Invite Friends

Topic: LGBT

Trump reverses Obama-era transgender policy: not protected at workplace: agree?

  • Comments: 273 |
  • Votes: 40
  • Share
Picture?type=square
Discussion started by Tok Staff:
The Justice Department issued a memo reversing Obama-era transgender policy: not protected from workplace discrimination. Agree?
Background article: ... Read more
Results in this view: Y-employer's Say 27% - Convince Me 9% - N-treat As Equal 64%
Picture?type=square
  • 35
Picture?type=square
Anonymous-user
Picture?type=square
  • 8
Picture?type=square
  • 5
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
  • 22
Picture?type=square
  • 59
Picture?type=square
By Kevin Basner Let people be their genders they feel most comfortable in! Employers have no right to say what other people can/can't do with their own bodies.
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Anonymous-user
Picture?type=square
  • 122
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin no one is stopping them, just also don't force everyone else to ignore the science of biology.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Capitalists have too much power in this society, and in the next election, they will be stopped.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin I’d rather the capitalists have the power, than the socialists, at least we know our government kill you if you just disagree.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio We don't kill unless you people make i t absolutely necessary. We'd rather EXPEL you people. In fact, the next time that one of your politicians threatens to take STUPID Texas, and SECEDE, why don't you take them seriously, and just do it. You people won't be missed, I'll tell you that.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin You sound like an authentic KGB operative. Have a nice day comrade vinnie.

You feel the same way about the exit Cali movement??
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio No. I only feel that way about you people. California is the REAL America, so they need to stay. On the other hand, Alabama, Mississippi, Texas and the rest of the "Saouth" (misspelled on purpose) are ALIEN to me, so they should go, and take all of their bible-thumping racists with them on their way out. Besides which man, this country is gonna be MAJORITY Black and Latin soon, so there will be no place for the Jeff "I never smoked a joint in my life" Sessions' of the World.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin when california leaves none of the rest will need to. we get rid of pelosi and crew. California isn't real anything.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio But California isn't going -- you people are! I don't know what makes you think that you're in the Majority, you are so out-of-touch with the average Baby-Boomer. You know what REAL baby-Boomers do? They smoke herb, they have pre-marital sex, they are secular, they associate with people of different ethnicities, the inter-racially marry, they want the rich to pay their fair share in taxes. Don't forget what we did...the unrest on campuses, the demonstrations against the War, against poverty, against this STUPID "drug war", against racism...the revolution during the New York Blackout in 1977 came from us, the Disco age came from us, Woodstock came from us...and the vast, VAST Majority of us are PROUD of those things!!! What happened to you, traitor?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin What happened to me? Simply I grew up.

I did a lot of this things you’ve mentioned, but saw no use is smoking dope, screwing around with everything with a hole. After a couple of times the novelty wore off, and I was it for wast it was.

Just think of the influences that those on the left side of the baby boomers have had on current generations, instead of protesting against a war you don’t understand your kids are protesting against free speech, congratulations.

Take California and leave the Union, you can take Oregon and Washington with you and start your own little socialists utopia, and smoke your dope and collect your Government checks.

When it comes to taxes, I agree the rich aren’t paying their fair share, they are paying too much. Here is the breakdown:

The 1% pay 70% of the taxes
The middle 51% pay 30% of the taxes
The bottom 48% pay no taxes

I agree with you, this is not a fair distribution of the tax burden.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio No, you didn't just "grow up" -- you heard the lies coming out of Reagan's mouth, and you actually believed it. There is no "left side of the baby boomers" -- ,that is the HEART, the Majority, if you will, of OUR Generation. You are a turncoat.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin There is only three people I owe loyalty to, God, Family and my country, in that order. When Regan was around I was being the stupid boomer you had talked about.

What had more influence was the fact I spent better that 10 years as a Boy Scout, earning the distinction of being an Eagle Scout.

I know you will try to Demeen that, but I will forgive you in advance, and remind you that your opinion is irrelevant,
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Why should I "demean" the Boy Scouts? Ah, this shows how little you know about me...or about life.

