Romney doesn't believe in being honest about drug use

[_asbestosman]

When it comes to the danger of drugs, kids need information, not propoganda. They need to know why adults teach them that drug use is dangerous and can ruin your life. The hope is that it will prevent kids from even experimenting. I would say that this worked for me. Even when I doubted most everything my parents told me while I was a young teen (I even doubted the church was true when I was 13-14), yet I still knew that I could really mess up my life if I did drugs.

On the other hand, kids who have done drugs need to have hope that they can be clean. I think the best way to serve both goals is to empahsize what difficulties drugs will bring and to empahsize how hard it is to get clean--much easier to avoid the whole mess altogether.

Still, there are some tricky questions. I think it is important to inform kids of some drugs that may never come out of the system entirely. Flashbacks will happen from some drugs. Cravings for some drugs may never stop. Anyhow, information is what they need, not propoganda, and not "it's wrong because I (or God, or the government) say so".

[_truth dancer]

Personally, I like Obama and completely enjoy the fresh and honest approach.

There is something really great about a man who can admit mistakes, acknowledge his challenges, present an authentic image and who seems less concerned with image than with truth.


~dancer~

[_gramps]

When it comes to the danger of drugs, kids need information, not propoganda. They need to know why adults teach them that drug use is dangerous and can ruin your life. The hope is that it will prevent kids from even experimenting. I would say that this worked for me. Even when I doubted most everything my parents told me while I was a young teen (I even doubted the church was true when I was 13-14), yet I still knew that I could really mess up my life if I did drugs.

On the other hand, kids who have done drugs need to have hope that they can be clean. I think the best way to serve both goals is to empahsize what difficulties drugs will bring and to empahsize how hard it is to get clean--much easier to avoid the whole mess altogether.

Still, there are some tricky questions. I think it is important to inform kids of some drugs that may never come out of the system entirely. Flashbacks will happen from some drugs. Cravings for some drugs may never stop. Anyhow, information is what they need, not propoganda, and not "it's wrong because I (or God, or the government) say so".

Why does everyone, or nearly everyone here, always lump every substance into the catch-all phrase "drugs?"

That is the propaganda that first needs to be addressed. Because the kids have already figured it out. The parents need to get up to speed.

And I would suggest that the D.A.R.E. program ain't goin' to help. At all.

My student the other night, while holding a mixed drink in his hand, told me he hates drugs. Doesn't do 'em.

Nimwit!

Hell, even the courts at the highest level have allowed certain substances to be ingested, if for religious purposes. DMT, the strongest hallucinogenic there is, is fair game if you join the right church. It is legal to ingest for sacrament on Sundays in the U.S. Can't be that dangerous if the freedom of religion clause Trump's the DEA's need and mandate to regulate "drug" flow throughout the country.

Explain that one to the kids!

[_The Nehor]

I see this as standard politicking by both sides. I don't think Obama thought revealing his drug use now would hit his campaign hard. He gets kudos for being honest by some and the issue is dealt with. This prevents someone from outing him later at a more critical time. Romney commented on it in a way that makes it look like a faux paus. This is mild. I can't wait till the campaigns start really heating up.

[_Dr. Shades]

That is the propaganda that first needs to be addressed. Because the kids have already figured it out. The parents need to get up to speed.

I disagree. I think parents should avoid taking drugs, too.

[_The Nehor]

That is the propaganda that first needs to be addressed. Because the kids have already figured it out. The parents need to get up to speed.

I disagree. I think parents should avoid taking drugs, too.

I think it depends on what kind of kids they have ;)

[_asbestosman]

Why does everyone, or nearly everyone here, always lump every substance into the catch-all phrase "drugs?"

Laziness. I was trying to type a quick response on a message board, not make a scientific or legal presentation on the various effects, dangers, and even lack of danger that various substances bring. I hope you'll excuse me for laziness as I assume you guys know what I meant.

Hell, even the courts at the highest level have allowed certain substances to be ingested, if for religious purposes. DMT, the strongest hallucinogenic there is, is fair game if you join the right church. It is legal to ingest for sacrament on Sundays in the U.S. Can't be that dangerous if the freedom of religion clause Trump's the DEA's need and mandate to regulate "drug" flow throughout the country.

Explain that one to the kids!

It may not be that dangerous, and I'm fine telling kids what they'll learn anyhow. I just want to make sure they know how hard various things are to quit, and the effects they may have. They may not be dangerous enough to Trump freedom of religion, but some drugs will make your life hell. A crack addict is not going to have an easy life. I would at least like kids to know why that is (science of addiction) and not to conflate that with the separate dangers of hallucinagens (don't know much about hallucinagens, but what of flashbacks or various bad trips). If pot isn't particularly dangerous, they should know why that is. The legality of it is irrelavent to what kids should know.

[_gramps]

That is the propaganda that first needs to be addressed. Because the kids have already figured it out. The parents need to get up to speed.

I disagree. I think parents should avoid taking drugs, too.

I didn't say that parents should start taking drugs. I said they should get educated properly so they can have worthwhile discussions with their children.

edited to add: which drugs should they avoid, Dr. Shades?

[_gramps]

asbestosman wrote:

It may not be that dangerous, and I'm fine telling kids what they'll learn anyhow. I just want to make sure they know how hard various things are to quit, and the effects they may have. They may not be dangerous enough to Trump freedom of religion, but some drugs will make your life hell. A crack addict is not going to have an easy life. I would at least like kids to know why that is (science of addiction) and not to conflate that with the separate dangers of hallucinagens (don't know much about hallucinagens, but what of flashbacks or various bad trips). If pot isn't particularly dangerous, they should know why that is. The legality of it is irrelavent to what kids should know.

This I would agree with, with one caveat. I don't know about flashbacks. I have never had them.

[_Dr. Shades]

That is the propaganda that first needs to be addressed. Because the kids have already figured it out. The parents need to get up to speed.

I disagree. I think parents should avoid taking drugs, too.

I didn't say that parents should start taking drugs. I said they should get educated properly so they can have worthwhile discussions with their children.

I was making a joke. When you said "get up to speed," I was pretending that I had interpreted that statement as "work up to taking methamphetamines" ('speed' in street parlance). You know, in the context of this thread about drugs and all.