Lol, I'm afraid Pedobear might be lurking...
I'm 15 though.
16, 17 in a month
How about.... no
1. I don't know you that well
2. Most people will lie about their age anyway.
3. I just don't want too:)
Don't want to*
To = A destination or action. Ex: I'm going to do it; I'm going to the park
Too = More than or in addition to. Ex: That is too many; Me too
15... and a half.
I am going to wait to experiment with the more dangerous drugs, but things like weed I don't feel will be to harmful to my mind and body.
Good, cause I know people who try things like crack and heroin at 15 and it completely screws them up. I don't know how many of my friends are on probation and one girl I know is supposedly addicted to heroin.
Don't worry man it isn't a daily thing for me, its maybe one day a week. I have only drank to the point of being drunk once and that was not a fun time so I do not plan on doing that for a while longer. The only other thing I may do before maturing a bit more would be shrooms. Thats not likely though because no one in my area that I trust or knows anyone who sells that stuff.
Personally I think 18/19 is the best drinking age, with you being allowed to drink with parent's permission at home at 16. Most people aren't fully developed until 18 or 19 (sometimes even later), and you can do a lot of damage to yourself with alcohol.
Honestly, while school textbooks don't lie to you, they do provide you with very one sided information. They only tell you of the negative health consequences of long term and some uncommon short term drug use instead of the social positives you can gain from experimenting once every few months.
I completely gave up on health classes when my eighth grade health teacher told me one cigarrete will get you addicted. Most people in the class realized she was an idiot but the fact that someone would make up such a stupid fact left a really sour note on me.
Notice the key word in that sentence:
"Told me one cigarrete WILL get you addicted."
She didn't say can, she said will.
Does anyone actually agree with me that drugs are bad in any way?
Drugs can't formulate a thought, therefore they can't be bad. For example, if a man kills shoots someone with a gun, is the gun bad? No, it's just being controlled by someone who is bad. The drug itself can't be bad but the person who uses it can be.
Although bad is an extremely objective term so what might seem "bad" to you might seem perfectly reasonable to another.
I had a bad day today, but days can't formulate a thought. So it wasn't really a bad day, I'm just a bad person.
I see your point, perhaps I was too broad in my statement.
Either way though, that ties into the second paragraph. It might seem like a bad day to man X if he got some mud on his shoes but woman Y might have a horrible life and think that getting mud on her shoes isn't that bad.
Definitely man, I'm not denying that bad is a subjective term. Just the first part that needed clarification.
But I want to exercise a lot and get ninja-strong! And try all the drugs to see what they're like! No fair!
I noticed a lot of us here are around the same age.
I'm 19. I will be turning 20 this August.
38. Listen to JJJ. I know the thinking of the teen. Frontal lobe is not even developed until 25. If I could do it all again, I'd wait, and I've tried everything. And...I deal with chemical dependency. None of that matters, really. The main thing that matter is if you can wait, it'll be worth it. My IQ was way up there, above 150 on one scale...I wonder if it's less now. i suspect so. Wait until your brain fully forms and ignore fools who think it opens the mind.
Happy birthday man!
Leon, it happens. Chill out. haha 20, by the way.
Anyway, yes. I agree 100% with JJJ and Madglee - you probably shouldn't expose yourself to stuff at that young an age. Live your life, learn what you can while your brain it still developing and it's still easy to, and... I don't wanna to "wait" necessarily, because it isn't one. It isn't like the wait to finally drive a car so you don't have to wait for rides -- it's just you living your life without drugs, and then just having them later, when they won't mess you up they way they would at an age like 15. I had my first drink at 18, pot soon followed, and everything else came fast at 19... I don't feel like a second of my life was wasted prior to that because of the absence of substances.
On the contrary, I'm glad I "waited" (not that I had any interest prior). I know a great deal of people in my town who eat ecstasy like they're tic tacs, get drunk, blown, fried, whatever, like it's nothing at as young as 13. Pretty messed up shit. There are 16 year olds who now think they've experienced everything life has to offer. They think their creative and intelligent minds have peaked. They think there's nothing left to be learned or experienced. And you know what, they're all pretty stupid. haha I'm not saying it's causal, but they're only hurting themselves physically and mentally.
So, I'll just repeat what these guys said, haha. There's nothing you can gain from it now, that you won't gain with a couple more years under your belt. In fact, you will have a better experience later on. The person you are today is not the person you'll be in 2 or 3 years. In that amount of time you'll have grown soooo much mentally and as a person, that your understanding and appreciation of substances will be far far greater. Trust me on this, there's a difference between taking a little of this and that to passively experience until it's over and finding your comfortable dose, where you can both function and take in everything you can from the experience, so you can bring it back with you after the chemicals have long been gone.
You're one year closer to death! :)
I can respect anyone's decision to not do drugs. However, fear that something may have just the smallest probability of hurting you or even ruining your life is no reason to avoid that thing. It's reasonable to avoid things like shooting heroin or running across a freeway. But not so much, if you're avoiding things like a beer with friends or using a cellphone or watching TV out of fear of radiation. It's all risk to benefit - if you're not interested, that's reasonable; if you're afraid something bad will happen, then perhaps not so much.
Roller coasters have the smallest potential of ending your life, and you don't "need" them, but the risk is so low that the fear of one is considered irrational. Just a thought
That last statement Zero, don't even get me started on rollercoasters. I fucking hate them. That's because I wenjt on one before and I had the seat in the back but there was no seatbelt on that car (Lawsuit much?) and I nearly went flying over the handlebars.