Actually, I used to like Reagan...that is, until he re-ignited that dormant, IGNORANT "War on the American People" -- oops! I meant the "War on", ahem, "Drugs". You see, I DIDN'T become brainwashed as these so-called Reagan Democrats did. I have been Pro-Pot Legalization through all the long years, never did I waver. And now, my side is DEFINITELY WINNING that debate. I was correct all these years.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin With the war on drugs, it is sad that the democrats and progressives became involved, watering down underfunding the processes, making it a dismal failure, same as they did with he immigration process.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Wake up! Prohibition NEVER works...why do you so-called "conservatives" always try? It didn't work with Alcohol during the 1920s, it didn't work with Sexual Repression, it didn't work with abortion, what makes you think it will work now?!!!

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result, or didn't you know that?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin So we should do nothing to curb bad behavior??

Some would call that anarchy.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Smoking herb is "bad behavior" only to you, and your kind. The vast MAJORITY in this country doesn't agree with you, so you wanna impose YOUR, ahem, "values" (if you wanna call them that) on others who don't agree with you!

Some would call that Fascism.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Vince there is a reason why they call it dope...
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman legalize it and treat it as a medical problem sure it is bad for you but do you support the government controling personal behavior, that is not how a free society operates
regulate it, treat it as a medical problem arrest dealers
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin No one wants the FDA to regulate it, they want it like california, you go to the “doctor” (who’s practice is solely handing out perscriptions for dope, and in the next office is the dispensary. Oh Amy the way it is grown in the back office.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman arrest the dealers
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Do that too...
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman and lock them up for long time
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Really? Arrest the Dispensary owners? Marijuana is L-E-G-A-L in California, thank the TRUE God (the God that I believe in). You're starting to sound like little Mikey!

No, don't "treat it as a medical problem" -- treat it as the MIRACLE that it is. People should be allowed to control their own bodies. Remember, I'm not the only one who feels this way, I'm in the M-A-J-O-R-I-T-Y
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman no dude i was thinking of people who sell crack who sell meth who sell smack
you know thee bad stuff
and do some research pot is not harmless
where in gods name did you get that insane idea?
The terrible truth about cannabis: Expert's devastating 20-year study finally demolishes claims that smoking pot is harmless
One in six teenagers who regularly smoke the drug become dependent
It doubles risk of developing psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia
Heavy use in adolescence appears to impair intellectual development
Driving after smoking cannabis doubles risk of having a car crash
Study's author said: 'If cannabis is not addictive then neither is heroin

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2783111/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-Expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html#ixzz4vVL37y9A
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio From what I've read, ALL of those, ahem, "studies", have been debunked. Not addictive, doesn't impair driving or intellectual development, and does not lead to schizophrenia. Those accusations were PROVEN to be lies.

As I said, too Strong-Willed to be convinced. Stop trying.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman so you can still read?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Doesn’t matter if the state makes it legal, it is illegal federally, and federal law enforcement can shut them down,

You must believe in the god that the Catholic’s have, they even engage in canibalism . He is mad at everybody, he is vengeful. The Christian God the rest of us worship to, has the Son Jesus Christ who loves us and is our savior. Who even died and was resurrected for the forgiveness of our sins.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Yeah...amazing, isn't it? After all those years of dealing with the "Devil's weed", I can still tell you about yourself!
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman oh you sad superstitous old man, so catholics were cannibals? okay i was raised protestant though long ago many of us were catholic , to me the major diiference i see is catholic churches are more elaborate have prettier statues, and in the past protestant ism imporved on the relgion in this way catholics burned witches, protestants merely drowned them.. you are sort of pathetic in your ignorance
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Yup, that is what they keep telling me, they believe are literally eating human flesh and drinking human blood. That is cannibalism.

Sadly many Christians still remain in the old covenent, keeping the mosaic law. Instead of embracing God’s grace.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman oh stop i'm a methodist and we did the same thing its a metaphor
dont be such a child
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin That is what I am saying
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Funny thing, but I never called it that, nor does anybody I know, and I know all kinds of people.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Neither did I until I realize it was for dopes
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman vince take some advice some friendly advice from an old drug addict
its all dope
mike is right about one thing
drugs are bad
mkay
they ruined my life
they made it a living hell
you dont need drugs to enjoy life
take a walk
play baseball
go swimming
F786K your wife or girlfriend hell your boyfriend i dont care
drugs just mess you up
it is why they call it dope
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Thanks for the advice, but I will pass on it. Marijuana is harmless...H-A-R-M-L-E-S-S, and that's a documented fact. It NEVER hurt me or addicted me, and I've smoked it since 1969. I've tried other drugs as well, and you know something? They never hurt me either. I am EXTREMELY strong-willed, so addiction is alien to me.

Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Yo Bubba, you're never gonna convince me, so stop trying. Remember what I said about my being "strong-willed"? I was DEAD SERIOUS about that.

Thank the TRUE God (the one that I believe in) that the American public is on my side. I believe that the percentage of TRUE Americans supporting Marijuana legalization is hovering around 64%, and growing. Now, why should I believe you instead of believing MOST Americans...the REAL Americans?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin You have smoked too much of your own dope... it has made you delusional
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Hemp is hardly, at the very least you suffer from carbon monoxide poising, with each toke you take you increase the amount in your blood.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman pot is not harmless
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman your being pig headed
close minded
you refuse to listen to facts
your as bad as a trump voter
or an inti vaxer
your in the same category as someone who rejects evolution or denies climate change
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman An insistence on the banality of the drug is especially dangerous among younger smokers, a population with an epidemic level of pot use. According to the most recent National Survey on Drug Use and Health, the use of tobacco and alcohol among 12-to-17-year-olds has fallen in the past year, but habitual use of marijuana among those 12 and up is increasing.

“If you go into a high school and ask the classroom, ‘Are cigarettes harmful? Is alcohol harmful?’ every kid raises their hands,” Gilman says. “But if I ask, ‘Is marijuana harmful?’ not a hand goes up.”

https://www.bostonglobe.com/magazine/2015/10/08/can-please-stop-pretending-marijuana-harmless/MneQebFPWg79ifTAXc1PkM/story.html

Medical science at its best operates independently of forces that drive the market and its associated politics. It was science that eventually curtailed the power of Big Tobacco and prevented nearly 800,000 cancer deaths in the United States between 1975 and 2000. As marijuana marches toward the same legal status as cigarettes, its potential hazards will require equal attention by science.

The argument here isn’t whether marijuana should be legal. There are champions on either side of that debate. Instead, should the drug become widely available, it’s to our detriment to blindly consider marijuana’s legalization a victory worthy of celebration. We must be cautious when societal shifts can affect health, especially among our most vulnerable populations.

i'm not saying it is as harmful as alcohol but it isnt harmless
where do you get that?
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio "pot is not harmless"

Well I, and many others, say that it is, and you're not gonna change my mind. Remember, "Strong-Willed"? I am perhaps the most Strong-Willed person on the Earth, so I will not change, and no one can change me. Period.
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio "But if I ask, ‘Is marijuana harmful?’ not a hand goes up.”

Well, doesn't that tell you something? Maybe some of the young people know more than you about it.

We are WINNING against the Prohibitionist ANIMALS! Why are you trying to throw a bucket of cold water on this Joyous event? Just celebrate it! My kids smoke pot, and I am PROUD of them. My nephew is a bible-thumping, prohibitionist fool, and I am ASHAMED of him!
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman The terrible truth about cannabis: Expert's devastating 20-year study finally demolishes claims that smoking pot is harmless
One in six teenagers who regularly smoke the drug become dependent
It doubles risk of developing psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia
Heavy use in adolescence appears to impair intellectual development
Driving after smoking cannabis doubles risk of having a car crash
Study's author said: 'If cannabis is not addictive then neither is heroin

