Anyway, this is meant to be a drugs thread, we can discuss this marriage issue elsewhere.

Sorry, as you brought it up I had to comment.

Just let me ask one thing, does a Christian gay person have less rights than a heterosexual non Christian

Perhaps you would like to start a new thread, because remember, when I got married I was, as now, an agnostic and chose a registry office. I could however have got married in a church as I had been baptised as a baby.

Who you are marrying should not be important, your faith should.

---

Why are you speechless? There is a large chunk of the rank and file Lb Dems that do not agree with the party view. My own view has always been clear. I have no objection at all to same gender relationships, neither have I any objection to Civil Partnerships in Register Offices etc. I just do not think it right that same gender marriages should be carried out in church. That is my main objection.

Anyway, this is meant to be a drugs thread, we can discuss this marriage issue elsewhere.

I'm also not happy with their support of gay marriage

Speechless!

---

Washington Post reports Obama: I’ve got ‘bigger fish to fry’ than pot smokers.

We will see Bernie. I'm also not happy with their support of gay marriage. I think Clegg is a liability and should go. I am writing to Simon Hughes in that vein.

Clegg

I cannot support Nick Clegg in his current wish to decriminalise drugs.

Therefore I will be very carefully examining whether I wish to remain a Member of his party.

Far be it for me to defend Nick Clegg, but from the article you linked to he is basically saying that drugs aren't going away, and he supports a law "where people found with drugs are not always prosecuted"

also

"Mr Clegg told the BBC the government needed to be open-minded and look at alternative approaches."

The whole article seem quite sensible to me, just automatically locking someone up for using drugs is not going to help, pushers and dealers yes, but users need help and prison does not always work

---

Clegg

I cannot support Nick Clegg in his current wish to decriminalise drugs.

Therefore I will be very carefully examining whether I wish to remain a Member of his party.

Self control and responsibility are important to learn.

I agree with you 100%. But that is the responsibility of parents to teach their children as they grow up. It is NOT the responsibility of the Schools or the State at a later stage in their life, when it will most likely be ignored.

If parents can't or won't behave responsibly, then there is an increasing case for preventing them from procreating in the first place. Far too many kids in the UK are born because of the traditional "Saturday night after the pub" syndrome. With no thought whatsoever of sensible family planning or responsibility.

China has a way of tackling it, but with tragic consequences as we saw this past year. You cannot have compulsory sterilisation after X kids, that is Draconian. Another theory is to put something in the water supply that will inhibit conception and then issue licences for an antidote to have kids. That cannot be acceptable either.

So what is the answer???

The answer? Humans have done a piss poor job of self control for centuries. What is the best teaching method? School of hard knocks?

As to Saturday night after the pub, you mention China. I'll mention global warming. If we don't find a way to have self control over our procreation we will be just like any other animal population, more mouths to feed that the planet is capable of producing food. A couple of generations will die off of starvation and it won't be pretty, forced sterilization might look preferable in hindsight. Frankly the widening gap between the haves and have nots is evidence that it has started.

---

Self control and responsibility are important to learn.

I agree with you 100%. But that is the responsibility of parents to teach their children as they grow up. It is NOT the responsibility of the Schools or the State at a later stage in their life, when it will most likely be ignored.

If parents can't or won't behave responsibly, then there is an increasing case for preventing them from procreating in the first place. Far too many kids in the UK are born because of the traditional "Saturday night after the pub" syndrome. With no thought whatsoever of sensible family planning or responsibility.

China has a way of tackling it, but with tragic consequences as we saw this past year. You cannot have compulsory sterilisation after X kids, that is Draconian. Another theory is to put something in the water supply that will inhibit conception and then issue licences for an antidote to have kids. That cannot be acceptable either.

So what is the answer???

Okay, so you liberty loving, laid back, do ya own thing, pot is AOK, anti nanny state people, have a look at this then.


School kids

Ah yes, the parents role in education is to furnish their kids with pot! All the better to get them started competing for that big prize in life, the Darwin award which as we all know is better than a Nobel Prize.

Legalize it, all drugs. Self control and responsibility are important to learn. You can't learn in a nanny state where you have no choice to make because they are made for you.

---

Yep with Bully Taws! Plus of course swopping Cigarette cards, and chatting up the girls across the wall in the next playground.

How could I forget all this Chris ! :)

Compared to what I said, I made only factual observations.
I'm not at all for the use of the drug but the societal facts are there.
However, I agree : permissiveness often has no limits...
Your article is the proof.
It starts with Coffee Shops and it ends in school playgrounds.
It seems that Colorado makes a commitment on a delicate way.
Somebody know how many American States legalized the use of the marijuana ?

---

In my day, we played marbles in the playground...

Yep with Bully Taws! Plus of course swopping Cigarette cards, and chatting up the girls across the wall in the next playground.

But this is what happens when you go soft on soft drugs. but people won't listen.

