peoples lives."

()


(ETA: This is more dry drunk behavior; shifting the focus to avoid dealing with the real issue of their behavior.)

[jstrodel]

I did not even address her directly, I said "if this is you". How is this viciously attacking her? It seems that you expect a double standard, perhaps towards females, that they deserve extra kindness directed towards them though they may be free to spread much vitriol and much lethal advice. I do not share this with you.

Are you implying that telling people drugs are not harmful for you is not evil? Do you think that you can be an ethical person and say it is safe to take ecstasy? Do you think there is any ethics attached to drug education at all?

How is that "viciously attacking her"?

You took what I said out of context. I said " If you are one of the upper middle class responsible users who is wise and kind and sophisticated enough to show people that they can be recreational drug users and do ok with it while their friends lives all go down the tubes, I think you are a selfish piece of shit."

I think that this is the highest act of kindness to tell people this who mislead people into thinking that drug use will not damage them. I had this done to me when I was about 15 years old.

It was not at intended as a personal attack, and is not any more severe than the many statements that have been directed towards me.

My intention was not to hurt anyones feelings, only to take what is a very personal issue for me and put it in a non-Christian context. I have had friends that have died and I know many people that are now homeless or in jail, one person now who at one time was into ecstasy.

I apologize if my use of the 'F' word offended you, I realize this is not common in Christian circles, I did not say it as a Christian but as a drug addict who has seen his life destroyed by ecstasy and the sort of responsible middle class drug use that is advocated by respectable philosophers such as those on this board.

[Angrboda]

I did not even address her directly, I said "if this is you".

Everybody and their grandmother knew you meant her. We're not that gullible. But nice job of avoiding taking responsibility for your actions.


And what is this, "I had this done to me when I was about 15 years old." ?

Still waiting on these beliefs that you would burn for. Good job changing the subject.

It was not at intended as a personal attack, and is not any more severe than the many statements that have been directed towards me.

Are you seriously using this as justification? "Somebody was mean to me, so I get to be mean to some other third person." If this is the type of morality you got from your faith, I want none of it.

[jstrodel]

I don't think it is mean to rebuke people who advocate drug use. Consider the difference in consequences: one person is rebuked and feels sorry for a few minutes. Another person is led to believe that ecstasy use causes no problems, starts doing ecstasy, starts doing other drugs, at age 45 is a drug addict, is divorced and is homeless.

Which is harsher?

In the future, I will refrain from using the F-word to people, since this offends you.

My purpose in talking the way that I do is to not come off like a condescending evangelist, but as someone who has personally been hurt very badly by drug use and atheism together.

[Angrboda]

I don't think it is mean to rebuke people who advocate drug use. Consider the difference in consequences: one person is rebuked and feels sorry for a few minutes. Another person is led to believe that ecstasy use causes no problems, starts doing ecstasy, starts doing other drugs, at age 45 is a drug addict, is divorced and is homeless.

Regardless of what I feel about this rationalization, just a moment ago you were using the rationalization that it was okay to be harsh with becca because other people were harsh with you. Having it pointed out to you that this isn't adequate justification, you just change to a different story. (This behavior is common among Christian apologists who change their arguments more often than they do their underwear.) You change your facts, arguments, justifications, and explanations at whim; you equivocate, move the goal posts, anything you need to do to justify believing that what you do is right. This is simply another side of casuistry which most of Christianity swore off in the 18th century. Not you however. Whatever works. Your morality, your personal guide to what you should and shouldn't do, doesn't come from the God of Christianity; your god is yourself, and you'll say, do, or think anything necessary to preserve your image of yourself as blameless.

You are the one here who isn't "saved." In Buddhist meditational practice they refer to what are known as "makyo," or illusions; they are the unusual experiences and sensations that can accompany meditation which people may "fixate" on as an important part of meditation. (From Wikipedia, "figurative reference to the kind of self-delusion that results from clinging to an experience and making a conceptual “nest” out of it for oneself.") These "makyo" or distracting sensations and experiences are seen as an impediment to actual spiritual growth and advancement in one's meditation practice. You have become distracted by the "makyo" of Christianity, mistaking the "wonders" for the substance of walking in Christ. And it's keeping you stuck, I imagine. But then, getting hung up on superficial alterations in your state of consciousness is nothing new with you, is it?

In the future, I will refrain from using the F-word to people, since this offends you.

I could care less if you use the 'F' word. I'm not who you (apparently) think I am. But then, that's hardly surprising, as nobody is who you think they are: you are lost inside a fantasy world of your own creation, which has no relation whatsoever to the real world. Swear, don't swear, I do not care.

[jstrodel]

Do you think there could be any possible scenario in which it would be ok to be harsh with people who encourage others to do destructive things?