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2783111/The-terrible-truth-cannabis-Expert-s-devastating-20-year-study-finally-demolishes-claims-smoking-pot-harmless.html#ixzz4vVL37y9A
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman do some research and get your head out of the sand
it may very well not be as harmful as alcohol
but thats not saying much as alcohol is terribly harmful
pot is very harmful none the less
learn what you are doing to your mind
it is not pretty dude
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman are you a scientist?
many people had that atitude about cigarettes 50 years ago rfused to accept medical studies
and they all died of cancer regardless of whether they beleived it or not
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Prohibition of alcohol hadn't worked since having a drink now and again has been ingrained in our society for thousands of years, illicit drugs have not been. things do tend to work when we are committed to them.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman wait you are wrong there too
people have been using drugs for thousands of years
either we start to execute drug dealers or we just admit we lost the war on drugs because its a medical problem and locking people up has not worked
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Many countries today do execute dealers...
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman maybe we should it works for singapore
they actually give addicts one chance
once chance to clean up
they f&*k up twice and its off to jail for five years
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Most cases call it personal responsibility.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman so you think it should be legal?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin No why have another intoxicant on the roads??
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman good point we should be tough on drunk dirvers
tougher in fact
we handle pot smokers who drive under the influence the way we handle drunk drivers
if people drive under the influence
one month in prison
second offense one year nd a permanently suspended license
third offense? life in prison
who is going to drive high or drunk?
and if they do we lock them up for good
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Tell it to the liberal judges... the laws are already on the books, but ignored but he courts, and if the courts aren’t going to punish the offenders, the police tend not to arrest them.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman over the past 30 years things have gotten much tougher for drunk drivers, the strictest penalties are in new jersey where first offense is a felony and one year in prison, the toughest country on drunk drivers i believe is
In Taiwan, the maximum sentence if someone is injured is 7 years, whereas it is 10 years in Dallas. When it comes to death, the maximum term in Taiwan is 10 years, while in Dallas it is 20 years.
In summary, Taiwan is to be lauded for its initiatives to hand stiffer penalties to drunk drivers, but its claims of world leadership may be a little premature.
https://practicesource.com/taiwans-dui-laws-worlds-toughest/
https://www.usatoday.com/videos/travel/2017/03/24/what-state-has-strictest-drunk-driving-laws/99573616/ starting in 2018 utah wil have the toughest dui laws the limit wil be lowered from .08 to .05
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin I read accounts very often if people who have hurt or killed someone and they are on their 6-7th dwi, si enforcement and prosecutions are not consistent.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman well they need to be we need not argue
drunk driving laws should be ruthlessly enforced
utah has the toughest drunk driving laws
they lowered the limit from .08 to .05, it is .05 all over Europe already.. we need to get tougher on drunk drivers and people who drive on drugs
and the laws must be enforced evenly
i think we both agree a legitimate function of the state is to prevent people from driving drunk
it is a worthy goal
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Get no arguement from me.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman well finally!
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman actually although i would not advocate bringing back prohibition
it is a myth it did not work
alcohol consumption was cut in half
the probelm was it was just too unpopular and created mass disobediance of the law
actually crime during that period stayed about level
the real problem was organized crime as the threat to the civil authority and ensueing corrurption
but prohibition cut alcohol consumption in half
the number of eople hospitalized with alcohol related diseases was cut by 75%
the number of people committed to mental hospitals because of alcohol delerium (that was a thing back then) was cut by 90%
peoples drinking habits were forever reduced
althoug once it was re lelgalized alcohol consumption again increased but never returned to pre prohibition levels
did you know that? http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/16/opinion/actually-prohibition-was-a-success.html
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman What everyone ''knows'' about Prohibition is that it was a failure. It did not eliminate drinking; it did create a black market. That in turn spawned criminal syndicates and random violence. Corruption and widespread disrespect for law were incubated and, most tellingly, Prohibition was repealed only 14 years after it was enshrined in the Constitution.

The lesson drawn by commentators is that it is fruitless to allow moralists to use criminal law to control intoxicating substances. Many now say it is equally unwise to rely on the law to solve the nation's drug problem.

But the conventional view of Prohibition is not supported by the facts.

First, the regime created in 1919 by the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act, which charged the Treasury Department with enforcement of the new restrictions, was far from all-embracing. The amendment prohibited the commercial manufacture and distribution of alcoholic beverages; it did not prohibit use, nor production for one's own consumption. Moreover, the provisions did not take effect until a year after passage -plenty of time for people to stockpile supplies.

Second, alcohol consumption declined dramatically during Prohibition. Cirrhosis death rates for men were 29.5 per 100,000 in 1911 and 10.7 in 1929. Admissions to state mental hospitals for alcoholic psychosis declined from 10.1 per 100,000 in 1919 to 4.7 in 1928.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman Prior to 1937, cannabis had enjoyed a 5000 year history as a therapeutic agent across many cultures. In this context, its blip as an illicit and dangerous drug was dwarfed by its role as a medicine.
http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/how-did-marijuana-become-illegal-first-place
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Hemp was primarily used in making rope.

