Poll of the Day > I wish people would be honest about the "benefits" of abortion.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Hop103 posted...

BlackScythe0 posted...

Hop103 posted...

That's not a good excuse to have an abortion. That's an issue of personal responsibility and thus have to suffer the consequences, not an issue of being a victim of a horrendous act or health being in danger, in which are both actual good reasons to have an abortion.

Consequences?

This is insane. Is this some sort of vindictive "the slut didn't have sex with me so fuck her!"?

Nah, it's more like think before having sex.

Bull shit.

Everything about the anti-choice argument is refusal to accept how difficult and personal the decision is, vindictive cries for "consequences" with the "child" they claim to care about being the punishment, and hypocritical arguments that life is sacred when it immediately becomes a moocher to them as soon as it's born.

There is no rational basis for the argument against safe abortion.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Jen0125 posted...

I wish men would all just get reversible vasectomies as teenagers since they're so fucking worried about abortion.

If it was reliably reversible, I'd be all over that.

I'm hoping that Vasalgel stuff makes it to market and is comparably effective to things like IUD's. I really don't like that so much of the burden of birth control (particularly its side effects) has to be shouldered by women, given that men's options are basically limited to condoms (not effective enough for long-term reliance) and vasectomies (more effective than anything else, but potentially irreversible). If it pans out, Vasalgel's looking like it'll be a reliable option that's easily reversible and won't have the side effects seen with hormonal options, which is great.

BeerOnTap posted...

So that makes it okay to have someone to reach into your body with forceps, pulverize a developed human baby with a heartbeat into pieces, vacuum out said pieces, and discard them like theyre trash

No, but then again, no one does that to a developed baby; they do that to a developing fetus and I don't see the problem with it.

BeerOnTap posted...

(or sell those parts for cash as planned parenthood was caught doing)?

Planned Parenthood has never sold fetal material for profit; doing so is illegal and if they had been caught as you are alleging, they would be charged for it. What happened is an anti-abortion group set up a sting where they tried to get someone from Planned Parenthood to sell them some fetal tissue and, despite talking for two hours, got nothing of the sort so they just hacked together a video out of what they had recorded that made it look like Planned Parenthood was actually selling them fetal tissue.

Notably, Planned Parenthood was thoroughly investigated by 12 states plus the federal government, but were never charged, with all of the investigations finding no evidence of wrongdoing. The people who attempted to frame them, however, were charged with 15 felonies related to the videos.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/pp-baby-parts-sale/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Parenthood_2015_undercover_videos_controversy

_AdjI_ posted...

If allowed, society will offer abortion services.

Also this. No one is demanding that the government set up door-to-door abortion services; simply that they not stand in the way of people trying to set up that service themselves. That's not demanding that society provide anything, it's demanding that society not prevent something from being provided organically.
---

It's mostly used as a form of birth control, which I find morally objectionable in the sense that you should take responsibility for your actions. But the reality is that some people shouldn't be parents and not every child is going to be adopted into a loving home... Then there are the birth defects that range from barely there to "I'd rather be aborted if that was me" tier ones.

One thing they really need to implement is that if you're on social assistance, you can only have one child (twins/triplets/etc. would count as one). You're then given the option to be sterilized and continue receiving financial assistance or risk being cut off if you have any more babies you can't support.

Valiant_Kaiser posted...

It's mostly used as a form of birth control, which I find morally objectionable in the sense that you should take responsibility for your actions. But the reality is that some people shouldn't be parents and not every child is going to be adopted into a loving home... Then there are the birth defects that range from barely there to "I'd rather be aborted if that was me" tier ones.

One thing they really need to implement is that if you're on social assistance, you can only have one child (twins/triplets/etc. would count as one). You're then given the option to be sterilized and continue receiving financial assistance or risk being cut off if you have any more babies you can't support.

Is there a basis for the claim it's mostly used as a form of birth control? Because I have never heard stories of people treating the decision like it is no big deal. It's a traumatizing decision and I feel like people put way too much effort into ignoring the reality of it and trying to make it sounds as though you think it's no big deal.