'Aww, I need this medicine to stay alive? Well, I guess since I'm dependant on it I don't really need it' -_-
Stay away from absolutes if you can.
Exactly, you said that anything that makes you dependant on it you don't actually need. You didn't say "unless it saves you pain" (Let me point out Weed and barbituates) "like morphine" (which is actually exremely addictive and has people OD on it regularly), so I brought up if somebody is dependant on a medicine that is saving their life. It was all just an example to show you why you shouldn't use blanket statements.
Keep your anti-theism to your own threads.
so you expect me to take "Anything that makes you dependent on it that" and "you don't actually need" sepreately, or do you want me to remove the comma? Either way, it's your fault that's how your sentence reads, commas change a lot. The best example I've heard is "Let's eat Grandma!" and "Lets eat, Grandma!". See how much the absence of a comma changed the meaning?
Anywho, let's move on since you actually learned to adapt an argument for once. How do you define need? Do you define it as something you need when your life is in danger? Well, that would be great, but then we're cutting out on things like sunlight and three square meals a day and an education, because even though we don't need it, it still benefits our lives to have it.
You have yet to define what you think "need" means.
The first part of your post was great. You actually typed what you consider a need to be in a clear and thoughtful manner. Then the other half of your post is just "You know what, screw it, even though you don't need to get addicted you can still use it"
Actually I don't, and I'm pretty sure that if one of the two of us is lacking in intelligence (and this is pulled from other threads as well, not just this one), it's you.
Well, my false age is 84.
My real age is 21, 22 in about a month and a quarter.
My "true" age is 19 as of last week.
Lol = laughing out loud
Facts: Cov, your arguments are illogical. Either you are against "unnecessary things and have the slightest risk of hurting you," which encompasses most things you'll experience in life, or you are against drugs (not mutually exlusive). You can't say you are against the former only if it applies to the latter. So to be clear - you are against drugs.
Second, if it's the case that you're against drugs because of unnecessary risk and not roller coasters, despite that same unnecessary risk, then it lends itself to the following question: What's the difference? Since you don't need either and they have virtually the same risk of damaging your health, there must be something about about drugs that make it a "bad" and roller coasters that make it a "good."
Now the rest is just my speculation: You're against drugs because of a lack of education (on drugs) and social stigma. There's no reason you would seperate one into a "good" category and the other in a "bad" besides an irrational fear of something that is exceedingly unlikely or impossible to happen (like pot addiction or roller coaster death) and the fact that you've been trained all your life by anti-drug campaigns to do so. Based on your arguments, you've failed to make a case for inherent bad existing in drugs and drugs use -- I'm not saying there isn't one to be made, simply that you haven't made it.
"not based in logic" All that needed to be said, haha.
No, you were arguing. You may not know what defines an argument, but you were arguing. You may not have been trying to convince people to believe what you believe, as I obviously wasn't trying to get anyone to take drugs haha, but we were making a case for a particular position. Whether or not you "care," hahah, that you were being nonsensical wasn't my concern at all. I just wanted to point it out.
Oh, and by the way, erowid.com. It's an amazing source of information, much more accurate and well sourced than any book they'll have you read in school and it's important to have good info on the things you put into your body. I would also tell you your reason of "potential for harm" is illogical, as I spelled it out to you so clearly before haha, but you already said that's how you roll. haha So... my work here is done :p
erowid.com is were I get all my information on all things drug related.
Me too, haha. But I also really like reading all the reports - some people go through some crazy stuff! haha There are a bunch of great cautionary tales, inspirational stories, depressing ones, lots of good advice, and all that. Humanity sure is a trip. That, and I like short stories :p
I only read the reports about the substances I am interested in. That way I can kind of get a feel of what will happen when I eventually experiment with them. For example I read a lot of Ayahuasca reports. Some of those are hallarious, and others are pretty dark though.
I do that sometimes, to get different perspectives n everything, but I also like reading about people who do things I haven't done and don't necessarily intend to do. People have a lot of interesting things to say, good insights n all that, they talk about their lives, friends, problems, interests... and I dunno. It's like reading someone's journal and living inside their head for a little while. I find it kinda refreshing
Same reason I like music that tells you something personal about the artists... like Alice in Chains' "Dirt," for instance, is one of my favorite albums. It's like a portrait of this guy's battle with heroin addiction, the way people see and treat him, they way he sees the world, how the drug can make him feel so full of life, and yet so utterly devoid of it, how he feels worthless, deserving of his misery, how the mental and physical anguish of withdrawal steadily eats away at him, how he hurts the ones he cares about, and how in the end all he wants is to be forgiven. Now I've never done heroin or suffered any kind of substance addiction, but I love the heart and raw emotion they put into their music, and it's almost like you suffer with them. Like a Greek tragedy, when everything wraps up and the hero's fallen victim to his own humanity (greed, pride, anger, etc), the audience is supposed to feel relieved or purged of some burden, knowing that everything is ultimately as it should be. That's why, I think, it's more disturbing to read stories like the ones on erowid about hard drug abuse that go without conflict than ones where someone ends up with a crippling addiction or even loses someone, tragic as they are.
I am only 12. Betaband is 10. In May he will be 11.
i'm 10 11 in july
17, 18 on the 24th.
All in all, my birthday is on Super Bowl.