Look at an old sailing ship and all the rigging was hemp. Hemp was legalized in 1941ish, because of the increased demand for inexpensive ropes.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman primarily but people used to smoke it
granted the potency was not as strong as todays genetically altered stuff
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman A History of Opiate Laws in the United States

Prior to 1890, laws concerning opiates were strictly imposed on a local city or state-by-state basis. One of the first was in San Francisco in 1875 where it became illegal to smoke opium only in opium dens. It did not ban the sale, import or use otherwise. In the next 25 years different states enacted opium laws ranging from outlawing opium dens altogether to making possession of opium, morphine and heroin without a physician’s prescription illegal.

The first Congressional Act took place in 1890 that levied taxes on morphine and opium. From that time on the Federal Government has had a series of laws and acts directly aimed at opiate use, abuse and control. These are outlined below:
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman During hearings on marijuana law in the 1930’s, claims were made about marijuana’s ability to cause men of color to become violent and solicit sex from white women. This imagery became the backdrop for the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 which effectively banned its use and sales.
before that it had been legal for thousands of years
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Dope never held the place of prominance that a fine wine did or still does.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman 1909 – Smoking Opium Exclusion Act
Banned the importation, possession and use of "smoking opium". Did not regulate opium-based "medications". First Federal law banning the non-medical use of a substance.

1914 – The Harrison Act
In summary, The Harrison Act of 1914 was written more to have all parties involved in importing, exporting, manufacturing and distributing opium or cocaine to register with the Federal Government and have taxes levied upon them. Exempt from the law were physicians operating “in the course of his professional practice”

1919 – Supreme Court ratified the Harrison Anti-Narcotic Act in Webb et al., v. United States and United States v. Doremus, then again in Jin Fuey Moy v. United States, in 1920, holding that doctors may not prescribe maintenance supplies of narcotics to people addicted to narcotics. However, it does not prohibit doctors from prescribing narcotics to wean a patient off of the drug. It was also the opinion of the court that prescribing narcotics to habitual users was not considered “professional practice” hence it then was considered illegal for doctors to prescribe opioids for the purposes of maintaining an addiction. It can be argued that today’s addiction medications are not intended to maintain an addiction but to facilitate addiction remission. In which case, this opinion of the court should not preclude practitioners from prescribing buprenorphine or methadone to patients suffering from an addictive disorder.

1924 – Heroin Act
Prohibited manufacture, importation and possession of heroin illegal – even for medicinal use.

1922 -- Narcotic Drug Import and Export Act
Enacted to assure proper control of importation, sale, possession, production and consumption of narcotics.

1927 -- Bureau of Prohibition
The Bureau of Prohibition was responsible for tracking bootleggers and organized crime leaders. They focused primarily on interstate and international cases and those cases where local law enforcement official would not or could not act.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman back in those good old bible days
dude drugs were legal
okay?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Little used in polite society, unlike a goblette of wine.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman in polite society
how polite was society
do some study
it was a pretty rude world dude
thats why people read the bible and needed it
i respect that
but now we have education and science and logic
we dont need superstioon we do better without it
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-secular-life/201410/secular-societies-fare-better-religious-societies
Religion – or so the age-old hypothesis goes – is therefor a necessary glue for keeping society together. And conversely, secularism is a danger to societal well-being. For if people turn away from God and stop being religious, then crime will go up, corruption will increase, perversion will percolate, decency will diminish, and all manifestations of misery and malfeasance will predominate.

It is an interesting hypothesis. Perpetually-touted. And wrong.