BlackScythe0 posted...

Is there a basis for the claim it's mostly used as a form of birth control?

Personally IDK about just birth control, kinda feels like a sex control in ways.
One of those 'if you can't do the time, don't do the crime' mentality things.

Psst (not aimed at you btw) poor people like having sex too, they're still people and not magically sex repulsed by being poor. People who don't want kids still like it too.

I mean anti abortion and the way people are having trouble getting assistance here btw.

BlackScythe0 posted...

Is there a basis for the claim it's mostly used as a form of birth control? Because I have never heard stories of people treating the decision like it is no big deal. It's a traumatizing decision and I feel like people put way too much effort into ignoring the reality of it and trying to make it sounds as though you think it's no big deal.

No, there isn't. He's talking out of his ass.
---

BlackScythe0 posted...

Valiant_Kaiser posted...

It's mostly used as a form of birth control, which I find morally objectionable in the sense that you should take responsibility for your actions. But the reality is that some people shouldn't be parents and not every child is going to be adopted into a loving home... Then there are the birth defects that range from barely there to "I'd rather be aborted if that was me" tier ones.

One thing they really need to implement is that if you're on social assistance, you can only have one child (twins/triplets/etc. would count as one). You're then given the option to be sterilized and continue receiving financial assistance or risk being cut off if you have any more babies you can't support.

Is there a basis for the claim it's mostly used as a form of birth control? Because I have never heard stories of people treating the decision like it is no big deal. It's a traumatizing decision and I feel like people put way too much effort into ignoring the reality of it and trying to make it sounds as though you think it's no big deal.

Yeah, it happens a lot. For instance, a former co-worker did that like 4+ times because she just didn't want a baby and then when she wanted one it was hard because of all the abortions.

Valiant_Kaiser posted...

BlackScythe0 posted...

Valiant_Kaiser posted...

It's mostly used as a form of birth control, which I find morally objectionable in the sense that you should take responsibility for your actions. But the reality is that some people shouldn't be parents and not every child is going to be adopted into a loving home... Then there are the birth defects that range from barely there to "I'd rather be aborted if that was me" tier ones.

One thing they really need to implement is that if you're on social assistance, you can only have one child (twins/triplets/etc. would count as one). You're then given the option to be sterilized and continue receiving financial assistance or risk being cut off if you have any more babies you can't support.

Is there a basis for the claim it's mostly used as a form of birth control? Because I have never heard stories of people treating the decision like it is no big deal. It's a traumatizing decision and I feel like people put way too much effort into ignoring the reality of it and trying to make it sounds as though you think it's no big deal.

Yeah, it happens a lot. For instance, a former co-worker did that like 4+ times because she just didn't want a baby and then when she wanted one it was hard because of all the abortions.

That's because of multiple pregnancies, though. They say it's rare, but scarring can be caused by the tools used in abortions. But that same scarring can happen in multiple pregnancies even when they end in birth. So, it wasn't really the abortions that affected her chances of having a baby. But the pregnancies themselves.Even if she had all the babies, she would most likely be having the same problems. According to doctors...
---

On the responsibility angle my only issue its fine for the woman to decide she doesnt want a kid but if they guy decides he doesnt want that responsibility hes a deadbeat and probably will pay child support. And the argument on that usually is exactly what ive seen here and get shit on "dont have sex if you dont want a kid"

That aside im all for abortion. Without it I fear the worlds population would be far worse. Probably alot more kids growing up in poverty and having a crap life as a result. And then I prefer the company of men so its literally a "doesnt affect me so why should I care" type of thing.
---

Here's my position, I am anti-abortion except for medical reasons, incest or rape. Having said that I do not think we need laws dictating to us what to do with our bodies. I would never tell my wife what she can or can't do with her body.

I married her but I do not own her. How would men feel if laws were passed making us have vasectomies. I think most of us would resist that.
---

I'm just waiting until we can have cakes for abortion showers.