[Mystical]

Heres the thing strodel, drugs are only destructive to destructive personalities. With the exception of nicotine, alcohol, meth. coke, heroin, or some of the street drugs I know of not. The drug in question, Ecstacy: is NOT habit forming. If there's a drug habit formed with it, it's from an addictive personality, not chemical dependence. That's why you're gettin slack, in my opinion. It's not destructive for all who use it, and the chemicals again: NOT habit forming. From my viewpoint, your case has about as much wherewithal as it would be if you were telling people 'harshly' that they shouldn't tell others that chocolate tastes awesome because some of those people might get a chocolate addiction and become a blimp.

I get your point, though. For some, it can take over their lives and pull them into a whole world. It happened to me, after all. At one point in my younger life I was a pill poppin alcoholic weed smokin mushroom taking coke dealer who stripped for fast cash and hung out with guys who answered their doors with a shotgun pointed at the peephole. It wasn't one particular drug that got me there, however. It was my weak personality--my lack of consideration for my own well being (or self loathing), and I wasn't at the mercy of a drug: they were at my mercy, being used for my will. And my will was to die, but I didn't have the courage to do it myself. So I used drugs (alcohol is a drug) to cover up my feelings, and hey double bonus because at the rate I was taking them they were killin me, anyways.
Most of those I know who still use shrooms or Ecstacy recreationally have no long term ill effects other than the obvious 'come down' which they are aware is coming and take it in stride. Obviously you put your life in someone else's hands if you get any kind of drug from a non-trusted/tested source. If they were legal, one wouldn't have to worry about one hit killers, now would they? Because the drugs like everything else would be regulated and taxed up the ass, and the young people who get them would be well informed. Ah but then, lets look at all those one hit killer cases shall we? Deaths related to MDMA (E), are primarily from hyponatremia, and heatstroke. Almost all those deaths involved alcohol. Hyponatremia caused by anxiety about having heatstroke (or thirst from alcohol use) where a MISINFORMED person drinks 7 liters in an hour and a half. Most of those statistics can be accounted to multiple drug useages and almost all included alcohol. Oh wait though alcohol is legal isn't it? Yep.

So, yes. In my opinion you're spinning your wheels telling people Fuck You for talking about the realities of drug useage. If you really cared, you'd give sound advice as you damn well know people are going to do it anyways. You wanna help? Stop throwing out misinformation or acting like the catholic church by telling people who are having sex that abstinence is the only way to avoid pregnancy. If you want to be an authority on drugs maybe you should know about the subject first and throw out all misinformation and preconceptions before you toss in your hate-filled verbiage.

The death rate for MDMA, assuming that there really were about 60 deaths directly caused by MDMA in 2000, would be roughly 2 in 100,000 users. The death rate from smoking, by contrast, is on the order of 400 per 100,000 users. Even alcohol, America's official "it's not really a drug" drug, nets about 50 deaths per 100,000 users each year. http://www.DEA.org

[jstrodel]

missluckie, a lot of what you are writing about MDMA is true, that it doesn't cause many deaths, that it isn't as habit forming as other drugs like cocaine, and that deaths can be avoided. But your experience tells me what I believe is accurate: that drugs involve a lot more than just the specific effects of the chemicals.

I think it is different to say "if you take MDMA, take lots of water be careful" versus "I took ecstasy, it was awesome, no big deal, test your pills, you'll be ok"

Ecstasy causes other problems though, it is neurotoxic, it causes depression, and it is commonly adulterated. Maybe you can reduce your chances of it being adulterated if you test your pills, maybe you can emphasize that to people. In my experience, people buy those pill testers, and then they get high, and they just pop pills and buy more and pop them. That is what drugs do to people.

So what I think is, regardless of what the paper effects of ecstasy are, how people in certain precisely controlled lab settings, in real life, people commonly take ecstasy with other drugs, take ecstasy and hook up with people in ways that they usually wouldn't (either on the drug or afterwards), take a whole lot more ecstasy than you are supposed to.

You can say "if you do this, you are an idiot, and it is all your fault" but the thing is, the vast majority of people who use drugs end up the same place you and I did. I know plenty of responsible entheogenic erowid visiting smart drug users who have a rationalistic view of the dangers of drugs who started off smoking weed and taking acid and ended up smoking crack, doing oxycontin, etc.

I also do not really buy the concept that ecstasy is not addictive. It may not have the same addictive properties that heroin has, but when you use drugs that are as powerful as MDMA, it changes your whole life. It changes who you are as a person. Your interests change. Your values change. The way that you see the world changes. I have seen people go from being upper middle class geeks to driving down to new york city to buy thousands of pills. That is serious criminal stuff there. Ecstasy changes people, and you aren't going to find that in the science journals that measure everything in perfect laboratory conditions, you are going to find that in the brothels and where the weapons dealers hang out.

That is just the way that it is. If you are one of the ones who has made it through and not gotten into all of that, I'm happy that it didn't happen to you, but I wouldn't feel like you are being compassionate by "creating awareness" that if people just "use responsibly" everything will be ok. The reality is that if you use drugs, you bring everyone around you into it. You will start stealing from people at a certain point. It all depends on how far you want to go.

I hope that I didn't offend anyone.