Consider, for instance, the latest special report just put out by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (and recently summarized on the website 24/7wallstreet.com), which lists the ten states with the worst/best quality of life. According to this multivariate analysis which takes into account a plethora of indicators of societal well-being, those states in America with the worst quality of life tend to be among the most God-loving/most religious (such as Mississippi and Alabama), while those states with the best quality of life tend to among the least God-loving/least religious (such as Vermont and New Hampshire).
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio That's the same argument that people of the World War II Generation made..."having a drink now and again has been ingrained in our society for thousands of years, illicit drugs have not been". What kinda Baby-Boomer are you?!!! As I said, you are guilty of TREASON to our Generation!
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin I am one who is not loyal to addicts bu the othe country, God and family.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman dude alcohol is a drug
it is the most abused drug
and the one that undisputedly does the most harm
it makes no sense to keep booze legal when we know it does much more harm than pot does
pot isnt harmless just less harmfull
maybe make booze illegal too
but lets not be so hypocritical
hard drugs should stay illegal
i'd treat addiction as a medical issue not a jail crime
but do i want to see fentanol and crack legal?
no way
drugs are horrible
all of them
especially booze
i know i am an alchoholic
it is killing me
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio You are a traitor to the Revolution...that is enough for me. And...my opinion is the majority opinion. Please accept your MINORITY status...racially, you will be in the MINORITY in a few years, so you should get used to it now, Bubba.
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin So why should we have more people high on the highway, aren’t drunks enough for you??
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman why not treat it the same way alcohol is
if you are caught under the influence behind the drivers seat
you get arrested for dui
how can you advocate making pot illegal when alcohol is legal and much more harmful
do you really think the government has the right to regulate personal conduct
is this nazi germany is this the soviet union?
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Why put another intoxicant on the road? There is a big difference between dope and alcohol, is that alcohol is water soluable, meaning that it is out of your system, in 24 hours or less. Dope is fat soluable, meaning that it stays in your system about 7 days. Do you make a law that you can’t have thc in your system Before you can drive?
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman you know half the country is hooked on opiates pushed by big pharma, the dea tried to stop that and the industry spent billllions to nuetralize them, i think everyone time would be much better spent trying to stop big pharma flooding the nation with opiates, pot isnt harmless
but we have an opium epidemic
why go after pot?
its like trying to wipe out soda pop drinking which does make people fat
and ignoring the alcohol problem
i think we really need to set priorities
and to me the opium epidemic is where we should be concentrating our resources not pot
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin I have no love for the drug companies, but that is a separate conversation.

Opiates are legal pot is not. That is why we go after pot.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Bill Dykeman Opiates require a prescription
is it not perverse that pot is not legal while something as deadly as opiates are so loosely regulated and widely abused, please try to catch 60 minutes this week its a scandal about how the government has neutered the DEA so Pharmacitical companies can maximize profits
you think people should have unlimited access to smack?
but pot is the problem, where are the priorities ?
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Instead of worrying about legalizing another intoxicant we should be concerned about helping those who have issues with, their addiction.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin I am fine being a trator to your imagination, rather than being a trator to the nation I defended for 22 years
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman yeah i think he is smoking a bit to much i hate to say it he seems like a nice dude but he isnt making much sense.. so sad
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Why am I not "making much sense"? Is it because I REFUSE to take your, ahem, "advice". You said that you were a dope fiend in the past...well, that NEVER happened to me, and it could NEVER happen. What part of Strong-Willed don't you understand? Being strong-willed PREVENTS me from being a dope fiend, and it prevents me from being brainwashed by so-called "values" that I don't accept.

Perhaps your will wasn't as strong as mine, so you became an addict. Ahh...STRONG WILL...it is definitely a gift!!!
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman you are not basing your view on science
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Bubba, you live in a DREAM WORLD. Wake up! My side is WINNING, so you need to accept defeat.
Picture?type=square
By William Dykeman yeah maybe but maybe that might be a mistake
up until about the mid 70s communism was winning
look at the mess communism did
the nazis were winning till stalingrad
whether or not people hold the possibly mistaken belief that marijuanna is harmless does not make it so having a majority on your side does not make you right majorities often get it wrong one of the flaws in democracy
many people believe the moon landing is fake and evolution is an unproven theory lots of people beleive in angles
does not make angels any more real
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Your side lives in the past...they haven’t gotten over the civil war, you haven’t gotten over Jim Crow, that is on your hands...mr democrat. Even a year later you haven’t even gotten over the election, of a man who was predicted to be president in 2011. All your gains are being rolled back. Even your friends in antifa (designated domestic terrorist group) aren’t going to be able to stop it.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio YOUR side "lives in the past" -- Prohibition, Sexual Repression, Tribalism -- ancient evils that will be squashed soon.

"All your gains are being rolled back"

Really? What about those States where RECREATIONAL Marijuana was legalized? Doesn't sound like a "rollback" to me...the TRUE Americans have spoken! All of those DISGUSTING "confederate" Statues coming down! Abortion and Contraception are ACCEPTED by most TRUE Americans!