The benefit is less unwanted children.
I don't know about you all, but that sounds like a win-win, since most "would-be-abortion" children end up living in shitty households which leads to more crime.
---

dedbus posted...

I'm just waiting until we can have cakes for abortion showers.

Jeeeeesus Christ
---

The best aspect of abortion....is that it prevent future criminals from being born.

Young, dumb, unfit, unstable parents? Yeah. Probably best if they don't have ki---*suddenly interrupted by an army of Pro-Life soldiers who descend from the sky on metal cables with guns aimed* "WHY NOT JUST PUT IT UP FOR ADOPTION THEN!?!"

Whoa whoa....holy shit.....um. Force her to carry a child to term that she didn't want?

Besides, many studies have been done that indicate that children in foster care/adoption agencies are often riddled with all kinds of psychological and behavioral issues.

Being abandoned by your biological parents isn't exactly something that's pleasant to live with. These kids often grow up to have serious issues. More inclinations towards criminality and drug use. Had they never been born at all, it would be one less life of depression and turmoil.

However, these "benefits of abortion" only work if BOTH parents agree they don't want the baby.

Things get tricky when you have couples that have been together for years, love one another, and BOTH genuinely WANTED a kid.....but during pregnancy she has some kind of psychological breakdown and wants to abort.

As it stands right now....she could abort that baby in many states....without even needing to provide a REASON. And she doesn't need to inform the father.

Put yourself in the father's shoes (uh oh, I'm asking you to imagine being a guy! The horror!)

You have loved this woman for years. You have both agreed you want children. But during the pregnancy she gets depression, anxiety, doesn't feel a "connection" with the life growing inside her. Feels sick. Isn't attracted to you anymore. Just becomes this emotional, hormonal, unstable woman you don't even recognize. And she decides to kill your baby while you are at work one day. Doesn't even tell you.

That's fucking HARSH.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

Isn't attracted to you anymore.

Thats actually pretty normal according to science during pregnancy. I really need to find that study...
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

On the responsibility angle my only issue its fine for the woman to decide she doesnt want a kid but if they guy decides he doesnt want that responsibility hes a deadbeat and probably will pay child support

To be fair, if a woman decides she doesn't want the kid and carries it to term and it winds up being raised by the father, the mother would similarly be on the hook for child support.

That just tends to be a rare situation because if the father wants the child but not the mother, he can't force her to carry it to term, so an abortion is more likely, but if the mother wants the child but not the father, he can just walk away, which is not an option that the mother has available.

Valiant_Kaiser posted...

Yeah, it happens a lot. For instance, a former co-worker did that like 4+ times because she just didn't want a baby and then when she wanted one it was hard because of all the abortions.

Personal anecdotes are not proof of anything.

GreenKnight127 posted...

Besides, many studies have been done that indicate that children in foster care/adoption agencies are often riddled with all kinds of psychological and behavioral issues.

That's less because the children aren't raised by their biological parents and more because the children aren't being raised in a stable environment. Especially with foster parents, as that's intended as a temporary solution, who the child's caregivers are can change frequently and rapidly. This means the child never gets a chance to develop attachment to any of their caregivers, which can cause significant issues later in life.

Most of the time children who aren't raised by their biological parents do just fine so long as they spend most or all of their childhood with their new families.

GreenKnight127 posted...

Things get tricky when you have couples that have been together for years, love one another, and BOTH genuinely WANTED a kid.....but during pregnancy she has some kind of psychological breakdown and wants to abort.

Somehow I doubt the situation you laid out is a common occurrence. Contrary to popular belief, most women are not, in fact, hysterical emotion-bags ready to fly off into a full-on psychotic break at the slightest inclination.
---

darkknight109 posted...

To be fair, if a woman decides she doesn't want the kid and carries it to term and it winds up being raised by the father, the mother would similarly be on the hook for child support.

