cHoDaBoY 0 #26 May 31, 2004 QuoteQuotePot leads to harder drugs This falacy has been admitted to by the most highest ranking anit-drug crusaders in the federal gov't. Pot does not lead to harder drugs. This myth is nothing more then a "scare tactic" used in the 80's, and has been admitted to as such by the people who said it. Ok I guess I'm going to have to be more clear since everyone wants to pick appart a simple example. Youre right pot does NOT necessarly lead to harder drugs, but is definetly a stepping stone. How many people do you know that started off smoking pot and then moved on to harder drugs? Now how many do you know that just started off using hard drugs? _Am. Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #27 May 31, 2004 QuoteYoure right pot does NOT necessarly lead to harder drugs, but is definetly a stepping stone. How many people do you know that started off smoking pot and then moved on to harder drugs? Now how many do you know that just started off using hard drugs? Sure, Of all the hard drug users I know, I presume they've all smoked pot. I also presume they've also eaten hot dogs. Hot Dogs MUST be a stepping stone to hard drugs! I'll say it again: The idea that pot "leads" to harder drugs has been proven false, and admitted as propaganda by the government. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #28 May 31, 2004 QuoteI also presume they've also eaten hot dogs. So we're back to the oral sex thing thenRemster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Luv2Fall 0 #29 May 31, 2004 I have to agree with you on this one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #30 May 31, 2004 the title of the article is purposely misleading to make more people want to read it. As much as you want to picture a teacher standing in front of a classroom, dildo in hand, preparing to demonstate oral sex to the class, it's not a very likely scenario. iirc, it looks as though oral sex will be added to the standard sex-ed curriculum. This isn't about shoving oral sex in their face* it's about making them feel more comfortable with the idea of, "hey oral sex doesn't just have to lead up to intercourse." And according to their study it seems to be helping. I know plenty of people who have smoked pot and never did anything else**, and I know of numerous "realationships" that involved oral sex and nothing further. *I know, I know... I'm sorry **no other harder drugs I mean Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #31 May 31, 2004 QuotePot leads to harder drugs. Oral sex leads to sex. What a load of bollock! It doesn't have to - not by a long shot - otherwise a larger percentage of the country would be crack heads! Just because they smoke a joint - some may have even inhaled!! We need to get a balance and start trusting the kids - they're not all stupid. Try listening to some some time.... you'd be surprissed what they already know. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cHoDaBoY 0 #32 May 31, 2004 QuoteQuoteYoure right pot does NOT necessarly lead to harder drugs, but is definetly a stepping stone. How many people do you know that started off smoking pot and then moved on to harder drugs? Now how many do you know that just started off using hard drugs? Sure, Of all the hard drug users I know, I presume they've all smoked pot. I also presume they've also eaten hot dogs. Hot Dogs MUST be a stepping stone to hard drugs! I'll say it again: The idea that pot "leads" to harder drugs has been proven false, and admitted as propaganda by the government. _Am Hotdogs? whats are you talking about? What does a hotdog have to do with drugs. You can make all the food comparisons you want, but the fact is that most hard drugs users have started out smoking pot. Ill repeat again "im not saying that smoking pot necessarly leads to hard drugs" So all Im saying is that introducing kids under 16 to oral sex is a bad idea. It can and will most likely lead to sex. I hope none of you out there plan on sitting down with your teenage daughters and explaining the basics of giving oral sex. Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cHoDaBoY 0 #33 May 31, 2004 Ok lets try this: #1 "Encouraging schoolchildren to experiment with oral sex could prove the most effective way of curbing teenage pregnancy rates, a government study has found." Ok now my version #2 Encouraging schoolchildren to smoke pot could prove the most effective way of curbing teenage crack use, a government study has found. What do you guys think about that? Think one or the other is right? or maybe both? Anyone have a hotdog comment? Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoostedXT 0 #34 May 31, 2004 Everyone that I know has smoked pot either just once or is still smoking. I personally dont smoke, hell I dont even drink. Not one of them has ventured to use harder drugs. I agree with I forget who said it but it was used as a scare tactic in the 80's. Also doesnt the fact that low MAO often lend a hand in someones addiction to risk or drugs? Its not pot that leads to someone wanting to do crack, but more the person wanting to do crack. I think the implimentation of making students aware of oral sex during sex education is a good one. I dont think its "Ok kids watch while I lay on the desk here and my husband Bob goes down on me." Its more educational and descrete. Sex ed. in my school consisted of why sex has become so prominant and widely accepted unlike back in the 40-50's. Protection, and understanding of what a male goes through in life, and the female period. Nothing