I didn't know that was allowed in Dutch schools
Thanks Chris for this article
They're really unconscious ! This is crazy !
In my day, we played marbles in the playground...

---

Okay, so you liberty loving, laid back, do ya own thing, pot is AOK, anti nanny state people, have a look at this then.


School kids

[...] In the UK it's use is somewhat synonymous with the Hippy era and the Bohemian lifestyle, patently Stereotyping at its worst I agree, but there you are.

Hi Chris,
In France, the use of cannabis is so become common and affects so many new generations that it isn't at all associated with the Hippie era. These generations also don't know what's Woodstock (for the U.S.) or May 68 (for France) who are the two main symbols of the cons-culture coupled with drug use. I think that today the cannabis is considered unfortunately no more as a soft drug. It's even more considered as a drug. The cannabis entered the same category as the alcohol and will eventually legalized almost everywhere in the world by means of widespread use.

---

@ Gary: We know your libertarian beliefs concerning drug control. But something I've mentioned before and will ask again is, do you really think tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use warrants signing a DNR as if you will OD and die? Personally I think perhaps alcohol could do that to you, but marijuana? It just seems to me that you classify pot the same as you would crack, and that's just not how things are in the real world.

Cigs and Pot cause cancer, it may be a bit slower than booze but just as deadly. Sugar and salt fall into this class as well.

I refuse to play the classification game. It is either a drug or it is a gras (generally recognized as safe) [no pun intended]

@ Gary again:

Oh, that is social security - as it exists today, steal from the working generation and give to the older one. It should be an annuity where the working pay for themselves, but that requires discipline, something severely lacking in society.

Erm, you mean 401Ks and IRAs??? I thought almost every one in this country with long term employment has one of those, maybe I'm mistaken. Point is Social Security is hardly what you make it out to be.

No I mean Social Security, the government program, a "traditional" pension plan. [A large fraction of the US working stiffs do not have a 401 or an IRA, just like they don't have medical.] The government needs to run it under the same rules they would require of a private company with a traditional pension plan. Have enough in the pot at all times to pay out all expected claims. Anything else is a Ponzi scheme.

---

Oh, that is social security - as it exists today, steal from the working generation and give to the older one. It should be an annuity where the working pay for themselves, but that requires discipline, something severely lacking in society.

Automatic enrolment

A new law means that every employer must automatically enrol workers into a workplace pension scheme if they:

are aged between 22 and State Pension age
earn more than £8,105 a year
work in the UK

This is called ‘automatic enrolment’.

New Pensions laws

Hi Sarge,

Sigh.
As you know, I have long hair. AND a goatee. I have sometimes worn sandals. Sometimes they were "open-toed".

Ooops! But no Guardian then? :-)

And I've NEVER touched marijuana.

Nor me either, simply through lack of interest. Like you, I know many people who do use pot for recreational purposes, and that is fine with me. I certainly think no less of them for that, it is their choice, just not mine. In the UK it's use is somewhat synonymous with the Hippy era and the Bohemian lifestyle, patently Stereotyping at its worst I agree, but there you are.

OK, fair enough. And there was me thinking that all pot smokers were people with goatee beards, open toed sandals, clutching a copy of the Guardian.

Sigh.
As you know, I have long hair. AND a goatee.
I have sometimes worn sandals. Sometimes they were "open-toed".
I have owned/worn four tie-dye shirts since about age 26.
And I've NEVER touched marijuana.
I have known people from well off families that smoke it.
I have known Republicans that smoke it.
I have known people that served in the Air Force that smoke it.
Shall I scour my memory and come up with more examples?

^: Point 1, agreed. There is no social or economic stereotype that fits those who do OR those who don't partake.

@ Gary: We know your libertarian beliefs concerning drug control. But something I've mentioned before and will ask again is, do you really think tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use warrants signing a DNR as if you will OD and die? Personally I think perhaps alcohol could do that to you, but marijuana? It just seems to me that you classify pot the same as you would crack, and that's just not how things are in the real world.

@ Gary again:

Oh, that is social security - as it exists today, steal from the working generation and give to the older one. It should be an annuity where the working pay for themselves, but that requires discipline, something severely lacking in society.

Erm, you mean 401Ks and IRAs??? I thought almost every one in this country with long term employment has one of those, maybe I'm mistaken. Point is Social Security is hardly what you make it out to be.

---

#resist

yes we know you support the good old days when senior citizens ate cat food.

You mean they didn't plan ahead and have twenty kids and move in with them ...

Oh, that is social security - as it exists today, steal from the working generation and give to the older one. It should be an annuity where the working pay for themselves, but that requires discipline, something severely lacking in society.

Look I know you have to relieve all suffering in the world. Sisyphus comes to mind. Some people are beyond help. The sooner you realize it and let them fail the better off the needs of the many are. Think of it as tough love.

Sorry for getting off the drug topic.

---