That just tends to be a rare situation because if the father wants the child but not the mother, he can't force her to carry it to term, so an abortion is more likely, but if the mother wants the child but not the father, he can just walk away, which is not an option that the mother has available

Yeah I realize there is no perfect fair to everyone involved way. But thats life. Life aint fair. its just the one part about it I dislike. Mostly because men get told to just not have sex id they dont want the responsibility of a kid but that argument gets shit on if said to the woman. As my mom would say, it takes two to tango. Of course rape pregnancies aside.

But again as already said I'm all for abortion.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

darkknight109 posted...

To be fair, if a woman decides she doesn't want the kid and carries it to term and it winds up being raised by the father, the mother would similarly be on the hook for child support.

That just tends to be a rare situation because if the father wants the child but not the mother, he can't force her to carry it to term, so an abortion is more likely, but if the mother wants the child but not the father, he can just walk away, which is not an option that the mother has available

Yeah I realize there is no perfect fair to everyone involved way. But thats life. Life aint fair. its just the one part about it I dislike. Mostly because men get told to just not have sex id they dont want the responsibility of a kid but that argument gets shit on if said to the woman. As my mom would say, it takes two to tango. Of course rape pregnancies aside.

But again as already said I'm all for abortion.

I was mentioning that earlier. Someone kept saying in the other topic that women should basically think before sex. But they were also saying they shouldnt have sex if they dont want the responsibility of a baby. Which is an insane argument. The reason places have too many teen pregnancies is because they only want to teach abstinence in those places... But just keep telling people not to have sex. Or to only have sex for procreation...
---

LinkPizza posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

darkknight109 posted...

To be fair, if a woman decides she doesn't want the kid and carries it to term and it winds up being raised by the father, the mother would similarly be on the hook for child support.

That just tends to be a rare situation because if the father wants the child but not the mother, he can't force her to carry it to term, so an abortion is more likely, but if the mother wants the child but not the father, he can just walk away, which is not an option that the mother has available

Yeah I realize there is no perfect fair to everyone involved way. But thats life. Life aint fair. its just the one part about it I dislike. Mostly because men get told to just not have sex id they dont want the responsibility of a kid but that argument gets shit on if said to the woman. As my mom would say, it takes two to tango. Of course rape pregnancies aside.

But again as already said I'm all for abortion.

I was mentioning that earlier. Someone kept saying in the other topic that women should basically think before sex. But they were also saying they shouldnt have sex if they dont want the responsibility of a baby. Which is an insane argument. The reason places have too many teen pregnancies is because they only want to teach abstinence in those places... But just keep telling people not to have sex. Or to only have sex for procreation...

In sex ed. All options should be layed out. Say abstinence is the best choice all you want cause it is but do go over other methods. On what I was saying it just irks me cause the double standard. In my school we at least went over condoms. To be honest though im betting most kids just tune out thr sex ed class. Maybe they should test you on it too. They just threw the info at us and left it at that so yeah betting plenty didnt pay attention.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

You have loved this woman for years. You have both agreed you want children. But during the pregnancy she gets depression, anxiety, doesn't feel a "connection" with the life growing inside her. Feels sick. Isn't attracted to you anymore. Just becomes this emotional, hormonal, unstable woman you don't even recognize. And she decides to kill your baby while you are at work one day. Doesn't even tell you.

That's f***ing HARSH.

It is, but that's pretty comparable to coming home to find that she's committed suicide over that depression/anxiety, which is always going to be a possibility regardless of any sort of legal barriers. Realistically, if she completely loses it like that, she's not likely to calmly make an appointment with a doctor to have an abortion (note that that doctor would likely pick up on her psychotic break and seek to treat that rather than immediately performing an abortion), she's likely to stab herself in the uterus with a kitchen knife. If you're really concerned about that possibility, push for better mental health support, not to restrict abortion's availability to sound-minded people.

mooreandrew58 posted...

Mostly because men get told to just not have sex id they dont want the responsibility of a kid but that argument gets s*** on if said to the woman.

It's an okay argument, provided it's coming from somebody who has themselves committed to celibacy (except for reproductive purposes) for the sake of preventing unwanted pregnancies. Otherwise it's just hypocritical and they're making a suggestion they don't actually want followed.