about bending Miss Mary Jane *edited* over and her pretty pink panties. I would guess tis oral sex stuff is the same. Hello Mrs. Bass...my sex ed teacher was smoking, oh soooo hot, and I got the sex ed award. Hello ladies....lol JoeFor long as you live and high you fly and smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry and all that you touch and all that you see is all your life will ever be. Pedro Offers you his Protection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cHoDaBoY 0 #35 May 31, 2004 OK, well i guess we will never see eye to eye on this topic. I for one, will NOT encourage my kids to experiment with oral sex. But different strokes for different folks. May I suggest the pam anderson video for educational purposes Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BoostedXT 0 #36 May 31, 2004 cHoDaBoY> do not understand that they are not having live demostration? Porno's playing? "Ok kids watch while Sara here give Peter Oral." Its going to be taught like sex is going to be taught. Do you think we should get rid of that completely also? What about teaching kids about the drugs? Oh because surely we teach them the bad things about drus theyare going to want to use them right? Its not a free for all oral sex in class. Its awareness. joeFor long as you live and high you fly and smiles you'll give and tears you'll cry and all that you touch and all that you see is all your life will ever be. Pedro Offers you his Protection. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
slug 1 #37 May 31, 2004 QuoteQuotePot leads to harder drugs This falacy has been admitted to by the most highest ranking anit-drug crusaders in the federal gov't. Pot does not lead to harder drugs. This myth is nothing more then a "scare tactic" used in the 80's, and has been admitted to as such by the people who said it. Hi Andy man The pot mythwas used way befor the eighties first time I heard it was the 60's. Then there 's the classic movie "Reefer Madness" maybe made in the 1930-40 era.The folks in the movie had some really good shit. Based on the movie no reason to try harder drugs. R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites slug 1 #38 May 31, 2004 QuoteQuoteI also presume they've also eaten hot dogs. So we're back to the oral sex thing then Eating hot dogs?? how about drinking thru a strawWe were in a place that had a drag queen performing on stage and she said to a guy in the audience that was drinking thru a straw. "Better watch out with that straw honey that's how i got started" LMAO R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cHoDaBoY 0 #39 May 31, 2004 QuotecHoDaBoY> do not understand that they are not having live demostration? Porno's playing? "Ok kids watch while Sara here give Peter Oral." Its going to be taught like sex is going to be taught. Do you think we should get rid of that completely also? What about teaching kids about the drugs? Oh because surely we teach them the bad things about drus theyare going to want to use them right? Its not a free for all oral sex in class. Its awareness. joe I realize this. When did I say they shouldnt be aware of it or educated on it? I DO NOT AGREE ON ENCOURAGING TEENAGERS TO EXPERIMENT WITH ORAL SEX. The same goes for drugs. I agree to educated teenagers on drugs, but no way in hell do I think they should encourage it. Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites AndyMan 7 #40 June 1, 2004 QuoteHotdogs? whats are you talking about? There's a concept of logic that goes along the lines of "Corelation does not imply Causation". Just because a large number of hard drug users formerly ate hotdogs, it does not mean that eating hot dogs caused or affected their drug use. Likewise, just because a large number of hard drug users formerly smoked pot, it does not mean that smoking pot caused or affected their hard drug use. Or, in this case, just because a large number of sexually active adults are sexually active, it does not mean that having oral sex caused or affected their current sexual practices. Corelation does not imply causality. It's not enough to notice that a lot of people do BOTH. A lot of people eat hot dogs, too. Specifically what I was refering to with the pot, was that in studies, they've managed to isolate pot users and effectively remove pot from the equation. The results were that just as many people went to hard drugs as before. The fact that pot was taken out of the loop did not reduce the number of hard drug users. Personally, I suspect the same would be true, here. Even now, kids see a different between oral sex and "real" sex, and start doing both at different ages. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #41 June 1, 2004 Of course, we could just not mention sex at all. Teenagers would never find out about it. Ignoring reality. Hmm... there's a technique that hasn't been used for a while. I wonder why that went out of fashion? Let's put Leave It To Beaver re-runs back on tv. No sex there. Picture if you will, an ostrich... with its head in the sand... knowing that everything is ok... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cHoDaBoY 0 #42 June 1, 2004 Quote Corelation does not imply causality. It's not enough to notice that a lot of people do BOTH. A lot of people eat hot dogs, too. Well I guess I find it quite strange that every single person I know that does or has tried hard drugs has started out smoking pot. I guess Im an idiot for making that correlation because I know lots of people that eat those addictive hotdogs. All of hotdog addicts have eaten food in the past, so we shoundnt make the correlation of eating food in the past and being addicted to hotdogs because correlation doesnt imply casualty. Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #43 June 1, 2004 QuoteQuote Corelation does not imply causality. It's not enough to notice that a lot of people do BOTH. A lot of people eat hot dogs, too. Well I guess I find it quite strange that every single person I know that does or has tried hard drugs has started out smoking pot. There is literally mountains of stuff that explains this, but the best one is a recent study by the Rand Corporation that appeared in the British scientific magazine Addiction. Perhaps this is clearer. Rand Corporation study QuoteA new study by the RAND Drug Policy Research Center casts doubt on claims that marijuana acts as a "gateway" to the use of cocaine and heroin, challenging an assumption that has guided U.S. drug policies since the 1950s. However, the study does not argue that marijuana should be legalized or decriminalized. The theory that the use of marijuana by young people causes some to graduate to harder drugs, often called the "gateway effect," has been used most recently to counter efforts to relax marijuana laws in several states. Earlier it was used to justify the imposition of tough penalties against the possession of even small amounts of marijuana. Evidence supporting claims of marijuana's gateway effects has been found in many epidemiological studies of adolescent drug use. For instance, these studies found that marijuana users are up to 85 times more likely to use hard drugs than those who do not use marijuana, and few hard drug users do not use marijuana first. "We've shown that the marijuana gateway effect is not the best explanation for the link between marijuana use and the use of harder drugs," said Andrew Morral, associate director of RAND's Public Safety and Justice unit and lead author of the study. "An alternative, simpler and more compelling explanation accounts for the pattern of drug use you see in this country, without resort to any gateway effects. While the gateway theory has enjoyed popular acceptance, scientists have always had their doubts. Our study shows that these doubts are justified." The study demonstrates that associations between marijuana and hard drug use could be expected even if marijuana use has no gateway effect. Instead, the associations can result from known differences in the ages at which youths have opportunities to use marijuana and hard drugs, and known variations in individuals' willingness to try any drugs, researchers found. QuoteThe RAND study and a series of commentaries about the report are published in the December edition of the British journal Addiction, a peer-reviewed scientific publication. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites USPA 0 #44 June 2, 2004 Quoteabstinence. Whahahahahaha USA right?The trouble with skydiving; If you stink at it and continue to jump, you'll die. If you're good at it and continue to jump, you'll see a lot of friends die... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites USPA 0 #45 June 2, 2004 QuoteWhy dont we teach kids how to roll joints so they dont go ahead and snort crack? This is the only way to fight drugs. In The Netherlands it is allowed (not legal, but allowed) to sell/ use "soft-drugs" like marihuana. After I think 10 years by now or something, results: Lowest number of drug addicts in Europe and USA. Smallest number of youth using marihuana and other soft drugs. Enormous drop in drug related crime. So I think it's pretty smart... The trouble with skydiving; If you stink at it and continue to jump, you'll die. If you're good at it and continue to jump, you'll see a lot of friends die... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
slug 1 #38 May 31, 2004 QuoteQuoteI also presume they've also eaten hot dogs. So we're back to the oral sex thing then Eating hot dogs?? how about drinking thru a strawWe were in a place that had a drag queen performing on stage and she said to a guy in the audience that was drinking thru a straw. "Better watch out with that straw honey that's how i got started" LMAO R.I.P. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cHoDaBoY 0 #39 May 31, 2004 QuotecHoDaBoY> do not understand that they are not having live demostration? Porno's playing? "Ok kids watch while Sara here give Peter Oral." Its going to be taught like sex is going to be taught. Do you think we should get rid of that completely also? What about teaching kids about the drugs? Oh because surely we teach them the bad things about drus theyare going to want to use them right? Its not a free for all oral sex in class. Its awareness. joe I realize this. When did I say they shouldnt be aware of it or educated on it? I DO NOT AGREE ON ENCOURAGING TEENAGERS TO EXPERIMENT WITH ORAL SEX. The same goes for drugs. I agree to educated teenagers on drugs, but no way in hell do I think they should encourage it. Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AndyMan 7 #40 June 1, 2004 QuoteHotdogs? whats are you talking about? There's a concept of logic that goes along the lines of "Corelation does not imply Causation". Just because a large number of hard drug users formerly ate hotdogs, it does not mean that eating hot dogs caused or affected their drug use. Likewise, just because a large number of hard drug users formerly smoked pot, it does not mean that smoking pot caused or affected their hard drug use. Or, in this case, just because a large number of sexually active adults are sexually active, it does not mean that having oral sex caused or affected their current sexual practices. Corelation does not imply causality. It's not enough to notice that a lot of people do BOTH. A lot of people eat hot dogs, too. Specifically what I was refering to with the pot, was that in studies, they've managed to isolate pot users and effectively remove pot from the equation. The results were that just as many people went to hard drugs as before. The fact that pot was taken out of the loop did not reduce the number of hard drug users. Personally, I suspect the same would be true, here. Even now, kids see a different between oral sex and "real" sex, and start doing both at different ages. _Am__ You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #41 June 1, 2004 Of course, we could just not mention sex at all. Teenagers would never find out about it. Ignoring reality. Hmm... there's a technique that hasn't been used for a while. I wonder why that went out of fashion? Let's put Leave It To Beaver re-runs back on tv. No sex there. Picture if you will, an ostrich... with its head in the sand... knowing that everything is ok... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cHoDaBoY 0 #42 June 1, 2004 Quote Corelation does not imply causality. It's not enough to notice that a lot of people do BOTH. A lot of people eat hot dogs, too. Well I guess I find it quite strange that every single person I know that does or has tried hard drugs has started out smoking pot. I guess Im an idiot for making that correlation because I know lots of people that eat those addictive hotdogs. All of hotdog addicts have eaten food in the past, so we shoundnt make the correlation of eating food in the past and being addicted to hotdogs because correlation doesnt imply casualty. Q. Why do birds sing? A. Because they dont have to pack when they land Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #43 June 1, 2004 QuoteQuote Corelation does not imply causality. It's not enough to notice that a lot of people do BOTH. A lot of people eat hot dogs, too. Well I guess I find it quite strange that every single person I know that does or has tried hard drugs has started out smoking pot. There is literally mountains of stuff that explains this, but the best one is a recent study by the Rand Corporation that appeared in the British scientific magazine Addiction. Perhaps this is clearer. Rand Corporation study QuoteA new study by the RAND Drug Policy Research Center casts doubt on claims that marijuana acts as a "gateway" to the use of cocaine and heroin, challenging an assumption that has guided U.S. drug policies since the 1950s. However, the study does not argue that marijuana should be legalized or decriminalized. The theory that the use of marijuana by young people causes some to graduate to harder drugs, often called the "gateway effect," has been used most recently to counter efforts to relax marijuana laws in several states. Earlier it was used to justify the imposition of tough penalties against the possession of even small amounts of marijuana. Evidence supporting claims of marijuana's gateway effects has been found in many epidemiological studies of adolescent drug use. For instance, these studies found that marijuana users are up to 85 times more likely to use hard drugs than those who do not use marijuana, and few hard drug users do not use marijuana first. "We've shown that the marijuana gateway effect is not the best explanation for the link between marijuana use and the use of harder drugs," said Andrew Morral, associate director of RAND's Public Safety and Justice unit and lead author of the study. "An alternative, simpler and more compelling explanation accounts for the pattern of drug use you see in this country, without resort to any gateway effects. While the gateway theory has enjoyed popular acceptance, scientists have always had their doubts. Our study shows that these doubts are justified." The study demonstrates that associations between marijuana and hard drug use could be expected even if marijuana use has no gateway effect. Instead, the associations can result from known differences in the ages at which youths have opportunities to use marijuana and hard drugs, and known variations in individuals' willingness to try any drugs, researchers found. QuoteThe RAND study and a series of commentaries about the report are published in the December edition of the British journal Addiction, a peer-reviewed scientific publication. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USPA 0 #44 June 2, 2004 Quoteabstinence. Whahahahahaha USA right?The trouble with skydiving; If you stink at it and continue to jump, you'll die. If you're good at it and continue to jump, you'll see a lot of friends die... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
USPA 0 #45 June 2, 2004 QuoteWhy dont we teach kids how to roll joints so they dont go ahead and snort crack? This is the only way to fight drugs. In The Netherlands it is allowed (not legal, but allowed) to sell/ use "soft-drugs" like marihuana. After I think 10 years by now or something, results: Lowest number of drug addicts in Europe and USA. Smallest number of youth using marihuana and other soft drugs. Enormous drop in drug related crime. So I think it's pretty smart... The trouble with skydiving; If you stink at it and continue to jump, you'll die. If you're good at it and continue to jump, you'll see a lot of friends die... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
