This goes against all my ethics...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom Swierzbinski

The other day I was helping my girl with her coursework. She had written the stuff in draft, and I was typing it up on the PC. It was about lung cancer, and what causes it. Lo and behold, on the list was marijuana. It said something like this:

'Marijuana is even more cancerous than tobacco, due to the fact that it deposits more tar in the lungs.'

:p

---

Regardless of what you want to believe there is no such thing as harmless smoke!
Just because I know of the positive effects of cannabis I cannot and will not ignore the truth, the truth is that inhaling any smoke (vaporized or not) will have harmfull side effects.
I tire of the pro group who insist that the mighty herb has no down side as much as I tire of the anti lobby trying to convince everyone it's more dangerous than nitro glycerine in a food blender.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiddenBeauty

Do you think that if we ignore any real facts we will stand a better chance of getting weed legalised?

---

Well said.
Ignorance never benefited anyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by da haze meister

the fact is, cannabis smoke is somewhat cancerous, as any smoke is.
but nobody smokes a "pack" a day of cannabis.
20 joints.
nobody.
also nicotine activates cancerous compounds and reacts while THC doesnt.

---

I average 20 J's a day every day :D :cool:

sit her down, stfu about the paper BS, and have sex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiddenBeauty

Do you think that if we ignore any real facts we will stand a better chance of getting weed legalised?

---

Obviously the answer to your question is no.

I just think it's obvious that facts exist within a certain context. For example, if I say: "Washington is the president of the US", it's false, although it was true at a time.
This is the equivalent of being asked to turn in a diet plan for a nutrition class, and insteading turning in an essay on how chocolate makes you feel good. It's not that it's not true, its that its completely unrelated to the topic at hand. As if this guy is some kind of activist? He basically fucked over his girl in the off chance that his paragraph of pro-marijuana information might what? convince the teacher to organize a student rally pressing for far reaching reforms?

Please.

The downfall of the pot-legalization movement is that we're all a bunch of stoners, but surely we can do better than this. And with less inverse affect for our loved ones and those around us as well.

Those are, I feel, the real facts. but perhaps you'd feel better if I said something like

Awesome man, way to fight the power and really stick it to the man. Legalize it! I'm gonna smoke a fat blunt in your honor!

Activism is more than catch phrases. If you're not part of the solution...

I'm sorry Polymirize either my brain is a bit dense today or I am really stoned but I have read your post 3 times and I dont understand what your saying :confused: :) :stoned:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HiddenBeauty

I'm sorry Polymirize either my brain is a bit dense today or I am really stoned but I have read your post 3 times and I dont understand what your saying :confused: :) :stoned:

---

Allow me to clarify because I'm stoned myself right now. I'm just going to shoot from the hip with it this time. Basically, I'm saying this original poster is a complete tool for highjacking his gf's work on lung cancer to interject that mj might have positive effects on brain cancer. It's not even that he just editted out information, he completely changed the subject.

Coursework about lung cancer and it's causes?

Let's shatter all illusions right here and now if we must: Breathing chemicals, smoke and ash of any sort into your lungs is not going to contribute to healthy lungs in the future. Maybe the benefits to my brain outweigh the adverse affects on my lungs, but honestly, I don't smoke for my health. At least, not my physical health.

It's not that I don't find his passion for the movement to be inspiring, I just think its horribly misguided.

Yea i'm with you now and understand completely :thumbsup: :stoned:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polymirize

Basically, I'm saying this original poster is a complete tool for highjacking his gf's work on lung cancer to interject that mj might have positive effects on brain cancer.

---

I agree he could have come up with some better more relevant information to replace what he deleted, but either way he disposed of the idiotic governement propaganda, and for that I give props.....


'Marijuana is even more cancerous than tobacco, due to the fact that it deposits more tar in the lungs.' -------yeah right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BongSmokityDuo

I agree he could have come up with some better more relevant information to replace what he deleted, but either way he disposed of the idiotic governement propaganda, and for that I give props.....


'Marijuana is even more cancerous than tobacco, due to the fact that it deposits more tar in the lungs.' -------yeah right

---

True

Cannabis when burnt releases more tar than tobacco ,, FACT !!

What you *should* have done is do for her whatever you agreed to do, namely type her paper for her. You could have stopped at that section, or waited til afterwards, to discuss its validity with her. Wouldn't it be better to convince someone of your views than to just tell others she believes it? At the very least you probably could have gotten her to add in "if consumed in the same fashion as a cigarette", because even you said "it can deposit more tar". Well, at least she won't be asking you to "help" with her course work in the future :p .