_AdjI_ posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

You have loved this woman for years. You have both agreed you want children. But during the pregnancy she gets depression, anxiety, doesn't feel a "connection" with the life growing inside her. Feels sick. Isn't attracted to you anymore. Just becomes this emotional, hormonal, unstable woman you don't even recognize. And she decides to kill your baby while you are at work one day. Doesn't even tell you.

That's f***ing HARSH.

It is, but that's pretty comparable to coming home to find that she's committed suicide over that depression/anxiety, which is always going to be a possibility regardless of any sort of legal barriers. Realistically, if she completely loses it like that, she's not likely to calmly make an appointment with a doctor to have an abortion (note that that doctor would likely pick up on her psychotic break and seek to treat that rather than immediately performing an abortion), she's likely to stab herself in the uterus with a kitchen knife. If you're really concerned about that possibility, push for better mental health support, not to restrict abortion's availability to sound-minded people.

mooreandrew58 posted...

Mostly because men get told to just not have sex id they dont want the responsibility of a kid but that argument gets s*** on if said to the woman.

It's an okay argument, provided it's coming from somebody who has themselves committed to celibacy (except for reproductive purposes) for the sake of preventing unwanted pregnancies. Otherwise it's just hypocritical and they're making a suggestion they don't actually want followed.

what im getting at is ive never liked when people say it to men and its fine but someone says it to a woman and thats wrong. Otherwise I agree abstinence is the best way but expecting it to happen isnt gonna happen.

But hey if you even convince one perso go that route anything helps I gess but as said other methods should be discussed as well
---

Abstinence doesn't work.

Not even with religion.

In fact, it could be argued that religion just makes people into powder kegs of suppressed sexual rage that ends up exploding with magnified force later on.

Have you ever met a preacher's daughter?

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeezuz!
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

Abstinence doesn't work.

Not even with religion.

In fact, it could be argued that religion just makes people into powder kegs of suppressed sexual rage that ends up exploding with magnified force later on.

Have you ever met a preacher's daughter?

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeezuz!

It works for a very small few. I mean there was a time when people actually did wait till they where married. And some still do. As said very few though but its definitely a never works thing. And marriage aside ive at least known a handful who waited till they where an adult and gainfully employed
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

GreenKnight127 posted...

Abstinence doesn't work.

Not even with religion.

In fact, it could be argued that religion just makes people into powder kegs of suppressed sexual rage that ends up exploding with magnified force later on.

Have you ever met a preacher's daughter?

Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeezuz!

It works for a very small few. I mean there was a time when people actually said they waited until they were married.

Fix'd
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

LinkPizza posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

darkknight109 posted...

To be fair, if a woman decides she doesn't want the kid and carries it to term and it winds up being raised by the father, the mother would similarly be on the hook for child support.

That just tends to be a rare situation because if the father wants the child but not the mother, he can't force her to carry it to term, so an abortion is more likely, but if the mother wants the child but not the father, he can just walk away, which is not an option that the mother has available

Yeah I realize there is no perfect fair to everyone involved way. But thats life. Life aint fair. its just the one part about it I dislike. Mostly because men get told to just not have sex id they dont want the responsibility of a kid but that argument gets shit on if said to the woman. As my mom would say, it takes two to tango. Of course rape pregnancies aside.

But again as already said I'm all for abortion.

I was mentioning that earlier. Someone kept saying in the other topic that women should basically think before sex. But they were also saying they shouldnt have sex if they dont want the responsibility of a baby. Which is an insane argument. The reason places have too many teen pregnancies is because they only want to teach abstinence in those places... But just keep telling people not to have sex. Or to only have sex for procreation...

In sex ed. All options should be layed out. Say abstinence is the best choice all you want cause it is but do go over other methods. On what I was saying it just irks me cause the double standard. In my school we at least went over condoms. To be honest though im betting most kids just tune out thr sex ed class. Maybe they should test you on it too. They just threw the info at us and left it at that so yeah betting plenty didnt pay attention.

