Nick Arnett wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
So the war on drugs is an attempt to stamp out human inclination by
force. Why don't we spend the huge amounts of money we now waste
trying to fight our inclinations on fi
--- Nick Arnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To bring it back to the conversation at hand, it's
> the difference between
> denying that something like rape is related to
> legitimate needs and denying
> any opportunity to meet those needs. Society can
> pretend that such crimes
> have no basis w
At 06:51 AM 8/20/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Ronn!Blankenship
...
> (1) So if "[I] put words in [your] head by saying that [their legitimate
> needs] are denied," by "denial of legitimate needs" do you me
Both Nick and Dan wrote interesting replies to my last post in this
subject, but I haven't had the time or energy to respond properly
and may not for several days as I'm headed out of town soon.
Just wanted to let you know that I'm not ignoring your posts...
Doug
Bed, very soon...
___
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Ronn!Blankenship
...
> (1) So if "[I] put words in [your] head by saying that [their legitimate
> needs] are denied," by "denial of legitimate needs" do you mean
> self-denial
> by the person with the nee
At 01:09 PM 8/19/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Ronn!Blankenship
> So let's talk openly about them here. What are those legitimate needs
> which you believe are denied, and how do you think those needs
> sho
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Ronn!Blankenship
> So let's talk openly about them here. What are those legitimate needs
> which you believe are denied, and how do you think those needs
> should be met?
I think I already gave a number
At 07:28 AM 8/19/03 -0700, Nick Arnett wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
...
> When are we going to wake up and realize that people want to get
> high? From the mild stimulus of caffeine, the outwardly
> innocuousnes
Julia wrote:
> Hm. I thought that Quakerism was a sect of Christianity. How do you
> criminalize a set and *not* criminalize a subset of that set? :)
Good point. Better to be safe than sorry. Let's criminalize Quakerism as
well.
--
"Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreute
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Doug Pensinger
...
> When are we going to wake up and realize that people want to get
> high? From the mild stimulus of caffeine, the outwardly
> innocuousness of nicotine and the destructiveness of alco
Dan Minette wrote:
>
> My positiojn is not really supportive of the war on drugs; there are plenty
> of problems with it. As I stated before, drawing the line after instead of
> before grass seems very reasonable. But, I do think that the position that
> legalizing the sale of all addictive dru
At 09:42 PM 8/18/03 -0700, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: Drugs (was Most Danger
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 11:42 PM
Subject: Re: Drugs (was Most Dangerous States)
> Dan Minette wrote:
> > - Original Message
Dan Minette wrote:
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: Drugs (was Most Dangerous States)
Jose J. Ortiz-Carlo wrote:
From:
- Original Message -
From: "Doug Pensinger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: Drugs (was Most Dangerous States)
> Jose J. Ortiz-Carlo wrote:
> >> From: Doug
Jose J. Ortiz-Carlo wrote:
From: Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
The wrongness of our approach to this problem seems so blatantly
obvious to me that I have to be suspicious of the real motives behind
drug prohibitions.
Doug
According to your theory, which would the
From: Doug Pensinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
The wrongness of our approach to this problem seems so blatantly obvious to
me that I have to be suspicious of the real motives behind drug
prohibitions.
Doug
According to your theory, which would these be?
JJ
_
17 matches
Mail list logo