As for Anti-Fa...they will SQUASH you conservatives like the insects that you are! And, AGAIN...I am not a Democrat, I am a Socialist...the Democrats are Jellyfish...they Ask...we Socialists don't ask, we TAKE!!! And, since you fear us, you give it up fast!!! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Keeping stoned folks away from the wheel and off heave equipment, and away from making important decisions is living in the past, I’m fine with that.

For those states who legalize recreational use, I feel sorry for the guy who shows up to work having gotten high 2 day before, and is looking at a random urinalysis.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio That's why we hafta stop that evil practice of random drug-testing in the workplace as soon as possible. One more Presidential election should do the trick!!!

Having guys like you secede from this country -- I'm fine with that! Please go and take your bible-thumpers with you on your way out.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin with another 4 years of Donald really should do the trick. Drug testing is not only good business practice, it is also a safety issue in most industries.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Drug testing will die off as more and more States decide to do the right thing by legalizing Reefer. On this issue, you can talk all you want but it is obvious that my side is WINNING!!!!! I mean, how come the Legalization issue usually wins? Have you an explanation for that? No, I didn't think so.

There will not be another 4 years for Trump...revolution coming, or didn't you know that? Whites in the M-I-N-O-R-I-T-Y -- that sounds wonderful! You know that the majority Black and Latins will NEVER vote for Republicans.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin You need to convince the federal government to do so. Anyone that works for the feds, or works for a company that has a contract with the federal government or any organization which accepts monies from the federal government will maintain the urinalysis. That covers a lot of people. By the way that also includes industries under the umbrella of OSHA.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio "You need to convince the federal government to do so"

Well, that's what we're trying to do.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Praise God that the most of those who make the laws do not toke...
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio I will Praise God -- but not for that.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin You’d be happy with everyone stoned and armed...
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio I would be happy with Prohibitionist busybodies staying out of people's faces.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Give up your car/vehicle, surrender your drivers licenses, and we can stay our of your face...
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Stay out of our faces or face Revolution, and defeat.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Revolution, by a bunch of stoners is an oxymoron.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin My last post applies or spend time in the state prisons
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio State Prisons? Why don't you go to :

Colorado
Washington State AND D.C
Oregon
California
Alaska
Massachusetts
Maine
Nevada

...and ask them for their driver's licenses, and then threaten them with State Prison? That would be fun to watch! Even the pigs -- oops! I meant, ah, "cops" -- in those States would laugh at you!!! Accept it, you are a DYING breed.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio When the Revolution comes, it won't be only stoners...and your kind will be incinerated! I could smell the Brimstone from here!

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Perhaps we need to have the Secret Service, come to pay you a visit...
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Dying, not really, I have kids that I teach different skills, we start and end in prayer, and do our projects. I affect 3-6 they affect even more, so the American way of life and it’s traditions get passed to other generations...
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio Wow! What a threat I must be to you that you wanna call the Feds and report me! As I said before, you wouldn't even DREAM of going to Colorado or Oregon and harass the people over there. You bible-thumpers are such robots, no wonder you people are HATED wherever you go.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Vincent D'Emidio What is "the American way of life"? well, that depends on who you ask. Most people will say a good job and family are important. Some others, such as yourself, are not satisfied with that scenario...you wanna interfere in others' lifestyles, and you wanna shove your, ahem, "morality" down others' throats. That seems to make you happy!

You're a very sick man, you know that?
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin the DHS tells us "If you see something...Say something." When you threaten violence against the Nation, the Feds should be notified.

We don't go around harassing anyone, we go around praying for people, especially people like you, and enemy of the nation.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Good job and family sounds good to me. living the morality of the Judeo-Christian faith, which this nation was built on is a good thing to aspire to.

If you don't like it there are plenty of socialist totalitarian states that would welcome you with open arms...
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin You threaten revolution to overthrow the government and they nations, yes you are a threat.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago
Picture?type=square
By Mike Hamlin Why should you leave? There are already established socialist nations, that you would fit right in.

We had a socialist as a candidate, even the democrats didn’t want him so they fixed the primaries so he couldn’t get the nomination.
Reply
  • | about 1M ago