They problem should test kids. Even if they dont, they should still teach them about safe sex. But they dont. And theres no real reason not to, but they dont...
---

The pro-lifers would have more of a leg to stand on if they gave more of a shit about the kid once it's born. 99% of them seem to only care about the unborn child until it's in the world.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fiscal-republicans/trump-proposes-15-billion-spending-cuts-targets-childrens-health-program-idUSKBN1I829L

Trump cuts $15 billion from childrens health programs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/opinion/gop-wants-hungry-kids-to-fund-tax-cuts.html

Trump cuts money and individuals from food stamp programs leaving kids hungry.

So yeah, they put up a huge fuss for the unborn child but the second it's in the real world and needing to be fed, taken care of etc.. they don't give a fuck.

Monopoman posted...

The pro-lifers would have more of a leg to stand on if they gave more of a shit about the kid once it's born. 99% of them seem to only care about the unborn child until it's in the world.

it's at least partly to keep poor people poor. don't give them a way out of inevitable pregnancies, and don't support them afterwards.
---

Sahuagin posted...

Monopoman posted...

The pro-lifers would have more of a leg to stand on if they gave more of a shit about the kid once it's born. 99% of them seem to only care about the unborn child until it's in the world.

it's at least partly to keep poor people poor. don't give them a way out of inevitable pregnancies, and don't support them afterwards.

And also don't provide proper sex ed and do nothing to make birth control more affordable.

_AdjI_ posted...

And also don't provide proper sex ed and do nothing to make birth control more affordable.

Blame it on the government for enforcing that public schools can only teach abstinence
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

In sex ed. All options should be layed out. Say abstinence is the best choice all you want cause it is but do go over other methods. On what I was saying it just irks me cause the double standard. In my school we at least went over condoms. To be honest though im betting most kids just tune out thr sex ed class. Maybe they should test you on it too. They just threw the info at us and left it at that so yeah betting plenty didnt pay attention.

We didn't really cover sex ed in health class all that well, and our school's biggest sex ed thing was a slide show presentation your parents had to agree for you to see about STI's (D back in the day instead of I) with a brief mention of condoms. More talk about adverts using sex to sell things and why sex was bad than condom talk.

Really no shocker the amount of seniors, and even juniors, getting pregnant in my school.

ChaosAzeroth posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

In sex ed. All options should be layed out. Say abstinence is the best choice all you want cause it is but do go over other methods. On what I was saying it just irks me cause the double standard. In my school we at least went over condoms. To be honest though im betting most kids just tune out thr sex ed class. Maybe they should test you on it too. They just threw the info at us and left it at that so yeah betting plenty didnt pay attention.

We didn't really cover sex ed in health class all that well, and our school's biggest sex ed thing was a slide show presentation your parents had to agree for you to see about STI's (D back in the day instead of I) with a brief mention of condoms. More talk about adverts using sex to sell things and why sex was bad than condom talk.

Really no shocker the amount of seniors, and even juniors, getting pregnant in my school.

We actually didnt do it in health class. They just fucked up or normal schedule for like 3 or 4 days where we learned about it.
---

well why do you think people who fight about smokking weed claim how its medically beneficial. when everyone arv knows has no medical problems lol.
---

ArvTheGreat posted...

well why do you think people who fight about smokking weed claim how its medically beneficial. when everyone arv knows has no medical problems lol.

It is a pretty decent painkiller. Doubt it would help much for say a broken arm. But most nornal pains it does the trick. Thats the most medical reason ive ever used it for in the past. For headaches didnt even need to vet high just a couple of good puffs.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

ArvTheGreat posted...

well why do you think people who fight about smokking weed claim how its medically beneficial. when everyone arv knows has no medical problems lol.

It is a pretty decent painkiller. Doubt it would help much for say a broken arm. But most nornal pains it does the trick. Thats the most medical reason ive ever used it for in the past. For headaches didnt even need to vet high just a couple of good puffs.

Heroin is a wicked painkiller, doesn't mean people want it legal for easy pain relief.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

ArvTheGreat posted...

well why do you think people who fight about smokking weed claim how its medically beneficial. when everyone arv knows has no medical problems lol.

It is a pretty decent painkiller. Doubt it would help much for say a broken arm. But most nornal pains it does the trick. Thats the most medical reason ive ever used it for in the past. For headaches didnt even need to vet high just a couple of good puffs.

Heroin is a wicked painkiller, doesn't mean people want it legal for easy pain relief.

Herion also kills people get back to me when someone ods on weed.
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

ArvTheGreat posted...

well why do you think people who fight about smokking weed claim how its medically beneficial. when everyone arv knows has no medical problems lol.

It is a pretty decent painkiller. Doubt it would help much for say a broken arm. But most nornal pains it does the trick. Thats the most medical reason ive ever used it for in the past. For headaches didnt even need to vet high just a couple of good puffs.

Heroin is a wicked painkiller, doesn't mean people want it legal for easy pain relief.

Herion also kills people get back to me when someone ods on weed.

I'm sure somebody's got in a fatal car accident while high. It doesn't have to be directly fatal to be a problem.
---

Heroin is so dangerous you can literally die from trying to quit cold turkey.
Never heard of that with weed tbh.

Feel like equating heroin to weed is a bit of a stretch. Sure, they're both drugs, but...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

I'm sure somebody's got in a fatal car accident while high. It doesn't have to be directly fatal to be a problem.

I know it's happened with booze, but that's legal. Irresponsible people are irresponsible.

ChaosAzeroth posted...

Heroin is so dangerous you can literally die from trying to quit cold turkey.
Never heard of that with weed tbh.

You die from relapsing and going back to your old dose as your tolerance dissipates quickly.

ChaosAzeroth posted...

I know it's happened with booze, but that's legal. Irresponsible people are irresponsible.

Booze is legal because it's grandfathered in. If it wasn't a cultural norm, it would absolutely be banned too.
---

Weed has little to no negative side effects even compared to booze. Other than being bad on your lungs if smoked im sure. Tylenol is probably worse for you to over do (it wrecked my grandads liver)

But this is off topic and I feel I wont convince someone who thinks weed is comparable to fucking heiron of all things so you do you
---

mooreandrew58 posted...

Weed has little to no negative side effects even compared to booze.

Heroin has little to no negative side effects too, and like you said in defense of weed:

ChaosAzeroth posted...

Irresponsible people are irresponsible.

Stupid people gonna get themselves killed regardless, better falling asleep forever in a toilet stall than causing a 20 car pile up on the highway.

mooreandrew58 posted...

Tylenol is probably worse for you to over do (it wrecked my grandads liver)

Yeah, it's a blood thinner, don't fuck around with meds.

mooreandrew58 posted...

But this is off topic and I feel I wont convince someone who thinks weed is comparable to fucking heiron of all things so you do you

"My bad's okay because me and my buds like it. I know people demonise my drug of choice with the same logic as heroin but obviously heroin is terrible but mine is legit".
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

mooreandrew58 posted...

Weed has little to no negative side effects even compared to booze.

Heroin has little to no negative side effects too, and like you said in defense of weed:

ChaosAzeroth posted...

Irresponsible people are irresponsible.

Stupid people gonna get themselves killed regardless, better falling asleep forever in a toilet stall than causing a 20 car pile up on the highway.

mooreandrew58 posted...

Tylenol is probably worse for you to over do (it wrecked my grandads liver)

Yeah, it's a blood thinner, don't fuck around with meds.

mooreandrew58 posted...

But this is off topic and I feel I wont convince someone who thinks weed is comparable to fucking heiron of all things so you do you

"My bad's okay because me and my buds like it. I know people demonise my drug of choice with the same logic as heroin but obviously heroin is terrible but mine is legit".

I quit smoking a long time ago. For legal reasons and finding work. But as said this is way off topic so seriously this is my last response
---

I never even understood the appeal of weed. All it did was make me tired and hungry...
---